29VVest35th street

up

New York NY10001

IsBN 0-415-3 920-X

11New Fetter Lane

London EC4P4EE
P'inted in G`eat B'itain

WWW/ouuedge c m

The TransIat On stud es Reader

Tl,e Tral,s`a

SFt/d/es to
Reader
providestheory
a dennitive
surVey of the
importanton
trans|ation
and research`
and in uentia|`ol9
a proaches

/ithmost
an emphasis
the deve|opments of the |ast thirty years, XA/ith introductory essays prefacing each

section` the book p|aces a /ide range of sen ina| and innovatiVe read ngs vvithin
their the| atic` cu|tura| and historica| cOnteXts

is a|ready c|assic reader has been fuHy updated and revised. The seCond edition

inc|udes

nine

nellv

readings`

by

authors

such

as

Jerome`

Dryden`

sch{eiermaGher` Derrida and N1asOn` sOme appearing in inventive retrans|ations

/ith teXts from antiquity to the present

provides a historica| dimension`
represents a /ide range of |anguages` from Arabic tO Benga"` Ita"an to

eXp|ores the interdiscip"nary nature of trans|ation studies through readings in

Russ|an
ne|ds such as |iterary theory and "ngu stics` ph"osophy and n|m studies

COntrihutOr

Kwame Anthony App ah` Wa ter Benjamin` Antoine Berman`

oOshana B|um-|<u|ka`JOrge Luis BOrges` Annie Brisset` LOri Chamber|ain`Jean

]arbe|net` Jacques Derrida` JOhn Dryden` Itamar Even-Zohar` Johann VVo|fgang

3n Goethe` Keith H arVey` James s. Ho|mes` ROman Jakobson` Jerome` Andro
~:fevere` Ph"ip E. Lelvis` Ian V ason`

|adinnir Nabokov` Eugene Nida` Friedrich

Ab|ancOurt` Ezra POund` |<atharina

` etzsche`Abo V ark NOrnes` Nico|as Perrot D

=:iss` steven RendaH` Friedrich sch|eiermacher` Gayatri Chakravorty s

3:orge Steiner` Gideon TOury` Hans J,

ermeer` Jean-Pau|

ivak/

inay,

Lawrence Venuti` Professor Of Eng"sh at Temp|e University` USA` is a transt|On theorist and historian as xve" as a trans|ator
^

'a s/a

or
/,y`s`b

`Fy (1995) and Tl,e Sca/,c/a/s c,f

ib"shed by ROut|edge.

He is the author of Tl,e

`al,s/a

`ol, (1998)` both

This is b und to be the most authoritati c anthology of the rctical

rcHcction n translati n currcntly availablc in Enghsh Thc sclccti n of
aricd and imaginativc,thc cditorial introductions
Prin ary documcnts is
lucid and inf rmcd

Thc Hcrmans,

This updatcd, grcatly exPanded rrdi,s`

indisPensable t

/Ilivtr

ri n

nd n,r/K
CoFF c

s
Idics Rc dcr

vill Pro c

scholars, translators and studcnts, Thc volume

s judi-

cious selccti ns ProvidC a c mprchcnsivc history of translation fz

antiquity to thc Prcscnt and thc tcrms f translati n thcory arc critically
asscsscd thr ugh a rich toPograPhy of subjccts As translation cmcrgcs
as a focal Point in thc cra of digital litcracy and ne

vn cdia, Lavvrcncc

Vcnuti s Rcader ofkrs an invaluablc indcx t dcnning thc Past and futurc

task of thc translat r

Emily APtcr,Ne,

yor t,niv rsit/,LJb H

Praise1or the first edition

This is a rcmarkabIc sclccd n ofthc mostimPortant twentieth century

contributi ns t thc Principles and Pr cCdurcs of translati

n,but :hat

makcs this v Iume s aluable arc Vcnuti s insightfttl n tcs that bring
thcsc contributi ns into proPcr f cus for b th studcnts and tcachcrs of
translation,

Eugenc Nida,

r,,

rlcdn Bjb`cs cie9

Js 1

enuti s r nsFdri n srud cs Rc d r rc ccts all the Miscrv and thc

splendour (Ortega y Gassct)of ahnost a hundrcd years of translation

studics,This b ok,and thc suPPlcmCntary readings suggcstcd by

cnuti,
pro idc(almost)ac mPlCtC c urqc

of anslaton u cs
Halls J VermCCr, oPoF FI n I,q-tJniv

This book ffcrs a challcnging and stirnulating perspccti

1usm

e n transla-

any of thc cssays includcd in thc

tion thcory in thc t
cnticth ccntury
c llccti

n arc scn1inal oncs, others are cxciting, inn vativc picccs that

invitc us to rcncct again on our undCrstanding and kn0 vlcdgc f thc

translation Pr cCSs

san Bassnctt,Tr,

IJr,i

21s1

i ,1JK

The TransIation studies

Reader
Second EditiOn
Edited by

Lawrence Venuti

l
up

0RK AND L0ND0N

NE
`

First pub ished 20oo by ROut|edge

Reprinted in2ooo and tv vice in2002

secOnd edition nrst pub"shed 2oo4 in the U SA and Canada

by Rout|edge
29
/est35th Street` N ekj/YOrk` NY1o0o1

simu|taneous|y pub"shed by Rout|edge

11 Ne/Fetter

Lane` LOndOn Ec4P4EE

ROll /ed9e`sa/9`lllp'`l, of lle

Tay/o'&

'a/,Cl~sG'ot//,

2ooo` 2oo4 This Co"eCtiOn and editoria| matte's

Lalrv'ence enuti indiVidua| essays individua| cOntributors

Typeset in Perpetua and BeH GOthic by

F|Orence P'oductiOn Ltd` stoOd|eigh` DevOn
Printed and bound by
TU International Ltd` PadstOw` Corn
a"
AH rights rese'ved. NO part Of this bOok may be reprinted or
'ep'Oduced Or ut"ized in any form Or by any e|ectronic`

mechanica|`Or Other means`noW knOwn or hereafter invented`

inc{uding phOtOcopying and recording` or in any infor mation
stOrage or retrieva system`w thout permission in writing f'Om
the pub"she's
L`b'ary of Co g`ess Ca a/og` g` Llb a
Dafa
The trans ation studies reader/ edited by `o
Lawrence enutiu

2nd ed

p cm
Inc|udes bib iog'aphica| references and index

1 Trans|ating and inte'preting_ H istory

I Venuti` LaVJrence

P306.T74362004
418 02-dC22
Br` /s/,L/b'a-y

Ca a/o9

2oo3022335
Pllb Ca

`l,g`
`ol,Da
A cata|ogue record fOr this
book is ava"ab|e
frOm the

British Library

IsBN 0-415-31919-6 (hbk)

IsBN 0-415-31920-X (pbk)

NlE1~{8R

P;c

8Y

Contents

/ackl,o /ed9me/, s

INTRODUCTION

FOundatiOnaI statements
l

I1

JerOme

21

LETTER TO PAMMACHIUS
T a s/ared

by|<a

l,/ee

Da /s

31

N iGO as Perrot D Ab|ancOurt

PREFACEs TO TACITUS AND LUCIAN

T a

s/ared b,Law nce

Ve t`

JOhn Dryden

38

FROM THE PREFACE T0 0yfD

s EPJSTLfs

Friedrich sCh|eiermacher

43

0N THE DIFFERENT METHODS 0F TRANsLATING

T'al,s/a

ed b,/st|sa Ber o ky

Johann VVo|fgang vOn GOethe

TRANsLATIONS
T'an5/a ed by sl,aro

S`oa

64

Viii
6

cONTENTS
67

Friedrich Nietzsche
TRANsLATIONs
T'ans/a eC/by Na/ er l auf/,ia

1900s-1930s

69

7 Wa|ter Benjamin

75

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE
TRANSLATION OF BAUDELAIRE S T BLEAuX PAR s f s
THE TAsK OF THE TRANSLATOR
Trans
ed a'/y zo

steven RendaH`A note on Harry Zohn s trans ation

83

Ezra Pound

86

GUID0 s RELATIONS

Jorge Luis BOrges

THE TRANSLATORS OF T E
T'a s a ed oy fsfller^

94
O E T OUs rtlD A D f Ju
/Ts

el,

109

I940s-1950s
10 V|adimir NabOkOv
PROBLEMs OF TRANsLATION
11

l15
lJ

fG

IN ENGLIsH

128

Jean Pau| Vinay and Jean Darbe net

A METHODOLOGY FOR TRANsLATION

T'a s fed oy J a

12

C sage'a dr/lJ arie/

ROman JakObson

138

0N LINGUISTIC ASPECTS OF TRANSLATION

I960s-I970s

145

13

153

Eugene Nida
PRINCIPLEs OF CORRESPONDENCE

14

Katharina Reiss
TYPE` KIND AND INDIVIDUALITY OF TEXT
MAKING IN TRANSLATION
T a 5/a ed

15

168
DECIsION

by sl/sa K`f'ol,

James s. HO|mes

18o

THE NAME AND NATURE OF TRANsLATION STUDIEs

16

GeOrge steiner

193

THE HERMENEUTIC MOTION

17

Itamar Even-zOhar
THE POsITION OF TRANsLATED LITERATURE
THE LITERARY POLYSYSTEM

199
ITHIN

CONTENTs
18

GideOn TOury

iX

205

THE NATURE AND ROLE OF NORMS IN TRANsLATION

980s

2 9

19

227

Hans J.Vermeer
sKOPOs AND COMMIssION IN TRANSLATIONAL ACTION
Tl

20

a s

fed b,/^ d ll C esre' a

Andr Lefevere

239

MOTHER COURAGE s CUCUMBERS TEXT` sYsTEM AND

REFRACTION IN A THEORY OF LITERATURE
21

Ph"ip E Lewis
THE MEASURE OF TRANsLATION EFFECTS

256

22 AntOine Berman

276

TRANSLATION AND THE TRIALs OF THE FOREIGN

T'a s`a ed bJ Law'e Ce yel,u

23

shOshana B|um-Kulka

290

sHIFTs OF COHEsION AND COHERENCE IN TRANSLATION

24

Lori Chamber|ain

306

GENDER AND THE METAPHORICs OF TRANsLATION

1990s and heyond

25

323

Annie Brisset

337

THE SEARCH FOR A NATIVE LANGUAGE

AND CULTURAL IDENTITY
Tl

26

al,s

TRANsLATION

ared by Ros a /nd G a d Roge Ga n0

Gayatri ChakravOrty Spivak

369

THE POLITICs OF TRANSLATION

27

Kwame AnthOny Appiah

389

THICK TRANSLATION

28

Keith Harvey

402

TRANsLATING CAM P TALK

TRANSFER

29

GAY IDENTITIES AND CULTURAL

Jacques Derrida
,/VHAT IS A RELEVANT

423
TRANsLATION?

T'a s/ared by LaNxe ce ye r

30 AbO Mark NOrnes

FOR AN ABUsIVE sUBTITLING

447

31

CONTENTS

Ian RllasOn
TEXT PARAMETERS IN TRANSLATION
INSTITUTIONAL CULTUREs

32 Lawrence Venuti

470
TRANSITIVITY AN D

482

TRANsLATION` COMMUNlTY` UTOPIA

B`bo9ra y
r/,cy(Px

503
527

AcknOwIedgments

I am gmtcftllto t11c llowhg coPyHght holdcrs br allowing me to usC d1c matc1 lals
that c mprisc this bo k:

Kwamc Anthony APPiah,

Thick TI anslati n,

C fJdJ o 16

vell, RcPri11ted by Pcr

1993by Charlcs H, R

JohnS HoPkns uni

1iSsi n

808-19, CoPyright C
of thc author and thc

crs y Prcss

ions,CoPyright
Walter Be?jamin, The Task ofthe Translator (1923) om J``ur,,in
1955 by SuhrkamP Verlag, Frankfurt a M, Enghsh transIatlon by Harry
Z hn, coPyright 1968 and rcne
cd 1996 by Harcourt, Inc, reprintcd
by pcrmissi 11 f Harc u ,Inc and by thc publisher f1 m11
min;
`rc,Bci,/
926cditcd by Marcus Bullock and Michael
sc ecr d
lirinfs I
1Jr,,e , J9 3

Jenni11gs,Cambridgc,Mass:Thc BclknaP Prcss of Harvard u11i crsity Prcss,

copyright c 1998by thc Prcsident and Fcllovvs of HarVard College

La Traducti n c n11ue oPrcuvC dC r trangcr, xr (1985)

67-81 Translauon and the Trials of tllc Forcign :Translad nc Pyright(D

2000by La /rcncc
cnuti Pubhshcd by PcrlniSsin of Isabelle Berman

sh shana Blum~Kulka, ShiRs fC hcsi n and C hcrcncc in Translati n, In Juhanc

House and Shoshana Blum-Kulka(cds),JnreIFinJu F nd fnrcr frt`r f Communi
)iscpt/rsc dnd C Jnir
cdrion
n i,, rr ns`Jrion cznd s c nd
,lJu Jc
1c tlisirion

Antoinc Bcrn1an,

srudjes, TtIbingcn; Narr, 1986 (T0biI1gcr Bcitragc zur Linguistik 272),

pP 17-35 RcPrintcd by Pern1ission of thc auth r and the pubhshcr
J rge Luis BoI gcs, Thc Translators of h TJ,ous@nd nd Onc Nifhrs, trans Esthcr
Allcn, m scJccr d Non-F1cFions l,y JorgC Luis Borgcs, cdited by Eliot

Wcinbcrgcr CoPyright

1999 by Maria K dama; translati n copyright

Inc 11sed by Pcrn1iSsion of Viking Pcnguin, a

n f Pcnguin Putnalll Inc

1999 by Penguin Putnan

divisi

XH

ACKN0

/LEDGMENTs

Annic B1 lssct, ThC scarch f r a Nativc Languagc: Translatl n and Cukural

Idmu chaPter4in Amic BHssct, 0oc riquc ol Tr nsFdrionjf, drre nd

n @cb c, F96s~`9d8, trans Rosalind Gill and R ger Gannon,

H`tcri9

T r nt :uni crsity of Tor nt

by Rosahnd Gill and R

gc1

Prcss, 1996,PP 162^94 Copyright(D1996

Gannon Uscd by Pcrrnission of thc auth

r and

thc translat rs

Lori Chambcrlain, Gcndcr and thc NIetaphorics of Translation, s Jns13 454-72

CoPyright O1988by Thc Uni Crsity of Chicago RcPrintCd by pcnuis on of
thc auth r and the PubhshCr,
VhatIs a Rclc ant TranslationP trans,Lawrcncc Vcnuti,Cr cd`
JacquCs DCrrida,
F

2001 by Thc University of Chicago

RePrintcd l)y pcrn1ission of the author and thc PubhshCr

Itamar E cn-Zohar, Thc Posidon of Translatcd Litcrature

ithin thc Litcrar
fnquir

27: 174-200. CoPyright

Polysystcm,

Po Fics

dd 11 (1990 45-51 RCPrintcd by Pcrl111ssion of thc

author and Dukc IJni crsit Prcss,

Joharln W l ang n GoCtlle,

Tral

shd ns (1819),trtans Sharon an Ill R ncr

schultc and John"gucnct(cds)rJlc rics

om Dild n
J

Dc' d',Chicago

TI

dnsfd

on 4n.4n ho : ss s

university oF Chicago Prcss,1992,PP 60^3

C Pyright o1992by Thc Univcrsity of Chicago RcPhntcd by Pcrrnission of

thc Pubhshcr

Kcith Har cy, Translating Can1P Talk Gay Identltics and Cukural T1 ans r,
TI

ns` r +l2):295-3

O CoPy t 1998 st JCromc Pubh

RCPrintcd by Pcr 1ission of thc auth r and thc PubliShcr,

JamcS s H lmcs, Thc Namc and Naturc of Translation studics
H llncs, Tr ns`czFcd/P Pcrs n
cditi n,

Tllc

From Jamcs s,

i cr rl r ns`d 1 n ntJ r ns` Fi n sFud s,scCond

Arnsterdam and Atlanta: Edidons Rod pi, 1994. RcPrintCd by

pcrmission of tlac estatc of James s Holmes and thc publishcr

R man Jakobson, On Lin8uistic AsPec f Translatlon Repl lntcd by Pcrrnission
f thc Publishcr om On rrdnsf rion by Rcuben Br xl:er(ed),Cambri(lgc,

Mass: Harvard Univcrsky Prcss, Copyright c 1959by thc Prcsidcnt and

Fell ws f Harvard Collcgc,
me, Letter to Pammachius Translation c P ight 2004by Kathleen Das
J
Pubhshcd l,y Pcr 1ission of thc translat r,

is

Andr Lc vcrc, Mother Courage s Cucumbers:Tcxt,sy cm and RC acu nin a

The ry of Literature, Jrodcrn LdnJudJ srudi s12 4(1982) 3-20,RCprintcd

by Per 1ission of thc N rthcast M dcrn Languagc Associadon and Ria

Vanderauwcra,

Ph

E Ltxvis, Tk M re J Tl tlnshdon E cts, In D nce m TIdzls` r,on,

ed JosCph Graham,Pp.31^62 CoPyHght 1985by Corndl uni crsity

Prcss uscd by Pcrn1ission of thc author and thc pubhshcr,

Ian Mas n, Tcxt Paramctcrs in Translati n:Transitivit and Institutional Culturcs

In Eva H co a, Pctcr sgall, Zuzanna Jettmar a, Anncly Rothkegd,

Dorothcc RothhB~Bastian,and Hcidrun Gcrzymisch-Arb gast(cds) xFoF
und lldnsF on lJahrbuch jbcrsctzcn und Dolmctschen4/2),T bingCn:Narr,

2003 Reprintcd by pcr 1ission of thc auth r and thc pubhshcr,

Vladin r Nab k , Pr blems f Translation:On in in English, PdrFisdn R

`iew22

(1955):496-512 RcPhntC(ll)y Pcrmission ofthc Estatc of Vladin r Nab k

.

ACKN0 /LEDGMENTs Xiii

Eugcnc Nida, PrinciPlcs fC rrcsPondcncc

TJ

nsfdrinJ,LCi(lCn

Fr m

Eugcne Nida, T 'czrd

d sCjcncc

E J Bhll,1964,PP15671 RCPrintcd by pcrmission

of the auth r and thc PubhShCr

Fhcdhd1
ictzsche, Translation Fronl Fricdrich Nictzschc,F/, G suIcnc ,trans

Valtc Kaufmann Nc Yo1 k Vintage, 1974, pp

136-8 RcPhntCd by
pcr 1ission

Ab

of thc PubhshCr and thc cstatc of Waltcr Kaufmann,

Malk N mcs, For an Abusivc subutling, Flfm Q tlrr 52(3) 1 -34

Copyri tO1999by tl c Rcgcl ts of tllc U cr ty of Cahfor a RePrintcd

by Pern1ission of thc auth r and thc LInivcrsity of Cahfornia Press

Ezra Pound,
CJuido s Rclations From
ircrdr ss9 by Ezra Pound. C
Pyright
1918, 1920, 1935 by E'ra P und 1Ised by Pcrl11ission of Nc , E)irecti ns
Pubhshing Corporation and Fabcr and Faber Ltd

TyPc, Kind and In(li iduality of Text: Dc0si n Mahng in

Translation, trans susan K ron,Pocr cs odd 2 4(1981) 121-31 RcPrintCd

Kat11a1

ina Reiss,

by Pcr 1ission of thc auth r and IDukc IJnivcrsity Prcss

stc

cn Rcndall,
Z hn

AN te

on Harry Zohn s Translation An extract f1 m Notcs on

Dic Au al)C dCS tlbcrsetzcrs , R

s translation f Bclllamin s

rr ducr n,rc,rmin

(1997)

i6RJddcr

@n

Erud s sur fc rcxrc rs s rr nJormd ns1 2

`
191-206 RcPrintcd
by Pcrn1ission ofthc aud1or and Pr

fcss r

Al`nick

ChaPdelaine,cditor f TrR.
Fricdrich schlcicrmachcr,

On thc L)iffcrcnt A/1cth ds of Translating/ Translation

coPyright/c 2004by susan Bcrno ky, Pubhshcd by Pcr 1ission of thc trans~
lator

GayatIi Chakrav r9sPi ak, The Pohtics of T1 ansla n, In GayatH sPivak,O1I

in thc r, chin JnIc iJ,c,London

dc

and Nc York:R udcd8c, 1993 RcPrintCd

by Per1ission of thc author and thc PubhshCr,

Gcorgc sttin , Thc Hcrmencudc Motion h Gcclrge t,ln ,= Bcl c ; rs

Gol
IaJudJ dnd71dnsFdrion,Ox r(l Ox tl u vclslty P ss,1975,Pp
296-303 CoPyri 11t
O1975by Georgc stcincr ReP1 lntcd by PcrmiSsion of
1

thc I)ubhshcr

GidcOn Toury, Thc`aturc an(l Rolc of N rms in Translati n In GidcOn T ury,

D scriPF
Trdnsfdrj@n s 11di s ~ dnJ B nd, Arnstcrdam and PhiladclPhia:

Bcnjamins,1995,pp 5 69 CoPyright 1995by John BC amhs B V

RCPrintcd by pcrn1ission f thc auth r and the Pubhshcr,

Hans J Crmccr, skopos and C mmissi n

Trdn5`drjon hcoH,

in Translati n The ry In RcddinJ5in

cd and tl^ans Andrc Chcstcrn1an

Helsink Ov Finn

Lcctura(Db,1989),PP 173-87 LIscd by pcrrllission of thc auth

lator,and thc PubhShCr

r,thc trans~

Jcan-Paul Vinay and Jea11Darbclnct, A Mcthod l gy for Translati n In Jcan-Paul

1nay

and Jean Darbclnct,ComP r ri e s isrics ol

nch dnd IaJhsh;H
J crl,odo`oj
r Trdns/cI n,trarls and eds,Juan c sag and M J,HamCl,
/
f,

Amstcrdam and P11iladclPhia :C11jamins,1995,pl) 31 +2C P)right C 1995

by John Bc11jalni11s B V RcPhntCd by Perrnission ofthc PubhshCr

XlV

ACKNOV/LEDGMENTs

I a1indcbted

Richard sicburth and Elena Reevcs f r thcir incisivc and uscful

commcnts on my translation

f` nt inc

Bcrman s essa

My cssay, Tnnslation,Commu ,ut pia, bcnc6tc,di m rca n by JCan

Boasc~Bcicr,Tcrry Halc,and susan /clls,as vcll as qucstions and comluents from

aPPrCciati c audicnccsvhcrc I dchvcrcd itin arious stagcs of completion For thcsc

PP rtunitics to spcak in lccturc scrics, scn1inars and confcrcnccs, I thank

1 halllmcd Abdcl Aatty and thc or8ani ng comnnktec of thc Fifth Intcrnadonal

Symposium on ComParativc Litcraturc at C ro uni ersity,Da"d Bcll s(Princeton

univcrsity),PctCr Bush(BrkiSh CCntrc f r Litcrary Translati n,Univcrsity of East
Angha,and dlc Inst utc of Translati n and IntcrPrcdng),Maria Gonz lcz Da ics

ey Harris (Eur PCan stu(lics Rescarch InstRute,

of salford),Michacl Henry Heim and Kathc nc King(univcrsity of

(Uni Crsitat dc Vic), GCoff1

uni crsity

California at Los Angclcs),SCrcna Jin and Chan sin Wai(Thc Chincsc Univcrsity

of Hong Kong),AlbCrto Alvarcz Lugr and A/1aria Teresa Cancda(univcr dad dc

o),Milli llt Marcus(u vcrsi f PCn uva al,M ta Mateo Mart ez~
Ba ol mo(um crsidad dc O"cdo),susan Matthias(New Y rk u vcrsity),Ram n
Rib (univcrsidad dc Barccl na),and Nich las R und(univcrsky of Shefseld)
Louisa Scn11ycn,rny cditor at Routledgc,ga c hcr un inching cncouragcmcnt
and hclPft l ad icc thr ughout dlis Pr ect(and PatiCntly wakcd r its dclivcry).
Katharinc JacobSOn,Jody Ball and,in its carly stagcs,Nhranda Filbcc

vcrc suPcrbly

cf6cicnt in gctting a cry comPhcated b k int Pr duction Hannah Hya 1copy

cditcd thc print~out vith hcr customary prccision and Susan Dunsluorc Proofrcad
thc gallcys vith carc,

The Italian vcrsc in thc dcdicauon is drawn

macstro in J

1Mil De Angchs s Pocm un

Einaudi, 1983).

`Fiiz,cFri(Torin
I must ackn

vlcdgc, nally,thc forcbcarancc and inspiration f Lindsay Da

ics,

Gcmma Leigh Venuti,and Julius Da id Vcnuti,who cndurcd my abscnccs during

man months f work and wcrc most hdPftllin dis acting me i m it
F r thc scc nd editi

n,I rchcd on thc assistancc of a numbcr f PcoPlc The nc v

translations vvcrc eXpertly vcttcd by

argarct Dcvinncy (Susan Bern ky s
klll0 macher),Janct Marth(Kathlccn Da /is sJ omC),an(l C en Rcndall(my
D

Ablanc urt).Richard sicburth ga c my vcrsion of Jacques Dcrrida s cssay a

Painstakingly closc rcading that lcd to many imProvements Patricia Crouch and
Miriam Fried hclPfu y sPottcd tyPograPhical err rs in thc rst cditi n
Louisa Scn11 cn not nl savv the need f rd is re ision, but bchcvcd in thc
alue f thc f rm I wantcd to givc it. Christy KirkPatrick grcatly %cilitatcd an
oncrous Production Pr cess. Katc Parkcr ef cicntly took carc of Pcrn1isSion

paymcnts
Forvorkng conditions that vcrc csscntial to my ti1ncly complction f this
pr Cd- ap t om bt lng gcneral-c oyable I rcm n gratchl t Martlla

Tcnncnt

LV
Ncw Y rk

Cit

SCPtCmbcr2003

INTRODUCTION

TransIatiOn studies:an emergi"g disCi ne

i i :
r W n11 FsT
present It ConCentrates on approaches that have been deve|oped during the t

T J f

^/en-

during thls periOd

tieth century`focusing artiCu|ar|y On the past thirty years It llvas
`
that trans|atiOn studies emerged as a ne /acaden ic ne|d`at once internationa|and

interdiscip"nary, The need for a reader is thus part|y institutiona|` created by the
/th of the discip"ne` especia"y as evidenced by the pro"feratiOn Of transrapid gro
|ator training rograms /or d/ide Recent surveys indicate mOre than250`offering
a variety of certincates and degrees` undergraduate and graduate`training not on|y

professiona| trans|atOrs` but a|so scho|ar-teachers of trans

ation and Of foreign

|anguages and "teratures (Can inade and Pym 1995/ periodicaHy updated at
www fut es/~apym

H arr

s1997)

This gro /th has been accompanied by diverse forms Of trans|ation research and

commentary` some oriented to /ard pedagogy` yet most faHing

^/ithin-or crossing
_traditiona|acaden ic discip"nes`such as|inguistics` |iterary criticis

and anthropo|ogy. The principa

tia| se

`ph"osOphy`

aim of the reader is tO bring together a substan-

ection from th s aried mass of NA/riting`but in the form of a historiCa| survey

that invites sustained examination of key theoretica| deve|opments

of course` edited vo|umes a xvays xA/ork tO denne a

e|d` a body of kno /|edge`

a teXtbook market` and sO they create as much as satisfy institutiona| needs` especiaHy in the case of emergent discip"nes,In trans|ation studies`the broad spectrum

of theories and research methodo|ogies n ay doom any assessment of its current

INTRODUCTION
state to partia| representation` superflcia| synthesis` optirnistic canonization, This
reader is intended` nonethe|ess` to be an introduction to the ne|d recognizab|e to
the scho|ars who work with

n it

But recognition must nOt be construed as mirror reneCti

The intention
s

a|so to cha"enge any discip"nary cOmp|acency`tO produce a conso"dation that interrogates the xA/ays in

-even

^/hich trans|ation is current|y researched and taught by revea"ng

f imp"c it|y_the "n itatiOns of scho|ar y knolv edge and pedagogica| prac-

tices` to sholv what trans|ation studies have been and to suggest what they might
be. Perha s the most effective
perspectiVe, \

^/ay to issue this cha"enge is to enab|e a historica|

/rote the French

A trans|ator /ithout a historica| cOnsciousness`

trans|ator and trans|ation theorist Antoine Berman/ remains \

a prisOner to h s Or

her representation of trans|ating and to those representations that Convey the socia|

discourses of the rnoment (Berman1995 61`my trans ation),In assemb"ng this

reader/ I am suggesting that scho|ars of trans|ation` as /eH as trans|ators` can

signi

cant|y advance their kA/ork by taking into accOunt the historica| contexts in

/hich translation has been practiced and stud ed,

The readings are organized

ntO siX Chrono|ogica| sections

the date of pub"-

catiOn for each reading a pears at the foot of its rst page,The docun ents gathered
in the rst section` a" predating the tv entieth century`have exel'ted such a p0

^/erfu|

foundationa|

innuence on|ater practices and cOn mentary as to

^/arrant the term

The next five sect ons are divided into decades of the tlventieth century

hether a

decade stands on its OxAln or is Combined vvlith others depends` in the 6rst instance`

on the vo|ume of trans|ation connmentary pubhshed\ /ith"

quantity (cf

it` sheer b

b"ographica|

the bib"ographies in N1organ 1959` steiner 1975` Schu|te and

Biguenet 1992). But there is a|so a qua"tative standard

as the readings n1ove

towards the resent` the |eve| of soph st cation and

nventiveness does in fact rise`
and new concepts`methods/and research pr0ects are deve|oped`justifying separate
sections for the 1980s and the 199Os and beyond,
The sections are each prefaced by introduCtory essays xlvhich describe | ain
trends in trans|atiOn studies/ estab"shing a context for cOnc se eXpOsitions of the

readin9s and caH" g attention to the XlVork of innuentia| vAyriters` theorists` and
scho|ars lArho are not represented by a reading.The section introduCtions are histor-

ica|

ca| advances and

narratives that refer to theoretica| and methodo|Og

occasionaHy offer critica| eva|uations, Yet the stories they te" avOid any evO|utionary I ode| of progress` as weH as any systematiC critique
ho /ever

I
anted to out"ne`

rapid|y` the history of the present moment in trans|at on studies, And to

some degree this meant asking questions of the past raised by the |atest tendencies
in theory and research,
The map Of trans|ation studies drawn here` its centers and peripheries` admiss

Ons and exc|usions` renects the current fraglmentation of the

e|d
nto sub-

specia ties` some empiricaHy oriented` some hermeneutic and "terary` and some

nnuenced by various forms of "nguistics and cu|tura| studies \

n produCtive syntheses, The effort to cast a

areas of trans|ation research`

/hich have resu|ted

/ide net has not encOmpassed certain

/hOse Vo|ume and degree Of specia"zation demand

INTRODUCTION
g. inter-

separate cOverage regard|ess of their importance to trans|ation studies (e

preting and lmachine trans|atiOn)

And breadth of coVerage has "mited depth of

representation for particu|ar theories and approaChes

The section introductions

airn` in brief space`to supp|y some omissions and tO sketch a histOrica|sett

ng

And

the bib ography not on|y identines parenthet|ca| references made thrOughout the

bOok` but|ists additiona| pub"cat|ons by particu|ar|y in uentia|or pro"nc authOrs.

It

/iH be C|ear that I have tried to cover much_for some` no doubt`too muCh-

in an effort tO suggest the variety of trans|ation studies.

The irnage Of the ne|d fashioned by this reader re ects the contemporary scene

a||the mOre c}Ose|y because it has been produced in consu|tation with many|eading
XA/riters and trans|atOrs`theorists and scho ars,They cOmmented on various versions

of the tab|e of contents` responded to questions about particu|ar trans|ation traditions and for| s of research` suggested speci

c texts` made "sts of names` and

CritiCized my rationa|e and princip|es Of se|ection and organization.Any authOr or

text that received a re|ative|y |arge number of recOmmendations earned some sort

of representation here. In some cases` my cOnsu|tants encouraged me tO cOHect

research that feH Outside their speGia|ty,And sOme he|ped s"mp|y`but r

ost tangib|y/

by a"owing their wOrk tO be reprinted

/ithout Gharge.
Their names and|ocatiOns Kwame AnthOny Appiah(USA)`ROsemary ArrOjo
(

sA)` IsabeHe Ber|man (France)` Annie Brisset (Canada)` Peter Bush (Spa

AndrexA/Chesterman(Fin|and)` Kath|een Davis(

n)`

sA)` Dirk De|abastita(Be|gium)`

Jacques Derrida(FranGe)`Itamar Even-Zohar(IsraeD` Peter Fa /cett( K)` Peter

FranCe (UK)/ Sean GO|den (Spain)/ Jean-Rllarc Gouanvic (Canada)` BasH Hatim
( nited Arab En irates)` hllichae| Henry Heim ( sA)` Ju"ane H Ouse (Germany)`
David Katan(Ita|y)`suzanne Ji" Levine( SA)` PhHip E LeWis(USA)`Ian NqasOn
(UK)`Rache|R/lay(USA)`Eugene Nida(Be|gium
`Christiane NOrd(Germany)`Ab(

sA)`A|exis NOuss(Canada)`Anthony Pyn (Spain)` E|ena Reeves

(USA)` |<atharina Reiss (Germany)` steven RendaH (France)` Richard Sieburth
(USA)` sherry simon (Canada)` Gayatri Spivak (USA)` GideOn TOury (IsraeD`
V ar|< N Ornes(

Harish Trivedi (India)` p 1aria Tymoczko (UsA)` V argher|ta U|rych (Ita y)` H ans

ermeer(Germany)`Luise von F|oto/(Canada)`and Patr ck Zaba|beascOa(Spain).

Those who eva uated the roject fOr ROut edge a|sO came frOm the internatiOna|
colmmunity of trans|ation scho|ars for the nrst edition` Neus CarboneH (S ain)`

M ichae Cronin(Ire|and)`|<eith Harvey(UK)`TheO Hermans(

(

K)`Efrain Krista|

sA)`Caro| Ma er(USA)`Kirsten Ma|mkjaer(UK)`Mark Shutt|ewOrth(UK)`

and p 1artha

Tennent (Spain) for the second edition` susan Bernofsky (

SA)`

Stefan Herbretcher(Ul<)` Lars O|e Sauerberg(Denmark)`Corinne Scheiner(USA)`

Dan e| Simeoni (Canada)`and Carnnen a|ero-Garces(Spain).
The nrst edit on v as decisive|y shaped by my Advisory Editor` N1ona Baker
( |<)` /ho

eva|uated every decision I made`every document I vA/rote, She

/as trained as a "nguist and

|ation scho|ar
^/ho

s a trans-

/hOse ne|d f research is cOrpus

"nguistics` Computerized ana|ysis of teXt co"ections

my

/ork has fa"en

/ithin

"terary
critiCism
and cu|tura| studies,meth0d0|Ogica1
lA/e began xvith
some sharedlA/hat
ideas` but
/ith }arge
differences_theoretica1
pedagogica},

e a|so
had in

INTRODUCTION
common

^/as a set of basic assumptions

gent academic discip"ne

that trans|ation studies constitutes an emer-

that research and cOmmentary on trans atiOn frOm other

discip"nes might be usefu}to trans|ation studies` but does not neCessarHy faH

/ithin

/entieth century`
it that many cu|tures have strong trans|ation traditions in the t
but that tO be innuentia internationaHy` /rit ng about trans|ation needs to be
XA/ritten in or trans

ated
nto an internationa"zed |anguage such as Eng"sh (cf.the

rich traditions Of trans|ation cOn

mentary in Russian`Chinese` Braz"ian POrtuguese`

and Cata an`among many other anguages`malor and minor).These assumptions

did not make any easier the difncu|t pr cess of se|ecting texts On the cOntrary`
they|ed to an effort to |imit the inevitab|e drift to /ard Eng"sh- anguage traditions

by cOnsidering various untrans|ated materia|s` by gathering previous|y pub"shed

trans|ations`and by presenting ne\

/and improved trans|ations of c|assic documents

/rote re|atiVe|y "tt|e

In the end` this reader sho /s that native speakers of Eng"sh

estern trans|atiOn theory that has proved innuentia| during the tlVentieth
of the
century and certain|y before it,

The differenCes between me and my advisOry editor were equaHy`if not more`

signinGant because they resu|ted in many debates over the range of current
approaches to trans|ation. These differences and debates reneGted the institutiona|

/ing that
divisions of acadenaic |abor`testing the notion of interdiscip"narity by sho
many interdiscip"nes are pOssib|e in trans|ation studies`and that even if disci

do nOt share cOnceptua| paradigms and research methods` they might nOnethe|ess"nes
be jOined together to advance a rOjeCt on trans|ation,The nrst edition of the reader
/as the fruit of such a co"aboration` a|though its 6na| form remained | y so|e
responsib"ity, FOr the second edition` I have\^`orked a|one.

What is a translation theOry?

The increasing|y interdiscip"nary nature of trans|ation studies has mu|ti p"ed
theories of trans|ation

nterest in a topic` however/ is no guarantee that

A shared

/hat is acceptab|e as a theory in one ne|d 0r approach \^/"| satisfy the conceptua|
requirements of a theory in others

In the West` fronn antiquity to the |ate nine~

teenth century/theoretica|statements about trans|ation fe"into traditiona"y de

areas of thinking about|anguage and cu|ture

ned

rhetoric` |iterary theory` ph"osophy.

And the most frequent|y cited theOrists Comprised a fair|y "mited group. One such
cata|ogue might inC ude

Cicero`H Orace`Quinti|ian`Jerome`Augustine`Dryden`

Goethe` sch|eiermacher` Arno|d` N ietzsche, Tl/ventieth-century trans ation theOry

revea|s a much expanded range of f e|ds and apprOaches renecting the differentiatiOn Of modern cu|ture not on|y Varieties of "nguistics` "terary criticism`
ph"osOphica| specu|atiOn`and Gu|tura|theOry` but experir

enta|studies and anthro-

po|Ogica{ ne|d/ork` as xA/e" as trans|ator training and trans|ation practice. Any

accOunt of theoretica| cOncepts and trends must ackno/edge the disCip"nary sites
At the same time`
in
^/hich they emerged in order to understand and eva|uate them
it is possib|e to |Ocate recurrent themes and ce|ebrated topoi` if not broad areas

of agreement.

INTRODUCTION
LOuis l e"y

\cOmp|ete theory of trans|ation \ has three

has argued that a

cOmpOnents specincation of funGt on and goa| description and ana ysis of opera/een goa| and Operations ( <e"y
tions and critica| comment on re|ationsh|ps bet
1979 1), |<eHy is carefu| to obserVe that throughout history theorists haVe tended

to emphasize one of these com Onents at the ex ense of Others The cOmpOnent that
receives the 9reatest ennphasis` I

Ou|d add` often devo|ves intO a recommendat

on

or prescription for gOod trans|ating

The ROman poet HOrace asserted in his ^rs POe

1o Bc) that the poet

`Ca (C
/ho resOrts to trans|ation shou|d avOid a certain operation-name|y`

^/ord-for-wOrd
rendering _ in Order to rite d|stinctive oetry. Here the function of trans|at ng is
to construct poetic authorship/and the inamediate goa| is a good
oem in HOratian
\On the Different N1ethods of Trans|ating
or ROman terms, In a
ecture entit|ed

(1813)`the German phHOsOpher and theO|Ogian Friedrich Sch|eiermaCher advOcated

/ord-for- /ord "tera"sm in |anguage that
an effect of foreignness in the trans|ation

departs frOn the quotidian to roduce

for the more precise|y the trans|ation

adheres to the turns and ngures Of the origina`the more foreign it

/"| seem to its

reader (Sch|eiernnacher` this vo|ume). FOr sch|eiermacher` textua| operations

produce cOgnitive effects and serve cu|tura| and po"tica| functions

These opera-

tions` effeGts and functions are described and judged accOrding to va|ues that
are "terary and nationa"st` accOrd

ng tO whether the trans|ation he| s to bu d a

German |anguage and "terature during the Napo|eonic

apprOaches that are based on "nguist

/ars. EVen wk/ith modern

cs and tend to assume a scientinc Or va|ue-

free treatment of |anguage/ the emphas s on One theoretica| component might be

"nked to prescription,
During
the 1960s
1970s` |ingu|stics-oriented
theorists
emphasized
the description
and ana|ysis
of and
trans|ation
operations`producing typo|ogies of equiva|ence that act as normative princip|es to guide trans|atOr training.
The surveys Of theoret|ca| trends in the section intrOductiOns have both beneted from and revised l<e"y s usefu|scheme TO nny mind`ho /ever`the key categOry

in any trans|ation research and cOmmentary is what I sha" caH the re|ative autOnomy of trans ation`the textua|features and operations or strategies that dist nguish
it from the foreign text and fron

teXts initiaHy xvritten in the trans|ating |anguage.

These comp"cated features and strategies are

^/hat prevent trans|ating from being

unmed ated or transparent communication they both enab|e and set up obstac|es
to Cross-cu|tura| understanding by /orking over the foreign text. They substantiate
the arguments for the impossibHity Of trans|ation that reCur thrOughout the t

/en-

tieth century, Yet xA/ithout solme sense of distinctive features and strateg

es`

trans ation never emerges as an object of study in its oWn right

The history of trans|ation theory Gan in fact be irnagined as a set of changing
re|ationships bet /een the re|ative autonomy of the translated text` or the trans|atOr s

actions` and t/o other categories

equiva

ence and function Equiva|ence

has been understood as\ accuracy`

correctness` Correspondence`

nde"ty` or identity it is a Variab|e notion of ho /the trans|ation is connected

\\adequacy`

to the foreign text Function has been understood as the potentia"ty of the trans-

|ated text to re|ease d verse effects` beginn|ng with the GOmmunication of

lNTRODUCTION
information and the production of a response comparab|e tO the one produced by the
foreign text in its o /n cu|ture,Yet the effeCts of trans|ation are a|so sOcia|`and they

have been harnessed tO cu|tura

` eConomic` and po"tica| agendas

evange"ca| pro-

grams`commerc a|ventures`and co onia|projects`as we|as the deve|opment of

|anguages` nationa| |iteratures` and aVant-garde "terary movements

Function is a

variab|e notion of hoXA/the trans|ated text is connected to the receiving|anguage and

cu|ture In some periods`suGh as the1960s and1970s`the autonomy Of trans|ation

is |irnited by the dominance of thinking about equiVa|ence` and functiona"sm

becOmes a so|ution to a theoretica| inapasse`the

mpossib"ity of fxing re|at

equiva|ence for every teXt type and every trans{ation situation

ons of

In other periods`such

as the 198os and 1990s` autonomy is |imited by the don inance of functiona"sms`
and equiva|ence is rethought to embrace what
deviations frOm the foreign text.

The changing

^/ere previous|y treated as shifts or

nnportance Of a particu|ar theoretica| category`

autonomy`eq uiva ence or function` may be deternlined by various factors`

/hether

inguistiC

and "terary` cu tura| and sOcia|. Yet the mOst decisive detern ination is a partiCu-

|ar theory of |anguage or textua"ty. George Steiner has argued that a trans|ation
theory

\presumes a systellnatic theory of|anguage

/ith XAlhich it over|a s cOmp|ete|y

or frolm x/vhich it derives as a specia|case aGcording to demonstrab|e ru|es of deduGtion and app"cation
of |an9uage ex

sted

(Steiner1975 280-1), He dOubted xlvhether any such theory

But he neverthe|ess prOceeded to out"ne his o /n cOnViCtion

before offerin9 his re ections On trans|ation

A trans|ation theory ah /ays rests on partiCu|ar assumptions about |anguage

use` eVen if they are no nnore than fragmentary hypotheses that remain imphcit or
unacknollkl edged, FOr centuries the assumptions seenl to have fa"en into t /o |arge
categories

instrumenta{ and hermeneutic (cf, |<e"y 1979 chap, 1), Some transmunication`

ation theories have assunned an instrumenta|cOncept of|anguage as con

expressive of thOught and meanin9`lVhere lmeanings are either based on reference to

an empirica| rea"ty or derived from a context that is prlmar"y |inguistic` but lmay
a|sO encompass a pragrnatic s tuation Other theories haVe assumed a hermeneutic
cOncept of |anguage as interpretation` cOnstitutiVe of thought and meaning` xtlhere
meanings shape rea"ty and are inscr

bed accOrding to Changing cu|tura| and sOcia|

situations, An instrumenta| conCept of |anguage |eads to trans|ation theOries that

privi ege the communication of ObjeCtive informatiOn and formu|ate typo ogies of
equiva ence` minir

izing and sOmetimes exc|uding a|together any question of func-

tion beyond communication

'\hermeneutic
conCeptva|ues
of|anguage|eads
trans|atiOn
theories that privi ege the interpretation
of creative
and thereforetodescr
be the
target-|anguage inscription in the fore

gn text` often eXp|aining it on the basis of

sOcia| functiOns and effects.

These concepts Of|anguage and trans|ation are obv

tions

Before they can cOntribute to any exp|anation or

ous|y no more than abstrac

nterrOgation of trans|ation

theories and practices` they require ana|ysis in specinc historica| contexts

In the

section introductions they have been used as heuristiC deVices to describe and
dist

nguish among different theoretica| texts and trends.

INTRODUCTION
rassr o,a caf'o s
The pr mary audience imagined for this reader is acadenlic instructors and students

in adVanced undergraduate or graduate cOurses in trans atiOn theory` as llve" as

theorists and scho|ars of trans|ation and practitioners /ith a theoretica|
nc"natiOn,

The
nstitutiona| sites of such cOurses vary xtlide|y today`

nc|uding not on|y trans-

|ator training programs` but Various other departments and progralms` such as
"nguistics`
forei9n
|anguages`
cOmparative
ph"Osophy`
andtocu|tura|
studies,
Instructors
/H| of cOurse
haVe their"terature`
o /n ideas
about hoxlv
use a book
they decide to require or recOmllnend In se|ecting and muHing over the texts that
compOse the reader` I thought often about potentia| uses in the c|assroo m, Here are
a fe /suggestions.

Read

o a/ly
`s

The chrono|ogica| organization encOurages historica| surveys of theoretiGa| trends

by focusing on articu}ar traditions`discip"nes`or cOnceptua|discourses se|ections
spanning decades xvithin the t /entieth century can be grouped to show the irnportant

mpact of the German trans ation tradition(Benjamin`steiner`Berman)`Czech and

Russian fOrma"sm(JakobsOn` Even-Zohar`TOury` Lefevere)`sen iOtics(Jakobson`

Lewis)` |inguistics (B|um <u|ka/ H arvey` Mason)` poststruCtura|ism (Lewis`
Chamber|ain` spivak` Derrida)

Theoretica| trends can be constructed according to different` even o posing

ear"er theor-

narratives of deve|opment, The narratives might be prob|em-so|Ving

sts pose prob|ems that are reformu|ated more precise|y and pOssib|y so|ved by|ater

theoretica advances (Nida s dynamic equiva|ence is recast in practica| terms by

ermeer s emphasis on the trans|ator s goa| and con naission) or theOretica|

approaches based on seeming y incOmpatib|e assumptions are joined in an innOvatiVe synthesis (Le /is co|mb nes co| parative discOurse ana|ysis and deconstruction),

The em hasis on continuity and progress in such historica|narratives can be rep|aced

by an emphasis on discontinuity and present insuf

ciencies, Thus` a |ater theorist

1ight be seen as posing a rob|em for\^/hich ear"er theories proVide a viab|e so|u-

tion (POund recommends that the trans|ator cOnstruGt a sty"stic ana|ogue xtlith
ng cu|ture to compensate for the very |oss of foreign
"terary texts ln the
receiv
teXtua|features
that
Nabokov|aments), 0r a theoretica| advance

n one ne|d might

be treated as a|illlitation in another(Grice s conversationa|\\maxirns

enab|eB|um-

s discOurse ana|ysis but undergO Appiah s ph"osophica| critique)

groupings are most productive` in other \^/ords`
l

uH<a

a/areness

H istorica|

^/hen they are accOmpanied by an

of the different narratives that might struCture the critica| reading of the

se|ections.

Read elI,afta/ly
The chrono|ogica| organization can a|so

be set aside in favor of tracing specinc

thelales in trans|ation studies se|ect ons can be grOuped to exp|ore assumpt ons

INTRODUCTION
about|anguage use(instrumenta| s hermeneutic)`theoretiCa| concepts(trans|atab"ity and re|ative autonomy` equ va|ence and shifts` reception and function)`
trans|ation strategies (free vs. |itera` sense-for-sense vs

/ord-for- /ord` domesti-

cating vs fOreignizing)` particu|ar genres or text types (humanistic` pragmatic)`

and various cu|tura and po"tica| issues(identity and ideo|ogy`po

/er and minority`

discip"nes and institutions)

A articu|ar theme /"| bring together a spectrum of differing approaches The

n`POund`and
9enre of poetry`for examp e`is at the center of the texts by Benjam
Nabokov/but a|so those by Dryden and Goethe,Sch|eiern acher` LexA/is`and Derrida
address the trans|ation of ph"osophy A theme can a|so provide a Cross-seCtion of

/ork in a speci c period. Po"tica|agendas for trans|ation are described and theor-

ized in the 199os frOm different perspectives and situations (Brisset` spivak`
Appiah` H arvey` N Ornes). se|ections can be made contrapunta"y`bringing together
diverging treatments. BOth D Ab|ancourt s practices and inay and Darbe|net

methodo|ogy raise ethica| questions when juxtaposed tO Berman Chamber|ain

inG udes a fennin st critique of steiner Rll ason s eXamination of European
nion
documents suggests that Vermeer s functiOna"sm becomesideo|ogica"y cOmp"cated
in pO"tica|
nstitutions

t/se st//9/ /emel,

a-/read`rTgs

Any approach to this reader xvi|| be strengthened by a fu"er historica| or theoretica| cOntext, H istor es of trans|atiOn theory and practice no / exist for lmany

BaHard1992`Cope|and1991/cronin1996`
Pym 2000` star|<e 1999` TymOczkO 1999` van Hoof 1991` ermeer 1992),

|anguages`traditions and periods(e

Theoretica| texts in particu|ar trans|ation traditions have a|so been co"ected (e,g.

st0rig 1963` H Orgue"n 1981` BaCardf` FOntcuberta and Parcerisas 1998)

Reference xAlorks` such as Baker s encyC|opedia (1998) and Shutt|e /orth and
Cowie s dictionary (1997)` can be usefu

in situating particu|ar texts in the disci-

p"ne Of trans|ation studies they rovide deta"ed entries on theoretica

concepts and

research methodo ogies and inc|ude h storica| surveys of trans|ation trad

tions "

Various "nguistic communities An instructor might create more |anguage-specinc

/ith such reference kt/orks as FranGe s guide(2000)to |iterary trans|ating
contexts
in Eng"sh` and Chan and Po"ard s encyc|opedia (1995) of theories and praGtices
fOcusing on trans|ation bet /een Chinese and Eng"sh
Supp|ementary read ngs can be strategic in deepening the representation of a

tradition`Concept`or theme.The ph"OsOphiGa| debates on trans|atab"ity are represented in the reader by Appiah and Derr

da

They might be deVe|oped further xvith

teXts by Quine (1960)` DavidsOn (1984)` and NlacIntyre (1988) Nlleschonnic s

hermeneutic Orientation(1973)is important for understanding Berman`and Brown
and Levinson s pO"teness theory (1987) for Harvey Spivak s pOstco|onia| renections can be extended thrOugh the histOrica|and theoretica| |inks betwkleen trans|ation

and co|onia| discOurse estab"shed by N

ranjana (1992) and Bhabha (1994). And

/ho are not represented

of cOurse an instruCtor | ight assign in uentia| theorists
here by a text` but nonethe|ess discussed

n the section introduCtiOns, Sperber and

1NTRODUCTION
W"son s reVe|ance theory (1986) infor| s the approach to trans|ation in Gutt
(1991)` hich might be prOductive|y studied

n re|ation tO Derrida s notion of re|e-

vant trans|ation
The |ists of

\Further reading that conc|ude each introductiOn can be usefu| in

ng c|assroom debates, These very se|ective |ists refer tO critica|cOn mentary

on theoretica| trends and concepts and on the work of speci
c theorists.
initiat

Antho ogies are a|ways judged by what they exc|ude as we

given its space|imitations and se|ection criteria`

|as inc|ude.This reader`

/i|| prove no exception, I am keen`

therefore`tO hear from instruCtOrs Who have adopted it for c|assroom use`whether
successfu"y or lAyith frustration, InformatIon conCerning actua| reading assignments`
the he|pfu|ness of the introductory materia1 and the usefu|ness of

articu|ar

texts

xA/iH be inva|uab|e in cOnsidering revisions for subsequent editions, P|ease direct any

comments to me care Of Rout

edge

slu
unoJ
l ls Iuuo!l

:t : 1 : t: { l e f

p}:: tl
; :It
l;t : d
not exist in c|assica| antiquity. XlVhen commentary about trans|ation nrst appears
I

t i

in the est`it tends to take the form of pass ng remarks`not systemat

c ar9uments`

and it is s|tuated in the academic discip"ne of rhetoric, Indeed`the flrst innuentia|

commentators_C|cero`P|iny the YOunger`Quinti ian_are aH distinguished ROman

orators NVhO cOnsider trans|ation as a pedagogica| exercise for aspirants tO their
profession
In De o fimo9e/,e`e orarc,rL//,9(46 Bc)` C|cero desCribes how` in order to

be

usefu| tO students` he cornposed Latin versiOns Of speeches by the Greek oratOrs`

I did not trans|ate them as an

Aeschines and Demosthenes (C cero 1949 365)

rpres]/ he lA/rites`

interpreter EJ,ec co/,ye'

`tJr `/,

but as an orator` keeping the same ideas and the forms`or as one might
say` the \\ngures

n |anguage whiCh cOnforms to our

of thought` but

usage, And in so do ng I did not ho d it necessary to render

/ord for

/ord` but I preserved the genera| sty|e and force of the |anguage.
(Ibid

Here trans ation serves the study and imitat

on of rhetorica| rnode|s` it

s a spring-

/ and better speeches` and this function requires a

board for the invention of ne
discurs

text

ve strategy that is free` paraphrastic`focused on the meaning Of the foreign

^/h"e adhering tO Latin norms,

s remarks point to another discip"ne in /hiCh trans|ation is praCticed

C|cero

at this tirne

gramrnar, The gran marian Or\ interpreter |ikewise uses trans|ation

14

FOuNDATIONAL sTATEMENTs

to serve an acade|mic function`

^/hich in this case is "nlited to Hnguistic ana|ys

and textua| exposition. ROman education is b"ing ua` students are taught Greek as

/eH as Latin` and trans|at on exerc ses are routine|y innp|emented in |anguage
|earning and "terary study, Because of such uses` the grallnnnarian favors a rather

different disGursiVe strategy` interpreting the foreign text much more c|ose|y`
renderin9 it

^/ord for

/ord.

In ancient ROme` the sparse cOmments about trans|ation renect the pecu"ar
institutiona| status of this
/rit ng practice. It is subordinated to the procedures and

educationa| aims of tNlvo academic discip"nes` rhetoric and grammar

Yet it is a|so

irnprinted by their riva|ry for cu|tura| authority In distinguishing his use of trans-

|ation from that of the grammarian` Cicero suggests that grannmatica| trans|ation
is not usefu|to the orator It is rhetoric` mOreover`that achieves dominance` main|y
because Of its ca aCity to dep|oy various kinds of kno/edge for socia|and po"tica|

purpOses, Orators argue |ega| cases and occupy 9oVernment Ofnce

grammarians

/ork in a strict|y academic capacity

The use that Cicero assigns to trans|ation |makes c|ear that it enacts another`

more emu|ative riva|ry betlveen ROman and Greek cu|ture

In the Repub"c and

ear|y Empire` ROman authors sought to capita"ze on the cu|tura|prestige of Greece

by submitting G reek texts tO various forms Of trans|atiOn and ada tation Thus they
imp"cit|y eXpressed the r adlmiration for those teXts

/hi|e aggressive|y rektlr|ting

them to create a distinctiVe|y Latin "terature H Orace s ^`s POer`ca not on|y
assumes the d scip"nary riva|ry that informed ROman trans|ation(he sides with the
orators)` but a|so indicates how the free trans|ation of Greek texts might a d poetic
cOmposition
It is difncu t to treat Common|matter in a xlvay that is particu|ar to you

and you

^/ou|d do better to turn a sOng of Troy into dramatic acts than

to bring forth for the nrst t me something unknown and unsung Pub"C

materia{ w"| be priVate property if you do not |inger over the connmon

and open /ay` and if you do not render llvord for

erF,res
trans ator E`

/ord "ke a faithfu}

(Trans, in COpe|and 1991

29)

Horace adVocates a rhetorica| imitation of the foreign teXt /hereby the HOmeric
e ics (

a song of Troy ) beCome sites of invention fOr the Latin poet` the

pub"c

materia frolm
/hiCh \ private poems are produced` pOssib|y through a change in
genre, These poems are not sO much \\ne as different in a
/

^/ay that exhibits the

s individua|ta|ent,

poet

The cu|tura|functions of ROman trans|ation stress the re|ative autononny of the

trans|ated text` minir izing the importance of equiva

enCe by de

ng it as a genera|

semantic and sty"stiC cOrrespondenCe In|ate antiquity`ho /ever`patristiC Commentary mOves equiva|ence to the center of thinking abOut trans|ation because the
foreign texts at issue are often key re"gious documents/ notab|y the Bib|e. In
De doC r J,a C/l``sf`a a (428 AD)` Augustine argues for the authoritative accuracy
of the septuagint`the Greek version of the Hebre

/scriptures prepared in the third

FOUNDATIONAL sTATEMENTS

15

Vs
/orking indecentury Bc. He rehearses the |egend of ho
^/seventy H e"en|stic Je

pendent|y`
separated in various Ce"s` nonethe ess /rote the eXact same

trans|ations(Aug ustine1958 49).\\In a"the more|earned churches/ Augustine

observes` \ it is nokt/ said that this trans|ation

/as so inspired by the Ho y S

irit

that many spoke as if /ith the mouth of one` |eading hina to Conc|ude that
even
though something is found in Hebrew vers|ons different fronq /hat they haVe set
do
/n`
(ibid

I think kAle shou|d cede to the divine dispensation by

/hich they wOrked

) Augustine s standard of accuracy is nOt so much c|ose adherence to the

fOreign text as an institutiona| Va"dat on that the trans|ation is divine|y inspired

regard|ess of its deviations.

Ear|y Christian cOmmentators take up the paraphrastic trans|ation typica| of

their ROman predecessors`but it is detaChed fron the discip"nary and cu|tura|riva|Trans|ating that

ries that deterllnined its va|ue for orators` poets` and p|aykvrights

focuses on the sense Of the foreign teXt` /hen that text is the Bib|e` inevitab|y
assumes a re"gious signi Cance the resu|ting trans|ation is seen as a transparent
representation of divine| eaning, /ord-for- /ord renderings GOnne to be stigrnatized
/

not s

rnp|y because they cOntain infe"cit

es` given the |eXica| and syntactica| differ-

ences betxtleen |anguages` but because they interfere xAlith the transmission of God

/ord NOnethe|ess`the Christian appropriation of the ROman tradition mystifes the

extent to
/hiCh | eaning-oriented trans|ation actua"y revises foreign texts.

This mystifcat|on can be g"m sed

n the rst reading that appears belo
JerOme
B

ndignant|y defensive Le

/`

His treatment of

fer fc, F an9l/,ac/l`tls(395AD)

b|e trans|ation turns cOntradictory in ts attempt tO synthesize pagan and Christian

\sense for sense versiOn of a papa| |etter` he eVinces his

sources, In justifying his

respect for the ROman cOmmentators Whi|e reservinq a

word for Word method

for Scripture because`as he states` \\the very order of the lA/ords is a mystery/

he a|so re"es on the authority of the Gospe|s`

Yet

`/hiCh are shOlA/n tO cOntain various

free renderings of the Hebrelv Bib|e that differ from the septuagint, U tirnate|y he

\in scripture one must consider nOt the

asserts that
/ords` but the sense,

Behind this contradiction "es the c|ose connectiOn betxlt/een sense-for-sense

trans|ation and Bib"ca| exegesis. Jerome s eXamp}es from the Gospe|s inc|ude
renderings of the O|d Testament that do not mere|y express the
nx it by imposing a Christian interpretation.Thus N1atthe
the B0ok of HOsea

sense

s vers

but rather

0n of a sentence

0ut of EgyptI have caHed my son _inscribes a prophetic

meaning that refers to the Ho|y Fan i|y s night from Herod` l/vhereas the Hebrew

fron

text reads quite d fferent|y

I ca"ed my son

hen Israe|/as a ch"dI |oved hin

Jeronae s Latin version of the Bib|e` the

`and Out of Egypt

u|gate` sirnHar|y

Christianizes Judaic themes (|<e"y 1975

162) It fna"y rep|aces the Septuagint
and becOmes the trans|ation authorized by the Catho"c ChurCh

ith fellv exceptions` commentators foHolA/ Jerome s va"dation of sense-for-

sense trans|ation through the M idd|e Ages and into the Renaissance` so that when
the trans|ating |anguage is no |onger c|assiCa| but vernacu|ar` his prece ts are st"|
echoed. His innuence extends even to heretica| sects

/hO GhaHenge the authority of

the u|gate The pro ogue to the V yc"fnte Bib|e (c 1395) asserts that \\the beste
trans|ating s`out of Latyn intO En9"sh`to trans ate aftir the sentence and not one"

16
aft

FOuNDATIONAL sTATEMENTS
r the vvOrdis` so that the sentence be as Opin either openere in Eng"sh as in

Latyn (H udson1978

68) The emphasis on inte"igib"ity`on making the|anguage

than Jerome s Latin` shows that the avoid-

of the trans|ation even more \\opin

/ord-fOr- /ord trans|ation is a prOse|ytizing move designed to increase access

ance of

to the sacred text

artin Luther s Version of the Bib|e (1522` 1534) sOught to

disp|aCe the \/u|gate by re|ying on High German` a dia|ect that is spoken by \

the

mother in the home`the chi dren on the street`the common man in the marketp|ace

(Luther 196o 189), Yet he app"es Jerome s sense-for-sense strategy and

inscribes Protestant theo|ogy through subt|e revisions. In his 1530 |etter on trans|ating`for examp|e` Luther admits that he inserted a

/ord(a//e`

a|one

`meaning\
\on|y
or
) in Jerome s version of a Pau"ne epist|e` arguing that the addition

\ConVeys the sense of the text

188).In effect`hoxA/ever`the apost|e is trans-

(ibid

formed into an advOcate of the Lutheran doctrine Of justincation by faith a|one.

The spread of humanist curriCu|a ensures that during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries the c|assica{ GO m|

entators /iH dOminate the discussion and

Occasiona"y citing Cicero and HOrace as their

practice of "terary trans|ation

mode|s` pOets produce free versiOns that are not a| /ays distin9uished fro origina

cOmpOsitions and /ou d today faH into the category of adaptations, This deve|opment derives part|y fron

a preva|ent COnception of authorship as imitation (G reene

1982), Hence the versions of Petrarch s sonnets /ritten by Tudor courtiers|ike s

Thomas yatt and Henry Ho

^/ard`ear of surrey`are nOt identined as trans ations

when they initia"y circu|ate in manuscript or nnaHy see print in Richard TOtte|

n/``sce//a/,y (1557), M eankl/hHe trans|at on is regarded as a practice that can be

usefu| in the construction Of a nationa| cu|ture, E"zabethan trans|atOrs suCh as sir

Thomas HOby and Ph"emOn Ho"and disp|ay a deep nationa"st inVestment in their
wOrk by mak ng ava"ab|e c|assica| and contemporary texts such as Castig"one
T e

Co

s A/a LJra/

o-y (1601)` they see then,se Ves as

`rr`er(1561) and P|iny

perfOrming the pub"c service of educating their`s
countrymen (E be

1969)

The funGtiona"sm that accompanies sense-for-sense trans|ation since antiquity

is no /rede ned

to nt different cu tura| and sOcia| rea"ties, Trans|ators are forth-

|ht in stating that their freedOms are intended not mere|y to imitate features of

iterary text in its o

the foreign texts` but to aHo /the trans atiOn tO wOrk as a
ri{

/n

right/eXert ng its force within native traditiOns.As a resu|t`trans|ation is strong|y

domesticating` assimi|ating foreign "teratures tO the |inguistic and cu|tura| Va|ues

of the receivin9 situation, The FrenCh trans|ator NiGo|as PerrOt d'Ab|anGOurt is

exemp|ary in e|evating acce tabHity in the trans|ating cu ture Over adequacy to the
foreign text

In the prefaces that are inc|uded in this vo|ume` D Ab|ancourt rationa"zes his
substantia| revis

ons Of TaCitus (1640) and Lucian (1654) by appea"ng to the

canOns of French |iterary taste that his trans|ations he

he argues`

require not on|y different

resu|ts in trans

p to form. \\Diverse t nes`

/ords` but different thoughts. This vie /

ations that are c|earer and more sty"stica"y fe"citous than the

foreign texts` but a|so bowd|erized

D Ab|ancourt

te"s his reader that he xA/ishes to

\offending the de"cacy of our Language

avoid both

and causing mora| offense

He is Very lmuch aware that his discursive strategies nOut conventiona| notions Of

FOUNDATIONAL sTATEMENTs

17

equiva|ence, Yet he makes c|ear that | is domesticating choices are not arbitrary`
but based On an interpretation that disp|ays an acute sense of historiGa| difference.
He just does not fee|that this d

fference is worth preserving in it5e f and certain|y

not at the cOst of departing from an e{egant sty|e as he cOnGeives it,

D

Ab|ancOurt initiates a trans|ation traditiOnhose prOducts are soon |abeHed

\\|es beHes infdO|es`

beautifu| but unfaithfu|, H s ideas gain prestige from his

membership in the Acad mie Franqaise`and thrOughout the eighteenth century they
are given diverse formu|ations and app"catiOns` sOme more extreme than Others.

AntOine HOudar de |a notte prefaces his version of the

describing his | any revisions in accOrdance

tO ensure cOntinuity of character`

he

acy(1714) by frank|y

I have tried

^/ith

neoC|assica| va|ues

sinCe it is this point _ lA/hich has

^/rites`

become so
/eH estab"shed in our time_tO lA/hich the reader is most sensitiVe` and
that a sO makes him the sternest judge (Lefevere1992a 3o).Pierre e TOurneur

sim"ar|y introduces his Version of Edward YOung s A/ 9/l T ougPlrs (1769) by

stating his
intention to dist"| from the Eng"sh oung a French one to be read
vho xAlou|d not have to ask themse|ves

/hether the book they lA/ere read ng

/as a Copy Or an origina (ibid, 39),
XA/ith p|easure and interest by FrenGh readers

Le TOurneur s
nOt dist nguish bet

co|

ment is remarkab|e for its conceptua|s|eight of hand.It does

/een a trans|atiOn that produces an effect equiva|ent tO that of

the foreign text and a trans|atiOn that produces the iHusion of origina"ty by effacing
its trans|ated status The tradition of /es be//es ` o0/es repeated|y cO"apses this
/

distinction` asserting a correspondence to the foreign author

essentia{nneaning of the foreign text

s intention or to the

h"e perfo n ing reVisions that ansxA/er to

`

is inte"igib|e and interesting in French cu|ture. The sheer fam

/hat

arity of the trans-

|ation` of its |anguage and sty|e` enab|es it to seem transparent and thereby pass
for the origina|

Eng|ish commentary during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries is decisive|y innuenced by French deve|opments. POets such as Abraham Co /ey`sir John
Denham` and sir Richard Fanshawe mOst |ike|y encounter D Ab|ancOurt s wOrk in
France` /here they foHolArthe eX"ed court of Char|es I after the Civ"VVar, Denham

preface tO The DesFrtlcr`o of Troy(1656)` his version of the seGOnd book of the
/le e`

announces his a|egiance to a sense-for-sense strategy that avoids|itera

renderings`
the vu|gar error of\ being

fe
res/

/and instead rewrites the

`dl/sJ
foreign text in Eng"sh cu|tura|terms(Denham1656

A2v).\ If /`r9 must needs

speak Eng"sh/ Denham asserts`

it xA/ere nt he sh0u|d speak not on|y as a man of
this Nation` but as a man of this age
(ibid. A3r). Denhan makes good his
pronouncement by casting the unrhymed Latin verse in the heroic coup|ets that are

beginning to dominate Eng|ish poetry`whi e"kening Trojan architecture to the rOya|

bu"dings in En9|and.
After the Restoration` John Dryden revises the c|assica
distinction between
rhetorica| and grammatica|trans|ation to take
nto accOunt the practices emp oyed
by his Eng"sh predecessors
his antho|ogy o

E/,/s

The eXtract reprinted here` dra /n from the preface to

/es (168o)` sho /s him tracing an Eng"sh tradition of

`d lA/hiCh stretches back to the start of the seventeenth century,

notab|e poet-trans|ators

Dryden situates h mse|f in this tradition` a|thOugh he is carefu| to dec|are his

18

FOuNDATIONAL sTATEM ENTs

preference for a moderate|y free strategy/ \\Paraphrase` or Trans|ation with

Latitude` which seeks to render meanings

He rejects not on|y wOrd for word

Versions as |acking nuency or easy readab"ity (

either perspicuity Or graCefu|ness

/H| frequent|y be
In itations that adapt the foreign teXt so

/ant|ng )` but a|so

as to serve the trans|ator s o /n "terary ambit ons.
|the sa| e` Dryden underestirnates the extent to vvhich paraphrase faHs short

of maintaining a semantic corres

ondenCe and is actuaHy transformative, He

suggests that xA/hen structura| differences between |anguages comp"cate the trans|ator s

task` the goa| shou d be \\to vary but the dress/ not to a

substance -as if a change in the means of ex

ress

ter or destroy the

on did not change the substance

expressed` especia"y xAl th "terary genres such as poetry. The c|othing metaphor

assumes an instrumenta|concept of|anguage

hereby communication is untroub|ed

by "nguistic and cu|tura| differences,

It is precise|y this assumption that under"es A|exander Fraser Tyt|er

s Essay

o/,f/,e Pr` C /eS Of Tra/,s/a

`o/,(1791)`the
nrst because
systematic
treatise
in Eng"sh.FOr
he re"es
on the
En"ghtenTyt|er` intercu|tura| communication
is ossib|e
ment notion of an essentia| human nature endo /ed /ith reason. Thus he de nes

g0od trans|ation as producing an equiva|ent effect that transcends the differences

betxA/een |angua9es and cu|tu res

the merit of the origina| /ork is sO cOmp|ete|y transfused into another

|anguage` as to be as distinct|y apprehended` and as strong|y fe|t` by a
native of the cOuntry to\/hich that |anguage be|ongs/ as it is by those

/ho speak the |anguage of the origina|

/ork

(Tyt|er1978 15)
TO achieve this effect/Tyt|er recommends paraphrastic trans{ation that ilmitates the
\ease of origina| GOmpo\\ideas
and \ sty|e of the foreign text and possesses the
or such nuenGy as tO see| untrans|ated (ibid,)

Yet the merit of the foreign text is judged`not according to uniVersa|reasOn`

sition`

but according to the standards Of the receiving cu|ture` pre-empting any equiva|ent

effect, Tyter app|auds A|exander POpe s trans|ations of the HOmeric epiGs

(1715_1726) for de eting passages that \\offend/ by introduCing |o / images and
puer"e a"usions

(ibid

79). Tyt er s standards are not s mp|y British they a|so

e"te of /hich he is a member He urges the trans-

renect the taste of the cu|tura

\preVent that ease Eof origina| composition

|ator to

fronn degenerating into

by refusing to render classica| |iterature into popu|ar dia|ects and

"Centiousness
discourses

If we are just|y offended at hearing irgi|speak in the sty e of the

EVening POst Or the Da"y Advertiser` hat must xA/e think of the trans|ator`

^/ho makes the sO|emn and sententious Tacitus express himse f in

/aiters of a tavern
the |ol/v cant of the streets/ or in the dia|ect of the
(ibid

l19)

FOUNDATIONAL sTATEMENTs
Tyt|er s \\prinCip|es

enta" the inscription of the foreign text

cu|tura|va}ues that prevaH in the receiving situation`starting

ard dia|ect of the trans|ating |anguage,

19

/ith "nguistic and

^/ith the current stand-

During the eighteenth century`a gro /ing body of German cOmmentary resents

In 1766` JOhann

a str"<ing a|ternative to the FrenCh and Eng"sh traditions

GOttfried Herder com |ains that \the French`who are much toO proud of their oksln

taste` adapt a" things to it` rather than try to adapt themse|ves to the taste of
another time (Lefevere 1992a 74) Language is cOnceived` not as expressing
thought and meaning transparent|y` but as shaping them accord|ng to "ngu
stic

structures and cu|tura| traditions \^/hich are in turn sha ed by |anguage use.
Consequent|y`trans|ation is viel/ved|ess as communicating the foreign teXt than as
offer

n9 an interpretatiOn that can take diverse forms accOrding tO the trans|ator

airns` the genre` and the cu|tura| and sOcia| situation in which the trans|ating
|s done

Among the German writers who adopt this view`the function that is mOst Often
assigned to trans|ating is the improvement ofthe German|anguage

Johann Heinrich

oss s Versions of the Oc/yssey(1781) and the J ad(1793) are frequent y cited
as exemp|ary they are the rst in German to reCreate the hexameter.

"he lan von

Humbo|dt inc|udes an homage to oss in the preface to his o /n version of Aeschy|us

\lr/hat strides has the Ger|man |anguage not |made`

9al,,en,J,o (1816),
/rites

\since it began tO in
Humbo|dt`
itate the meters of Greek` and what deve|opments

have not taken p ace in the nation` not just among the|earned`but a|so among
the masses` even do /n toX/Vomen and ch"dren` since the Greeks reaHy did become
the nation s reading matter in their true and unadu|terated shape?

(Lefevere

1992a 137)

The fu|est theoretica| statement in this German trend is Friedrich

sch{eiermacher s1813|eCture to the Ber|in Academy of Sciences(inc|uded here),
FOr sch}eiermacher`the idea|trans|ation creates an \\image

that incorporates the

kno /|edge and taste of\\an amateur and cOnnoisseur`a lanan kl/ho is

/eH aCquainted

/ith the foreign anguage`yet to /hom it relanains nonethe|ess foreign. In assigning

irnportance to a sense Of foreignness` Sch|eiermacher exc|udes not on|y commercia| and ragmatic uses of trans|ation` but the sorts of paraphrase and irnitat

on
that|ong preVa"ed in trans|ation practice and cOmmentary. He| ost va|ues humanistic genres and discip"nes` espec aHy "terature and ph"osOphy. And he at once
revives and rehabHitates "tera"zing strategies

There can be no doubt that he

speaks for an e"te cu|tura|taste and aims to set it up as a standard for trans|ators
and readers of trans|ations, L"<e Humbo|dt` he illlagines foreignizing trans|ation

as a nationa"st practice that can bu"d a German |anguage and "terature and
overcOme the cu|tura| and po"tica| donnination that France eXercises over Germanspeak|ng |ands,

In the passage from the l//es -EasFe`ly D`ya (1819) that appears be ow`
JOhann VVO fgang von GOethe surveys the emerging German tradition by d stinguishing betVlJJeen three different |(inds of trans|ation, Goethe describes them not in

s strategies adhere to the form and meaning

of the foreign text` as Dryden had done` but rather in terms of hoxA/ lmuch the

terms of holAv c|ose|y the trans|ator

20

FOuNDATIONAL STATEMENTS

trans|ation preserVes the "nguistic and cu|tura| differences that constitute the
foreignness of that text /\though he observes that the three kinds rnay Occur in the

same period`his treatment is both historica|and progressiVe

he moves from Luther

to oss and beyond`sO that forei9nizing trans|ation becomes

the nna|and highest

of the three\ epOchs,

transcendence in

FOr Goethe`this|<ind of trans|ation issues from a ROmantic

/hich the trans|ator |oses his nationa| se|f through a strong

identincati n lA/ith a cu|tura| other

In the history of vv/estern trans|ation theory` the German tradition marks an

important VA/atershed, It abandons the cOnceptua| categor|es that xA/ere repeated}y
used since ant quity and deVe|o s others that are not on|y "nguistic and "terary`
but cu|tura| and po"tica|

Given Friedrich Nietzsche s incisive Critique of /estern

thinking` it is not surprising that he too shou|d disp|ay an acute a /areness of ho

trans|ators might efface the differences of foreign teXts, The pithy re ections from
T/le G y Sc`e Ce

(1882) that cOnc|ude this section return to ancient ROme`

describin9 ho / poets "ke HOraCe and Propertius apprOpriated their Greek pre-

decessOrs and "nking their rhetOrica| use of trans|ation tO Rornan innperia"sm,

What was past and a"en was an embarrassment for them/

writes N ietzsche`

\and

being ROmans`they sa / it as an incentive for a ROman GOnquest,

Yet Nietzsche might have |eveHed a sinn"ar critiCism at the German tradition
as weH FOr a though German theor sts and practitioners bring an increased se|fal/vareness to trans|ation` treating it as a decisive enCounter

/ith the foreign` they

trans|ate to appropriate` en"sting foreign teXts in German cu|tura| and po"tica|

agendas, The sOcia| functions they assign to their /ork revea| the "mperia"stic
impu se that may we|be indissOciab e from trans ation.

Further reading
Amos1920` Berlman 1985and 1992` Cope|and 1991` DanieH 2003` |<e"y 1979`
Lefevere 1977` N Orton 1984` Rener 1989` RobinsOn 1991 and 1992` Steiner
1975a` enuti1995`Zuber1968

Chapter 1

Jerome

LETTER TO PAMMACHIUS
Tra/ls/a ed b)/`(a

e Ji i

ately rej iced, sure

/,/eel,Day

J:J1gR

t$

l 1:lc

f ictory for his causc; and he l cgan l9y saying,

I consider

myself ft)rtu11ate today,O King Ag"pPa,bccausc I am to make my de k:nse ag nst

the accusations of thc JewS bC rc y u who are especially familiar with Hcbrcw

custon s and contr vcrsics IActs 26:2-3 surely hc had rcad thc saying in
Ecdesiasticus~ h1tunatc is hc who sPcaks t attcntivc cars [ECdCsia icus2 9]
- f r he kne v that the v rds
lect of tl cjudgc

can Pc

Ci

of an orator can succecd onl

much as the intel-

C Hcncc Itoo,Pamm hius,consider myself

rtunatc

in this arair,sincc your cducated cars vill hear n y ans

cr to a foohsh tonguc that
shngs allcgations of ignorance or deceit at me,Claiming that cithcr I vas unablc Or
I hscd t0 alislatt [inFcIPr rdhll a lctter accuratt, om Grcck,Now of tllcsc,
thc rst is an crror, the scc nd a cri1nc! S , taking no chancc that my accuscr~
thr ugh a shckncss f tonguc that excccds all b unds and an imPunity that usurps

all h nsc_might

il
me

bcfore you,ju as hc h acc c(l Popc EuPha of

crin1c, I scnd this lctter in rdcr that u,and thr ugh you othcrs vh dcen 1ne

vorthy of their l vc,may kno h

v thc situation can e about2

ycars ago Popc Epiphanius scnt a lcttcr to BishoP John f

JCrusalcm,rcbuklng him about ce aln P n0Ples of d ctHnc and aRcrwards mildly
urging hilll to rePent CoPiCs f this lctter vcerc cagcrly snatchcd uP thr ughout
II Ab ut

t vo

Palcstinc,cithcr because f the merit f its author or thc clcgancc of its c mposi
tion Thcrc vvas in our monaster a man l)y no mcans undistinguished among his

vn PeoPle, Euscbius of Crcm na, vho, vhen this lctter

vas on cvcry nc s liPs,
395

22 JEROME
adn1ircd by thc lcarncd and unlcarned ahkc f

r its d ctrinc and na vlcss stylc,bcgan

ardcntly to besccch1nc to turn it into Latin for hirn and,for easc of undcrstanding,
t

CxPlain it clcarly and sirnply,sincc hc vas cntirely ignorant ofthc Grcck language

I dd just as hc askcd:summoning a sc
tating in thc luargins of thc pa8cd

bc I dictatcd swiRly an(l hastily,l)ricfly anno

C scnscvjthin Cach main scction No v,hcrc is

thc casc: hc had earnestly rcqucstcd that I makc thc c

askcd in rcturn that he keeP it at homc and n

Py only R)r hilnsclf, and I

t ilhngly ll,akc it Pubhc Eightccn

m nths Passed thus bc rc thc anshd n IinFerPrcrd

l~by s mc n el
migratcd fl m his dcsk t JcIvsalem A cert

thck~

n iau(lulcnt monk,cither r a bribc

(aS thc C klcncc suggcsts)or out f gratuitous rnahcc(as his corruPtor strugglcs in
vain to arguc),Pr
cd hilnsclf anothcr Judas by Plundering and scizing Euscbius s

PaPers, thus aff rding my adversarics a chancc t ho l against n1c, An1 ng the
uncducatcd cr
vd thcy(lcclarc lnc falsc,clain1ing that I did not translatc
v rd for

v rd,butvr tc dcarcst nc for h n rablc nc, and that rn nstrous to say~

throu8h a rnahcious intcrprctati n I chosc n t to carry o cr thc titlc 1
1I1(ot to
:ialidcs f this s lt,de my crimes
ercn(
r
Bisll
hn
Thcsc,and
tH

lmost rc
PJ
I

But rst,bcf rc I addrcss thC issuc of translati n,I ish

to qucsti n th sc

/hcrc(lid you gct a coPy of thc lcttcrP Who suPPhcd

vh call PrudCncc malicc

it?By hat affrontcry do you Pubhsh hat y u ha C Purchased thr ugh cri1nc7VVhat
hcn vc cannot kccP sccrcts C cn within our o fn valls
an ong mcn vill bc safc,
and desks?If I vcrc to PrcSs thesc chargcs a8ainst you bef rc a tribunal, I vould

rmers
in okc thc civil la s that,c cn in Hnancial cases,decrec punishmcnt for inf

hilc thcy accCpt thc bctrayal, condcn n the betrayer he gain ob iously
and,
Pleases,but the intent dis8usts Not long ago the consul Hcsychius,against hom
thc Patriarch Gamahcl n1aintained a m st gra c hostility, vas condemned t dcath
by the EmPer r Theod sius,l)ccausc by corruPting a sccrctary hc had c n scated
docu1nents In thc ancicnt hist ricsvc rcad ab ut thc(loublc~dcahng teachcr xx,ho

bctraycd the Fahscan childrcn,and~bccausc thc Ro1nan pcoPlc

shamcR lly

uld not accePt

b ught victory
vas b und and(lch crcd l)ack t his PuPils,returncd
:

to thosc vh m hc had betraycd Whcn Pyrrus,King of Epirus, vas in camP l Cing

hcalcd f

his
ounds,his

o =n doct r trcachcr usly ffcrcd t murdcr hirn;but his

cncmy Fabricius Prefcrred to rcturn thc doctor in chains to his mastcr,rathcr than
sanction such a hcin us crimc,c cn in an cncn1y.This PrinciPle, vhich Pubhc lavvs

and cncn1ics prcscr c, vvhich is sacrcd cvcn in thc 1idst fvar,has becn uPheld
among thc lll nks and PriCSts of Christ,And(l cs any ofthcn1n darc, vith raiscd

vS and a snap of the sngcrs, to belch and say,

CyCbr

so vhat if hc chd bribc Or

cxtort'Hc did what scrvcd his intercst

Vhat an ama ng dcfcnsc of wickcdncss!
As if bandits and thicvcs and Piratcs(lo not ]ovhat Pro tS thCn1 Certainly Annas
and CaiPhas,in seducing the vrctchcd Judas,judged it uscful to thcmsclvcs
IV I ish t writc tri cs in my notcbook as I PlcaSc,to CommCnt uPon
scriPturc, to strikc back at thosc vh insult mc, t scttlC my irc, to cxcrCise my
writing stylc in rhet rical comm nPlaces,and to sto1 c arrows as if Polishcd fc,r

as long as I do not PubhSh my thoughts they are1nereIy abusive,not crilllinal; indccd, something nc cr aircd in Public cann t C cn bc abusivc You may
corruPt scrvants,harass c mpanions and,as c rcad in fables,raPe Danae disguised
ver of g ld E)issiluulating your actions you dcclarc mc falsc, but do y u
as a sh
not at thc samc tiInc confcss y ursclf guilty of morc scrious cri1ncs than th sc

battlc

LETTER TO PAMlvlACHIUs 23
you charge against meP Onc man accuscs you f hCresy, anothcr of PcrvCrting
dogma: you are silcnt; not daring to ans
lat r[jnr
c mPlete

iP rdrcml t

ver thc chargc itsclf, you tear thc trans~

Picccs,dePrccaung me

s lablCs,and

decm your de nse

if y u drag do vn ne vho rcmains silcnt supPosc I ha c crrcd or on1ittcd

solucthing in translating this is thc hingc hcrc n your cntirc casc turns,this your
dcft,nse!On tht t acc unt arc you n t a hcrctic ifI am a Po r anslat r Iinrc rcsl?

Iam n t reviving thc charge of heresy against you hc vh made thc accusation
kn
s hat hc

vrotc~but vhen

anothcr and,your body gaPing

accused by onc lnan it is lYlost f

vith vounds,to

scck comf

hsh t chargc
onc ho

rt in vounding

slccPs pcaccfu y,

uPt

n w

I havc sP kCn as if I did c11angc thc lcttcr s

mCwhat,arguing

that a si1nPlC translati n can havc lnistakcs vith ut being cri1nina1, But truly,sincc

thc lcttcr sho

s thC Scnsc has n t bccn changCd in thc lcast, nor anything added

scCking to undcrstand, undcrstand nothing [ ndritI, prologucl and, ` ishing to Pro C anothcr s
ignorancc,cxpose thcir
n,Indccd,In t only adn1it,but frecly ProclaiFn that in
translatlon[jnr Fdrjoncj om thc Grcck~cxcePt in the casc f sacrcd sc Pturc,
whcrc thc cry ordcr fthc wor(ls is a mystcry I rcnder not word r word,l)ut
that c untcrs Orthodox cloctrinc,llly accuscrs,as Tcrcncc says,

scnsc for scnsc,In this Inattcr I havc thc guidance f Cicero, vh translatcd Plato

and Xcn phon s l,ccon m1cus and thc t v m st beautiful rati ns that
Acschincs and Dcn sthcncs (lch Crcd against each other Ho v much hc omitted,
h :n)uch hc addcd,and ho /rnuch he changcd in ordcr t (lisPlay thC ProPertiCs
f an thcr languagc through the l)roPerticS f his0 vn,therc is not enough tirne t
horitcs in his
Say, It suf ccs f r mc to quotc thc auth rity of this translat r,
Pr rc or zs

Pr loguc:

I havc judgcd it right to undcrtake a labor uscful tO studcnts,alth

ccrtainly n t ncccssary for mysclf That is, I havc con

ugh

Crtcd thc mOst

f thc lu st cloqucnt Attic orators,ACsChincs

cclcbratcd rations of t
hiCh thcy dch ercd in dcbatc against each othcr,
and Dem sthenes,
not rccasting thclla as a translator[i,arcrPres but as an()rator, kecping

thc samc n1canings but with their nlls~thcir gurcs,so to sPcak~

in vords adaPtcd to ur idio1n, I havc not thought it ncccssary to Pay
out one ord for anothcr in this pr ccss,but ha c c nscrvcd thc charactcr and thc f rce fthc languagc Nor ha c I th ughtit Htting to count
thcm out t the reader,but t
veigh thcm ut
Thcn again in his c nclusi n hc vritcs;
If,as I hoPc,I Succccd in cxPrCsSing thcse sPeechCs by rctaining a thcir

irtucs~that is,thcir rneanings and their gurcs and thc ordcr

f llo ving

ft Pics,

thc v rding nly so long asit docs n t con ictvith our idi

- if all arc not litcrally fr

n1the Grcck, I ha c at lcast cndcavorcd to

n atch then1acc rding to tyPe
ctc.
And thcn thcrc is Ioracc,a
isc and lcarncd man, vh
translator IinrerPrcrdri]in hiS

rs P c iC Do not stri c

likc visc ad iscs thc skillcd

to render word r word hkc

24 JEROME
a faithhl t1 anslat ,r Iinre?r

s1.

Tcrcnce has translatcd Mcnan(lcr,and Plautus and

Caccdius havc translatcd thc ancient con1ic PoctS novv,d

hey shuply chng to the

rds r rad1cr c nscrvc thc grcater bcauty and ele

)u

call trut11rill11css in

ovcrzcalousncss,

anslati n jnFcr`,ycrd

j n

T venty ycars ago, ha in

ancc in their translations?

hat

sl,the educatcd call ( o ll Lttv or

been cducatcd in d1is tradition

ovcrzcalousncss and likc visc dcccivcd l)y its crror, and ccrtainly not anticiPaung
your accusations against me, I turncd thc CJ,r

nicFc of Euscbius f Cacsarea into

Latin Evcn thcn I urgcd in my Prcfacc

It is difncult,
vhen foll
vin8 thC hncs

f anothcr, n t to ove1 shoot

sOmc vhere and ardu us,
vhen solncthing is wcll Put in anothcr
languagc,to PrcsCr e this samc beauty in translation T a dcgrcc signi~
n is nc
vith thc vcry ProPcrt) ofa

ord: I d not havc a

in mylanguagc`\ith vhich t cxPress it,and in sccking
to qtads the mca n8,I hkC along way alound to covcr ba
ely d1c sPacc
Fcati

c mParablc v rd

fa kw

rds J0ncd to d1is dimculty arc thc twists of11)l,c1

bat n,

arictics of rhetorical gures

vhat I n1ight call the Pecuhar natic character of thc
and, hnally,

thc differenccs in grammatical cascs, thc

langua8c if I anslatc[

nFc,IP

word by w

rcl,it sounds absurd;if

out()f ncccssity I altcr something in the rdcr or dicti n,I vill

ha c

abandoncd thc task f a translator

scclll t

inFcrPrcFis

ARer discuss" g111uch elsc that vould bc tedi us t

follov

hcre, I addcd

If tl11yone does not think that translation IinrcrFrJ Fione]altc1 Sd1e

of a languagc,let him brcc Holncr wor(l rw rd

Charm

Latin Bcttcr
nslate1nFcrP,ertzr1Jrl
Homcr
into
Pr
e
Hc
will
sec that
yt,t,let hm t
thc syntax bcc mcs ridiculous, and the m st cloquent Poct barcly
int

artic111ate

VI N
,thcrc may be httlc auth rity in my words~by this cxaml)lc I wished
only to Pro C that f1 om adolcsccncc I l avc transfcrrcd not thc
rds, but thc

mcaning -yct as an cxamPlC ofthc samc tyPc rcad and c

nsidcr this short Prcfacc

to a hk fSt AI1tho11
A translauon exPrCssCd w

m ne languagc into anothcr

rd for lx.ord f1

conccals thc scnse just as an o erabundant Pasturc stramglcs the croPs,

sincc sPccch bSCr cs cascs and gurcs, this lncthod takcs a10ng`vay
around to co cr barcly thc space of a w :ords, Thcrcf rc, I havc
shunncd this mcth d in translating, at y ur rcqucst, thc hfc of st
Anthony,sO that nothing is l st from thc scnsc vhcn l havc had t chan c

thc 'ords Lct others chasc aRcr syllables and lcttcrs, you seek thc

mcanlng
Till,c vill run utifI rcPcat d1C tcsti
t

ony

of all th sc vh ha c translatcd acc rding

the sensc It suf6ccs f r the Prcsent t citc Hilary thC C nfcssOr,

h in turning

qome homilics nJ b and many commcnttnries on thc Psalms m Grcckinto Lath,

LETTER TO PAMMACHIUs

25

did n t attcnd to the dr0vsy lCttcr nor contort hin self by translating IinrerPr Fd^

iDnc)the b orish

stylc f rustics, l)ut by right of vict

ry carriCd thc scnse CaPti e

into his o vn lan uagc,

VH Nor shoul(l it sccn1surprising that sccular and ccclesiastical vritcrs translatc[inFerPr Fcsl in this
ay,` hcn

thc sevcnty Translators,the Evangchsts,and thc

APoSdcs di(l likcxx isc vith thc Sacrcd B oks3Vc rcad in Mark that thc L rd said,

r l

irhd cu ,i, an(l in lucdiatcly

woman,l say to you,arise

[Ma1

dcccit in adding Isay t you,

addcd

`hich

k54

is translatcd [

P2r

rcrcIr1 r young

Thc E angclist m ht bc dcn

t l

cc<l br

hcn thc Hebre /had rncrcly youn

voman,arise.

Yct to makc it surf t1% t Qov[mo1 C CmPhaticl and t exPrcss the sense oF calhng

ancl con1mandh1g,hc addcd I say to) ou /\gain in 1atthc v, Vhen thc thirty Picccs
s Hcld l) ught vkh

fs vcr arc rcturned by Judas and the pottcr

Thcn was hlHllcd as writtcn what had bccn spoken by thc Pr

thcn1,it is titten:
phct Jeremiah and

thcy t k thc thi

ty Picccs of sil cr,thc Pricc f hirn n sx`hon)al)ricc had l)ccn sct
b
the s ns c)f Isracl,and thcy ga ethcm R)r thc Potter S HCld,as thc Lord(hrccted

mc [Mattl.ew2 9-10 N
v tl h is not ttD be und in Je miah,btt h Zccharlah,
in far diffcrcnt

ords and in an entircly cliffcrcnt rder Indccd,the Grcck f thc

ScPtua8int has And I ill say to then ifin your hcart it sccms good to you,gi c

isC,rcfusc thenn, And tlacy veig11cd out n1y

a cs as thi ty
od c1

mc111)
agcs;

PiCcCS f Sdvcr,And the L rd said t

111c

Cast thcn1int thc furnacc,and consi(lcr

ifit has bccn tricd as I vas tI1cd by thcn1 And I took the thirty ljicccs of Sil

thrcw thcm int thc hrnacc in thc bousc of d1c Lord

it is ccrtainly evi(lcnt ho
nuch thc testh1 ny

er and

IZcchariah11 12-131 Herc

of thc Evangchst deParts ion1thc

scptuagint translation And,in thc Hcbrc v, vhnC the scnsc is thc same,thc ' rds

arc turncd about and ncarly contradictory It rcadS: And I said t then If t y ur

cycs it sccms g od to y u,b ing forth my vagcs;and if not,d nothin And t1 cy

eighcd out my`vagcs as thi yl)icces of l cr And thc Lord said to1 c cast thcm
s1

to the Potter,a suitable Pricc,f r it is the pricc t11cy sct upon luc And Ito k thc
30PiCcCs of silvcr,and cast thcm to thc pottcrin the h usc ofthc Lord, (Dnc rnight

with
accuse thc AP stle f hlsch d, ncc he agrccs ncit11cr wid1thc Hebrcw nol
the ScPtuagint translat rs, and,
vhat is vorsc, hc crrs in thc attributi n, saying
JcrCmiah instca<l of Zechariah.But hr bc it olu mc to say such a thi11g about a
foll wer
set f

of Ch1 ist,wh sc carc it was not to Chase aRcr words and syllables,but t

rth thc lncaning of doctrinc.

Lct us gi
ct

other CxamPlC fthc samc sort r

m zech iah,which J 11n thc

thc Hebrcw truth Thcy will gazc upon hin1wh mt11cy havc

Thcy
l look upon me,
[John 19-37 F r this thc scPtuagint reads
l

angchst takcs ll m

PiC1

ccd

bccat1sc thcy ha e lllockcd me, which thc Latin vcr

on anslatcs[inrcrP

il as

And thcy ` ill gazc uP n n1c becausc of th sc d1ings they havc m ckcd or

insultcd Thc Evangchst, thc ScPtuagint and ur Latin t1 anslati n of Zcchariah

cach diffcr,yct thc :ari us1nodcs of cxprcssion unitc in onc sPirit,ln Matthe

vvc

alsO read ofthc L rd f rctclling thc f"ght f thc APostlCs,and c nrllling this vith
a quotation fron1zcchariah

It is
rittcn

hC says, I vdl strikc thc shcPherd,and

thc shccP xs l be scatterCd IMatthC 26:31;Zccha1 iah13 7 Butin thc ScPtua8int

and thc Hclxcw itis much difkrcnt,br this is n ts d by thc Person f God himsclf,
as thc Evangchst :ould havc it, but by thC Pr PbCt Cntreating God thc Fathcr

strikc the sbcPhCrd,amd thc shccP

ill bC scattcrcd Hcre,I bchcvc,as d cc
tain

26 JEROME
thcr Prudcnt luen, thc Evangchst n1ight stand accused of sacrilcge f
r daring to
attribute thc
v rds of a Pr
d1c
PcrSOn

f
God
Thc
sa1
c
Evangehst,
PhCt t

Matthew,w tcs

tllat J sePh,warncd

by an angd,took thc inhnt an(l hs mothcr,

Vcnt into EgyPt and thcrc rclnaincd until thc dcath of Hcr

sP ken thr

ugh thc Prophet H sca vould l)c ful llcd:

d,s that God

Out f

s
rd

EgyPt I ha C callcd

my son P atthCw2"5] Our Grcck and LaJn

anslati ns f Hosca d not havc

it this way,but acc rding to thc Hebrew uth it is writtcn:
Vhcn Isracl was a
child I l vcd

hi1n,and ut f Egypt I ha e called1ny sOn IHosca11 1 For this thc

Whcn Isracl as an infant I lo cd hilu, and ut of Egypt I

Scptuagint translatcs,

No v,arc all th sc t bc sc rned vho di"cr in translatin8thiS

passagc,vhich PCrtains to thc1nystcry of Christ, r rathcr bc:ranted indulgcncc,
in tllc sPt1 it of the llowing Passagc iom Jamcs; VC all
cnd in many things,
ha c called his s ns,

and hc vh
body

nc cr ffcnds

in spcaking is a pcrfcct man and can rcstrain the cntirc

[Jamcs3:2P Anc,ther examlDlC aPPcars in Matthcw where is wHttcn

He

camc and li ed in a city callcd Nazarcth,s thatvhat vas spoken by thc Pr Phcts
m ht bC h lled,that hc w tlld bc callcd a Na/ cn IMtttthCw2 231 LCt thc
w rd smiths and thc hsticli us judgcs of all things w0ttcn answcr whcrc thcy ha e

vcr its PlacC in Isaiah No

, in this Place, vhercvc
ha c rca(l and translatcd: Thcrc shall come forth a sho t out fthe ro t f JeSSe,
rca(l this, and lct thcn

(lisc

m its roots [Isaiah11 1,thC Hcbrew,accor ng to thc

u Iidi m] f that t nguc,has Thcrc shall c mef rth a sho t out f thc ro t

f Jessc,and a Nazarenc shall sPhn8

m its r
ts
Vhy is thc word Nazarcnc

and a bough shall grow h

1

on1ittcd in thc scPtuagintP Ifit is not Per

1itted to rePlace ne vord

ith anothcr,

conccal or to ign rc a myStcry of(]od

/III
/e should Pr ccCd t othcr cxamplcsa bricflcttcr f rbids nc to d vcll

on a singlc Point Matthe v als says,

ll this took Placc in rder to ful ll hat
`
thc Lord had spokcn thr ugh thc ProPhCt
bchold a irgin shall havc in hcr vomb

bcbi
and
bc
a
sOn
and
tllcy
all cclll his namc Emmanuel [MatthCw
Iin uFcr
then ccrtainly it is a sacrilcgc t

1:22-23; Isaiah 7:14

Bchold a virgiI1 shall

Which the sePtuagint translatcs as
cchc in hcr w mb[in u cio dcciPiCrl and bCar a sOn,an(l you all ca his name
E1manuel Can lncrc words dehme usP Vcll thcn,ccrt nlv She sha havc and

shc shall rccci

and they shall call and you shall call arc n td1c

Moreo cr,in the Hcbre / ve rcad it vritten

thus

Behold a
irgin

samc thing

sha

conccivc

{conciPicFl and bear a son,and shc shall call his name En 1nanuel It is mot Achaz,
wh was chalfged with in delity,n r thc JewS,who woul deny tllc Lorcl,but shc

vho vill c nceivc and bcar hiIn

Hcrod vas disturbcd by thc arri al f thc
N1agi,and,gathering his scribcs and Pricsts,hc inquired fthcm /herc Christ vould
bc born And thcy rcsP nclC(l, In BcthlchcIll fJudCa;hr so it was writtcn by tllc

Pr PhCt: and you,Bcthlehcln,thc land fJudah,are not thc lcast am ng thc rulcrs
of Judah; r
m you slDall c mc a rulcr t govern my pc
lDle Ismd IMatthcw

hcrsclf vho shall name hirn, thc virgin hcrsclf,

Elsc vhcre in this E an8chst vC rca(lho v

2:5-6 This passagc the scPtuagint rcndcrs: And you, Bcthlehem, housc
f
Ephratah,arc sma to bc am ng thc th usands of Judah;
m you onc shall comc

rth t

mc to bc Princc ofIsracl

hc de8rCc f diffcrcncc bct

atthc v and

`ccn
thc scptuagint,in l)oth v rds and syntax, vill an1azc y u C Cn morc if you l k at

thc Hcbrcw,whcre it is wHttcn, And y u,BCthlChcm EPhratah,arc httlc among

the th usands of Ju(lah;yct out of y u onc will c mc th to mc,wh will bc a
l

LETTER TO PAMMACHIUs

27

Micah 21 C nsi(lCr phrasc by Phrase what is sct fo h by thc

And you,Bethlchcm,land fJu(lah r land f Judah thc Hcbrcw

has Ephratah, and thc scptuagint has thc h usc of EPhratah Considcr ncxt,thc
rulcr in I

acl

Evangclist

Phr c
u cn t tllc lea am ng tllc lcadcrs of Judah, In tllc
sCF tua 1`t thS reacls, you are smdlto bc am ng thc thousands of Judal
clnd
dlc Hebrew, you arc httlc among thc thousands of Judah HCrc the E angclist
E angchsrs

givcs a c ntrary scnsc to thc scPtuagint and to thc Hcbrc

/, vhich

agrcc closely For thc Evangehst says that Bcthlchem is not sma
ofJudah,cvcn tll ugh it is(h
and small as y
R)ll

ttly statc,d

ou ale hdced littlc an(l small;bklt httlc

u arc,out ofyou ,ill comc rth

the saying of thc Apostlc Pau

in this passagc

am ng thc lcadcrs

mc a leader of Isracr~which

vhat
God chosc

is vcak in thc v rld in

ordcr to c nbun(l thc str ng u Corinthians 27j,Lasdy, what ll ws in

N1atthc v
crn or
vho shall support my pC Plc Isracl clcarly diffcrs
`ho shall g
fron thc vords f thc proPhct
IX I reveal thcse things, not to declare thc E

angchsts guilty of hlschood~

indccd, such an accusation is rcser ed for the imPi us, likc Celsus, P rPhyry and

Juhan thC Apostatc~but t c n incc llly accusers of their ign rancc and to scck
indulgcncc om thcm,s they will concede to 1c in the1attcr of this simPlc lCttCr
that vhich,likc it r not,they rnust concCdc t thc Ap stlcs in thc mattcr of sacrcd

ScriPturc.Hcrc is a tclling examPlc Mark,thc disciplc of Pctcr,bcgins his gospc

Thc bcginning of the GosPcl ofJesus Christ,as it is ritten in Isaiah the Pr Phct
Bchold,I scnd my mCsscngcr bcforc your hcc,wh shall PrcparC y ur fay,Av icc
vay of the Lord, luakc straight his
f nc crying in thc
ildcrncss; PrCparc thc
m tw Proph ts~MalaChi,
s
age
is
a
comPoskC
[Mark1"-3]
ThiS
Pa
Patl
1

ob iously,and Isaiah,Thc srst Part, vhich says Bchold

Iscnd my mcsscngcrl)cforc

Vho shall PrcParc your vay, is fron1d c cnd of Malachi; the sec nd
your facc,

hich is intcrPolatCd, a oicc of one crying in the vildcrncss ctc,,

part,ho vc cr,

ve rcad in Isaiah H rthcn d es A/Iark,at thc cry oPcning of his text,statc as it

vhen this is n t

vasvrittcn in Isaiah thc ProPhct: BCh l(lI scnd my mcssenger,

f
thc
t
in Isaiah, as I have said, but in N1alachi, thc last
vcl c ProPhCtS? Let the
ignorant in thcir PrcsumPti n solvc this littlc PuzzlC,and I in turn

vill scck indul~

ark,llnorco cr,also
gence for n y dcviations from EPiPhanius s lctter Thc samc

introduces the sa iour spcaking to thc Pharisccs thus

Havc ou ncver rcad vhat

Da i(l did vhen hc and his f ll vccrs vcrc nccdy and hungry:ho v hc cntcrcd thc
h usc

of God,then undcr thc high~Pricst Abiathar,and atc thc brcad of prcscnta_

tion,which is n tlawhl r any cxccpt tl1c Pricsts to Cat?

IMrark 25~26],Rca ng

Samucl~or,as it is columon known,thc Book of Kings~we will disco cr that

thc high p1 lcst
as not Abiathar but Achimclcch,whom aftcrward Saul orclcrcd
kllled by Docg,along vith thc othcr PriestS
Wc can go on to thc APostle Paul, vh
vritcs to thc Corinthians: If the had
kn0
n,thcv vv ukl nc cr havc cruciRcd thc Lord f glory But,as it is vrittcn,no
e e has sccn,nor car hcard,nor d1c hcart
f man conccived, vhat God has PrcParCd
for th sc whol vc him Corinthians2:8-91,Commcntato on this passagc typically root throu8h thC ravings of thc apocrypha and clai1n that it is takcn frona the

APocalypsc of Elijah,but in thc Hcl)rcw tcxt ofIs ah wc rcad

Fr m

thc bcgin~

ning,n nc ha c heard nor Percei ed by the ear N eyc has sccn,( od,besides you,

what you havc prcpared fc,r those who wait for you
Isaiah64 4],The sePtuagint

28 JEROME
anslatcs this1nuch(hffcrcntly; Fr n thc bcginning, 'e11a e not hcard,nor have
ur eyes secn a God1)csidcs you and your truc vorks,and) u vill Pr vide1nercy

t1

r those vho vait

f ry u

yct thc APostlc d cs n t

pCriPh1 asisl,as it iS sai(li

h1his ePistle t

translatc word by wOKl,but o CfQ ot1 l g th1 ugh

1Grcck,he cxP1 cssc(l thC samc scnsc in diffcrcnt phrasi11g

the R mans the san1c blCsscd aPostlc,taki11:a PaSSagc s on1Isaiah,

Says: Bchol(l,Ilay

in Zion a uml)li11g stonc an(l a rock of scanclal

Is 8 41 Hc dif rs hcrc
f r

Wc can Plainly understand thc s urcc of this Passa8e,

om

[Romat1s9:33;

thc scPtuagnt and yCt agrccs with thc Hcl,rc

thc sePtua8int has thc c ntrary sensc

Andvhcn Pctcr citCs this l,aSsagc he agrees vith

stonc or a rock of dcstruction

both Paul and thc Hcbrc tcxt

But for thc unbchcving a stumbhn
ck of scandal

truth,

so that you do not fall uPon a stumbhng

st nc

and a

1Pckr 8],All

d1csc cxamPlcs makc clcar d1at i11intc1 lDrcti11g

thc c)ld Tcstamcnt thc AP stleS and Evangehsts s ught thc scnse, not thc vords,
and di(l not particularly take PainSith thc syntax and stylc, so lon as thc truth
r

lay pen to undcrstanding,

X Lukc,AP

sdC and E angchst,lvxTitcs that stcPhen,christ s srst rnartyr,in

(liSl)utc with thc Jcws s

(l

Witll scventy h ,Cs uls Jac b wcnt l wn int EgyPt,

an(l hc died, he hi111sclf and our fathers, and the

vcrc carried l)ack to shechcn);

an(l thcycre laid in thc t mb that Abraha 1had b ught ith

s ver fr

n`thc s ns

of Iamor,tlle son f Shcchcm [Ac 7"4-161 ThiS P sagC ttlkcs a v y

di11

llt

rm in Gcnesis,whcrc clcarly Abraham Purchased flom EPhron thC Hitt c,s n

of Z har, a doublc ton1b and a cld ncar Hebr nf r400dicfr chm

of sil

er and

ik sarah thcrc IGcncsiS23:8-16 But latCr in Gcncsis ve

rcad d1at Jacob,rctLl1 r1ing s
m McsoPotamia with his xx:i es and his s ns,Pitc11Cd

:elled
his tcnt ncar Salcn1, thc city of shechern in thc land ca cd Canaan, aI1dd
aftc1

xl=ar(l buocd his

there,Purchasing t11c ncld vhcrc hc had pitchcd his tcnts from Ham r, hthcr f

shechem,f r1001ambs;and raising an altar thcrc he callcd upon the G d of lsrael

IGe11esis36 8-20 so,in this chaPt ,Abral am d not buy a ttDmb fl m Ham r
hosc fathcr
vas shcchc 1, but from EPhron s n of Zohar; thc t mb is 110t in
Shcchcn1, but in Hcbron,
1)istakc nly called Arboc The t velve Pat1 iarchs are not
buricd in Arb c but in shcchc 1,and t11e seld vvas n t purchased by Abrahalu,but
by Jacol) l will Put o sobong this littlc PuzZle s my dctractors may tlacmsclvcs
inquirc and undcrstand that in scriPturc One must consider n
t the rds,but thc
sensc,

Yct another examPlc Thc tvcnty11rst Psahn in the I1ebrc v text bcgins
thc san)e vords that the L rd sPokc n thc cross
tra11slated[inFc rcr irurl as My

=ith

,' bF i, Vhich is

`jJ,e/i`dn2
you%rsakcn mcP
G (l,my Go<l,why ha`c
Psalm
l ok

21"1,Can lny detractors in turn cxPlain why thC SC C11ty Translators addcd
uPon lnc ?For thcy rcnder it

God,rny God,look uPon n1c,vvhy ha c you forsakcn

me7 Surcly tlacy will answcr that nonc of thc mcalllng is damagcd if tllese fc

vords arc added s thcn lct thcm grant that I ha c n t in1PcrilCd thc P siti n f
tbe chvrchcs by lct ng a : vOrds shp in sx
iR dictati n

XI
tvould bc tcdious to disclosc h
rnuch thc sePtuagint addcd and dclctcd,
:hch in Church coPics is marked or by daggcrs and astcrisks,Indccd,dK Jcws
incvitably laugh

hcn they hcar

vhat e rcad in Isaiah, Blcsscd is hc vh 11as sccd

in Sion and a h useh kl in JcruSalen

and laugh no lcss at thc Passage in Arnos
a er thc(lcscriPti n f`t`xuricl: ThCy have
egarded thcsc things as Pcrmancnt rather

LETTER TO PAMMACHIUs

29

than Hcctingr This is actually Hnc rhctoric ith a Ciceronian nair, But vhat shall

vith thc authoritati c books,in vhich thcsc and s n any si1uilar passagcs do
n t aPpcar,vhcn thc Pubhcati n fsuch c11ffcrcnccs vould ll c untlcss volumcs?

Fornaerly,as I havc said,on1issi nsvcrc n1arkcd by an astcrisk,or diligcnt rcadcrs

c

mPared ur

tmnslation I1n e 9 rdho]t

ldCr oncs,Bttt dcsPitth all tl is,thc

SCPtuagint rightly rcmains thc church editi

made bc
th

rc Christ sc ming, r

n~eithcr bccausc it is the

liginal,

bccausc it was usc(l by the APostlcs~but nly in

se Placcs whCrc it d es n t con k

t with the Hebrcw.Howcvcr,wc11ghtly rcjcct

Aqtllla,a Prosclytc and a c ntentious anslat

r Iin c?r sl,wh

attcmPts t

not just nglc words,but thcir ctymology

%o can acccPt or c

anskr

mPrehend hr

corn and vinc and oil his x u , o1 u v, t1 Jrvot t r,as vc V0uld say,

prohsion, uithlncss,and b ghtncss ?Or tht t,becausc thc Hcl)rcw markeror

thc accusativc Corrcspon(ls t thc prcposition with, this man must~k %o (og
~int

o v t v
Prc,t by Syllablcs and lcttc and tl cKbR say o to oiQ 0v

GCncsis1"],wlllch

r
d
creatcdl
vith
thc
hca
cn
and
with
thc
carth
G

makcs no scnsc in cithcr Grcck r LatinP Wc could gi c examPles f this in ur

ovn

idion1 F r so much that is l)cautifully cxPresscd l)y thc Grccks docs not, if

transfcrrcd litcrally,rcs und in Latin;and c nvcrscly, hat sounds Pleasing to us,

if c n crtcd

by strict vord ordcr, vould clisPlcasc thcn1!

XII,Butin ordcr to bypass this cndless discussion and sho v you,lnOst Christian
of n blcs, and m st n blc f

Christians, the bnd f

falseh

od thcy rcbukc in n1y

translation f Epiphanius s lcttcr,I gi c thc bcginning of this lctter vith the Greek
1 u g,
wordlng,so tllat through a sin e accusaton otl crs may be unde tood, E
a t ,I1"t o1 o 1tc,V X liQ cr o 1,which I rccall ha =ing convcrted to It

L
k/
is Htting,dcarcst onc,that vc m t abusc our PrivilCgc as clcrgy out ofPride
t0g is dear ne/n t dcarcst
thcy cry, ho vn any lics in nc short hnc!First,a
~br it says n to1

1,
t1but o1
onC
1g mCans estccm, not

;thCn,o

PridC

of which thc fc,rmcr means a swclhng and thc lattcr sig hcs a judg cnt ;and

thc rcst f thc scntcnce is your o vn intcrPolation, llVhat do you say, (D Pillar of
hterature and Aristarchu

of our tlmes,you who P s judgmcnt on all writt rs?In

Rcn vinccd undcr thc

ain,thcn,ha c vc studicd s l ng and, as Ju cnal says,

r d
s rircs IlP sailing iom Port,we shipwrcck immc atcly.And so,sincc to crr
is human amd to adn1it crror is Prudent,I bcg y
tll11Cnd thc crr

u,rny critic, vhoc cr you arc,to

r~C)teachcr~and rcndcr w rcl r word You ought to ha c

tcll me, It is ntting, dear onc, that c n t o crcsti1natc thc clcrgy

This thc cloqucncc of Plautus,this the Attic charn
vorthy fthc Muscs!Thc vcll~
orn pro crb is ful lled in me: He l ses b th his intlucnt and his m mey,

^rho
scnds a bull int a resthng1uatch.
All this is not thc fault of llay accuSCrs,
vho arc likc actors Playing rolcs in a
vho for a high Pricc havc taught thcm to kn0 v
tragcdy, l)ut of thcir tcachcrs,
nothing By no mcans do I criticize uncultivated specch in a Christian~if only ve

v uld havc that s craticvisdon1, I knovv vhat I(lo not kn

v, and that f anothcr
wisc n an, Know y ursclf! My(lccPest rCSPCct has alvcays becn n t for crudc
crb sity but for h ly sirnPhcity: those vh say that thcy in1itatc thc aPostlCs in
sPCcch1nust Hrst in1itate them in life Thcir sil Phcity of spcech vas indicatcd by
the abundancc f thcir sanctity;and thC rcsurrcction ofthc dead con Jted thc syll c cr,
gislns of Arist dc and thc contrivanccs of ChrysiPPuS wC Inust adlllit,ho
said/ y u

30 JEROME

: : :t:
:r:

:1

philosophy bo ks instcad f trcc trunks

;? JIl

h
(

il

i
||

:
;T

e :F: 1

s
r

:f: F::

l:

llllmm

:::lC c

Translator s notes
JCr me

uses tw sctx f tc rms to rc rt the a8cl t,PI cCSs an(l product oF

translating: ne rclating to
/,rcrPrcs,
vhich f llo vs classical auth rs such as

Ciccro and H racc, and thc thcr relating to rrtJns`dror Whcn the f rmcr is
rcndcrcd herc as
translatc/ thc Latinv l bc cncl scd in l)rackcts
Pan11nachius
vas a Roman scnat r
vh abandoncd his Pohtical carccr t

Fl

iT,i| f}

:}

:;lIi:lfT

:::r l:

i{:

h
PF{
W

nd
`

Thc kng y u

u d

broadcr mPaign by JcromC Hc ha

scPtuagint and c)ld Latin translati
t

:1 s :l

ns,
hich

st

1 i

hc frcqucntly critiqucd At thc

C

f : T 1 lr :
;1:F i
c ulgatc,gadually(hsplaccd the c)ld Laun and c cntua y bccalnc thc
m~

cial Church
ersion
JeromC is rc rrh1g to Aristarchus

f san thracc, hcad of thc Alcxandrian

Lil)rary(c, 180-145Bc)and al)roliHc tcxtual critic Hc Pr
duccd cditi ns of
H mcr, Hcsi d, Alcact s, Anac1 con, and Pindar, as wcll as volulnin
us
commcntahcs n htera1 ya11d grammatical su ctts

Chapter 2

NiCOlas PerrOt d AhIancourt

PREFACE TO TACITUs
ra`?s
ed by Lawre ce1/e`?L`r`

e
1i : 1` cj I s h:JI J

Ilc:u1

c
::

us thc hist ry lf ur

EmPerors n his 4nnc^, only thc Hrst and last rcIuain, thc
morc than l)alf I have thcrcsccond is cntircly lost,and of thc thirdvc PossCss no `

forc(lccmed it aPpr Priate to(lc tc onC olume to thc Rcign f1 ibcrius,reser ing
th

sc f Claudius and p

dcsirc to c

cr

r a second Part~ -should I sOmc day bc scized by thc

ntinuc1Thc Prcscnt v lumc is,ncvcrt11Clcss,Tacitus s lnastcrPiecc,as

cll as thc life f a great Pohtician, vbich is the llloticr vhcrein ur Aud1 r exccls
Thc rcst f his History lllight ha c bccn con Poscd by somcOnc clsc;n r did Romc
lack its Rantcrs to(lcPict thc iccs of Cahgula, thc stupi(lity of Claudius, and thc
vritc
cruclties of Ncro But t

thc lift

fa Pri11ce like Tibcrius rcqui1 cd a Histrian

hkc Tacitus, vh could unra cl all thc intrigues in thc Cabinct,assign gcnuinc causcs
to c

cnts,and(hstinguish PrCtCnsc and aPPcarancc fr n truth. F r hcre nc nc cr

cncountc1 s, as onc clocs in thcr Iist rics, a long succcssion of :ars and battlcs;

and if you cxccPt thC n1ihtary cxPloitS f Gcrmanicus treated in thc rst and scc nd
Bo ks,you vill nnd n thcrs that arc not disPosed of vithin thirty lincs and arc
not morc con mendable f r thc c nscquences that thc Auth r dra sF on1thcn1,
and the circumstances that hc n tcs in d)C1 , than f r thc grandcur r beauty
f the cvcnts,All thc samc,as he oRen consi(lcrs things om some stral)gc anglc,
he ccasionally lcavcs his narrativcs incon1PlCtC,a quahty
hich,t gcthcr vith thc
luultitudc f crr rs that aPpCar in thcru and thc(hm hght that Prcscntly shincs uP n
hcrc f thcy treat, cngcndcrs thc bscurity in his
most things
vorks (Dnc nccd
not n1al cl, thcrcf rc,that hc is s

1640

dificult t translate, seeing that hc is(hFflcult

32

NIcOLAs PERROT D

ABLANCOURT

to undcrstand He is,furthcrm rc,

ont to n1ix in the samc scntcncc,som C_
ti1ncs in thc samc PhrasC,di crsc thoughts hich bcar not thc shghtcst relati nt
each othcr,and of vhich a part is incvitably lost(asihcn nc P hshes a rk)in
the cffort to cxPrCSS thc rcst vit11 ut o=nding thc dchcacy of our Langua8c and
thc c rrcctncss of thc argumcnt For pcoplc do not havc thc saI c rcspcct for my
French as f r his Latin;and thcy`^fould n tf rgivc mc things that thcy Rcn adn1ire
in hirn and c en~ifit rnight bc Put thus_-revcre Evcryvvherc clsc I havc f
ll
vcd
hi1n stcP l)y stcP,and rathcr as a slave than as a comPanion, although I
1ight ha c
vcd mysclf1norc f ccd n1 sincc I
all
vas not translating a Passagc, but a B ok,
c cry Part
f
vhich must bc hnkcd t gcthcr and fuscd as in the san e body,
Furthcrm rc, the di crsity that nc nds am ngst languagcs is so grcat, in thc
construction and shaPe of PCriodS as vcll as in gurcs and othcr rnaments,that at
CvCry turn onc must adopt a dircrent air and isagc,unlcss oncvishes t crcate a
lllonstrous body, such as th sc f ordinary translations,
vhich arc cithcr(lcad and
hstless r confuscd and muddled,
vithout any rdcr or charI Hcncc nc1nust
c cn

takc heed that an Author s gracc n t bc lost thr ugh too n uch scruPul uSness,and
that thc fcar of being unfaithft l to hi11,in s mc onc thing not rcsult in in6dchty to
thc vh lc PrinciPally vhen onc is crcating a vvork that is t
original, and nc is n t cndea ring to hclP youn:PcoPlC

takc thc Place f thC

undCrstand Greek

vs that bold Phrascs arc not exact, bcCausc corrcctness is thc

Latin, For onc kn

cnCmy f grandcur,as can bc secn in Painting and`vriting,Yct a bold strokc suPPhcs

the
ant of corrcctncss, and such PhrasCs are dcCmcd morc l)cauti Jl than if they

vcre morc in conf rn1ity vith thC I ulcs It is difhcult, m rc vcr,to bc cry cxact
whcn translating an Author ho is n t hillasclf cxact (Dne is oRcn f rccd to add
methng to h tl ought in ordcr t d i it;at dmcs k is nc ss y tt,rct nch
one Part in ordcr to8ivc l irth t all thc rest This lncans,ho vcvCr,that thc bcst
transladons sccm to bc thc lc tR"th l Inclccd,a Chtic ofour umc has n tc(ltwo
th usand crrors in Arn s Plutarch,2 vvhile an ther f und ahn st as man in
Erasmus s translati ns,3 PcrhaPs bCcausc they did not kn that thc (h crsity of
Languagcs and stylcs obhgcs dac usc of con PlctCly diffcrent cxPrCSSions, sincc
t

eloqucnce is such a dehcatc thing that someti1nes a lncre syllable is cnough to sPoil
it, For aftcr all it is hardly hkcly that such grcat Mcn

vcrc n)istakcn in s

n any

PlacCS,CvCn th0ugh it is n t unusual for a n1istakc to bc madc hcrc and therc But
not e eryonc is capablc ofjudging a translation,alth ugh cvcry nc is ofthc oPini

that hc is.Hcrc as clscwhcrc,Aristodc

nccds trust cach man c nccrning his o vn Art,4It is tin1c,h
vc Cr,t0l)roccCd to
sn axilu shoukl scrvc as thc rulc

onc lllust

thcr considerations,and to concludc this Prefacc

One sh ukl n t bc surPrisCd, rst f all, to hcar mcntion f Ccnturions and
C horts,thc Angri aricns and thc Cattcs,Thc translat r has l)ccn f rccd to rctain
thcsc tcrms bccausc ancicnt ar 1ics do not corrcspond to ours, and Germany has

undcrgonc so many changcs that it no longcr contains the samc Pr

inces Or thc

samc PcoPlcs As for thc ancicnt systcn1 frnoncy,I vould not have retained it had

und great disadvantagcs in thc Onc uscd t day For sincc Roman money
vc nCcd a r und sul,l, it comcs out quitc
differs fron1 urs, someti1ncs vvhcn
contrary, F r cxamPle, Arn)inius Pron1ises Onc hundred scsterccs pcr day to thc
I not f

s klicrs vho surrcndcr t him;if I inscrt scven li rcs tcn sous, vhich is PrCtty nCar
the saIne amount,I vould rendcr thc thing ridiculous For vhov uld ever concei e

PREFACE TO TACITUs

33

of1uakh g such a Pr n1iscP(Dne lui:ht o r soldiers a Pist lc r an cu, c)r son1c'oukl bc absurd
d1ing ofthc k nd,but sc cn li rcs tcn sous,or six livrcs ftecn,
I havc thcref re rctained thc ancicnt forn1,and I contcntcd mysclf Sx id1Putting thc

aluc in the margin to Prevent obsCurity It rcmains to spcak of ProPCr11 uns,

vith

vhich havc not f ll

vcd any particular rulc bccausc n nc in fact cxists VVc sa
Marc A11toine and A/larc Aurclc,but
c do not say,in my vicw,Marc Agrippa r

Marc Ciceron Wc say Quintc Curce,but n t Quintc Li8airC AS r thc Ancicnts

custom f designating(layS as N ncs,I(lcs,and Cdends,I had initially f llowed it
bccausc it adcls s mc m CSty,but in tbc end I abandoned to av i(ln aklng a
mystery of a thing that is naught, and that is n arvclous nly in its extra agance
That is irtually all I have fclt bbgcd to cxPlain in this Preface I shall add nly
that I have n t obser ed an of thcsc rules s

cxactlv that I did n t ccasionallv

cxcn1pt n1ysclf r m it, eithcr to avoid the a k ard Pronunciation of a xs rd, r

f

rs n1c ther rcas n Trul thc Lati11s

verc cvcn morc rchgious than`c in this

reSPcct, taklng pains to Prc Cnt any offense to tlac dclicacy of thciI languagc l)y
barbaric an(l rci n tcrms Our own Fathcrs s d NaPles and thc Tibcr,l` t NaPoh
and thc Te crc,in ordcr to accomn Odate things to thcir Pr nunciation But bcf rc
concludh1g,to Pro i(lc s mc informati n regarding our Author,I shall say that hc

dcsccndcd mR man Knights,that he ll urishcd undcr Vcspasian s EmPirc and

dlc bllowi11g rcigns,an(l that aRcr ha ing Passcd through all thc grcat0 ccs of
thc RcPubhc,chCrishcd by thc f rcmost111en of his ccntury,hC Hnally cni yCd thc
h b rc l)is nan1e and bcl nged to his farnily5
glory oI ha ing an EmPcr r

PREFACE TO LUCIAN
T

M nsieur Conrart, Counscl r and Sccretary to thc King6

/1 nsicur,

As things rcturn to thcir rigin and rdil)a1 ily cnd vhcrc thcy commcnccd,it vas
only ju t11at I dedkate my Hnd Tmnslad n to him who c
yed my rst ui
and so NIinucius Fehx7having ivcn bi1 tb to our fricndshiP, Lucian
vas to l)
ing
;

about its Pc1 lc cti n Itvas ncccssary,l rthcrm rc,n t

s^ ntispiccc

mcrcly that amxc(lt thc

should bc a nan1c that banishcs c cry ill pinion xl:hich1uight su y this

Vork, but that thc Auth

Conrart

s 1rtuc

s hbcrtinagc should bc

vcrshado vcd by Monsicur

:
I
uld add that this B kc uld not honorably apPcar in Pubhc

under any ausPiccs but your o

n,sh1cc you havc dOnc s much to br"1ging it int
the fc)rld, and your sOund advicc is thc rcason that it sccs thc hght in a morc
perRcted state This is not,then, s much a giR as an act oftateful recognition,
alth ugh an intercstcd rccognition, sincc it bcgs thc protcction of hiln
vh lll it

uld recognize as its benefact r And truly, Monsicur,sincc it is PrinciPally you

ho rn vcd lne to undcrtake this ersi( 11,you ought to sharc thc ccnsurc or Praise
tl at may attcn(l it~aPart
m thc Fact t11at it ill mcct with monstcrs cnough at
its biHh to jusuf)tllc search k

1654

ra Pr tcctor B1It d1at you mi bt not rcProach mc

34
f

NIcOLAS PERROT D

ABLANCOURT

r rashly imphcating you in a quarrcl vhich you erc bcttcr off1thout,I ai1n to

CquiP y uith vcapons to(lcfcnd yoursclf,and t shicld us b

th from CaIumny,

Heads:Dcsign
Every comPlJnt that may bC lodgcd agalnst mc hlls under tw

and
ay of Procccding,For somcvill say that this \uthor ought not to ha c bccn
translatcd, vhilst thcrsvill say that hc ought t havc bccn translatcd thcr visc I

wish thereforc to rcsPond to thcsc two

ccti ns,aftcr

ha ng said somethng about

Luchn which will servc aq my justinmu n and dari thc as ns that lcd mc ttD
translatc hirn

Lucian was a nati c of Sam sata,caPital of Commagcnc,and hc was not of

gentle birth, f r his fathcr, 1acking thc means to maintain hiIn, res
sh uld

ed that he

learn a moticr; but sincc his nrst eff rts did n t sho v Pr n1iSC, he threvv

hiInsclf int

Lcttcrs,a cr a drcam vvhich is rcPortcd at the beginning of this Vork,

Hc hirnsclf says that hc embraccd thc ProfCsSi n of Barristcr;but sincc hc abh rrcd

vranghng and thc ther vices of thc Bar,he rcs rtcd t PhilosoPhy as to a rcfuge
T judge fl m

hs W1 ltings,he w a Rhctor who made Eloquencc his Pr Ssi n

and comP scd DCdamatons and Harangues n a crsc sul,Jccts,CvCn Pleas br Law
Courts,although nonc

f his v rk in this

in Antioch, vhcncc hc shiftcd t

cin survivcs Hc nrst t ok uP rcsidcnce

nia and Grcccc,then to Gaul and Italy,and aftcr-

ia RIaccd nia,Yct hc clcarlv li ed a strctch f tiInc

vards rcturncd t his countr

in Athcns,whcre hc also acqulled its viccs and v tucs,Hc hnally withdrew om

the activitics of vhich1have sP kcn,in ordcr t de otc hi1nself t Phil s Phy;this
is vhy hc comPlainS s mevhCrc that PeoPlC vant hin1to cmbark on thcn anc v in
his old agc Hc livcd nincty yCars,bcing born bc rc Tralan s reign and outlasdng
Marc Aurclc,undcr vvholll he vas hcld in great cstccn and bccamc thc EmPeror s

Adn1inistrator in Egypt suidas, thc Byzantinc lcxicograPher, lnaintains that clogs

had torn hiFn to PiCcCS;but this is aPParently calumny,a gcsturc of rc cngc becausc
in his raillery he di(l not sparc thc srst Christians any n1orc than othcrs Yet vhat
hich
hc sai(l of thcm can be rclatcd, in my vic /, to thcir charity and shnplicity,
is rnore Praise than injury;bcsidcs, ne should n t exPcct a Culogy of Christianity
fi

n1a Pagan somc bchcvcd that he vas a Christian;but it is not c i(lcnt in this
True,br a Forcigncr hc lu ws many of our my CHCs,although Judea s

Bo k

ncarncss and dcahngs vith Christians,along ith his natural curiosity,1night ha c

lcdgc Others have sought to rcPresent hiIn
cnablcd hin to comc by all this kno
vhich
as a paragon of visd n1and lcarning But in additi n to thc love fB yS,t
ncd
for
t
bc
Pard
he vas inclincd, and his scant a arencss of the Dcity,hc cann
having vili6cd thc rcPutations of thc m st cn1incnt Mcn on thc strength of Rumor
_or rathcr their cncn cs talcs,For c cn though one n1ight cxcusc hiln by arguing
that his sightsvcrc not traincd on thcn ,but on th sc vh 1isusc thcir namcs to
hide thcir iccs, hc obvi usly lct shP no oPP rtunity to traducc thc 1and al vays

made s mc biting rcmark cn P

ss

nr Furthcrmorc,the luanner in
hich hc trcatcd

thc most signi6cant lnattcrs rnakcs abundantly clcar that hc as n t deePly learned

in PhilosoPhy,and that hc had acquired only hatvas of usc for his Pr fCssi n f
Rhctor,which was t sPeak Pro and n n all kn(ls of mbJccts.YCt Cannot bc
dcnicd that hc vas onc f thc readicst Wits of his century, vho is cvcry vhcrc dchvhich the
vith a gay and Playful humor and that gallant air
cate and char 1ing,
ancicnts tcrmcd urbdniry,n t to lncntion thc cleanncss and Purity of his stylc as vcll
as his clcgance and Ci ility I nnd hirn nly a bit coarsc in mattcrs of Lovc,vhcthcr

PREFACE TO LUCIAN

35

n, Indccd,
hcn hc
uld bc imputcd t thc sPirit of his tilnc or to his
rth
vith
tumblcs
into
ishcs t spcak of it,hc lcaPs thc bounds f dccency and f
vhich is thc mark of a clcbauchcd rathcr than a gallant it Hc also
thc bsccnc,
displays the mark f a Ranter
vhcn he
ishcs to say C crything and docs n t
vhcn hc n1ust nceds d , a icc d1at springs from too n1uch
concludc
Vit and
lcarn"1g Nc crd1elcss,it is a grcat pr of of thc I1 crit and cxccllcncc f his VV rks
that thcy havc been Prcser ed d
vn to ur day, sceing the httle arccti n that
that sh

pcoplc ha c fclt for their Author and thc vrcck ofs rnany othcr`csscls of Antiquity

r ncghgcncc;and b i usly Christians as

wcll must ha c bund tlaat he c uld bc much m rc Prontablc than il lurious More,

vhich have bcen l st

thr ugh n ischance

anity and imPosturc of false G ds, r

vith the frailty and inc nstancy
thC PridC and ign rancc of Phil s PhCrs, al ng
For hc
f human things;and I doubt that thcrc cxist bcttcr Books in this resPect
ncver did a man sO cffcctivcly lay barc thc

s` CCtly

stcals int thc intcllcct tbr ugh ra lcry;and his M ral is all thc n1 rc uscful

as it is Pleash1g Hcrcin too onc can lcarn a thousand m

st cuI ious

things;it is likc

vcrs sclected frol 1 thc Hnest spcchncns of the Ancients, I lca

ab uquct of n

asidc thc P i11t that the

yths arc t1 catcd in an ingcni us fashi n that is most
nduci
c
c to in1PrCssing thcm on thc luemory and contributcs n t a littlc t thc

undcrstanding of Pocts Onc nccd n t6nd strangc,thcn,rny dccision to translatc

ving thc cxamPlc of sCvcral lcarncd Pcrs ns h ha c Produccd
this B ok, foll
Latin Vcrsions, hcthcr f onc Dial guc or anothcr;and I am thc

css blamc vorthy

as I havc rctrcnched
hat v as1nost obsCcnc and,in s mc passagcs,ten1Pered vhat

as too k)osc Thus ha e I cntcred uP n thc justi cati n of my :ay of ProcCCding,

vc jusdscd by thC tuany advantagcs that thc Pubhc can dcri c
r1ny dcsign is
n rcadiI1g this Auth r,I shall say only that I havc left his pit1ions 'holly intact,
sincc othcr jisc this i uld not ha c bccn a Translati n,but I resP nd t dac most
f

intcmPcratt in the Argument or in the Rcmarl s,s that no illJu1 y might result,

As thc rcateSt nun11)cr of things found herein consists Only of Pohtc turns
f Phrasc and radlcry, vchich arc differcnt in e cry Lan:uagc, a Translati n in
o Cls
accord ith thc rulcs vas imPossiblC Thcrc arc cvcn somc Picccs hkc rlc
u mcnr,s hitll could n,t bc mslatcd

all,tarld tw

or thl ec otllt, whit la

hinr

ill not bc undcrst d utsklc of that

on thc(hstincti e quahty of Grcck tern1s and

contcxt, All comParisons drawn with I~ c addrcss thc Lovc of B ys, which vas
not f rcign to thc rn rals

of Grcccc,but vhich is abh rrcnt to ours At c cry turn,

the Auth r citcs s()mc vcrscs

n thing

om Homcr,which w

uld n w bc pcdantry,t

Say

of thc old,too banal N1yths,thc Pr erbs,thc ExamPlcs and thC antiquatcd

vhich
v uld today Producc an cffcct c mplctcly contrary to his
ComParis ns,
dcsign;f r hcrc it is a quCstion of Gallantr),not Crudition It as thercf rc neccs-

in rder t makc sOn,cthing Plcasing; other ise,it vould

not bc Lucian; and
vhat PleascS in bis Language`
ould not be t lcrablc in urs
Furthcrn10rc, as thc most bcautiful
isagcs al rays contai11 somcthing that one
sxishcs
vcre not there, s thc bcst Auth rs contain passagcs that must nceds be
altcrcd or clari ed, Particularly
vhcn things are d nc solcly to PlcasC; for thcn
one cannot Pcrn`it thc shghtcst fla ; and should thcrc bc any
vant of dchcacy,
one
ill not di crt,but b rc,Hcncc I do n t al ,ayS clCa c to thc
ords Or th u8hts
oF this Author;
vhnst kcePing in sight his PurPoSe, I t things t our air and
manncr E)i`crsc tinncs rcquire n t only diitc1 cnt
ords,but different thoughts;and
sary t cban c all that

36

ABLANCOURT

NICOLAs PERROT D

vhere thc havc

Arnbassad rs are accustomcd to drcss in thc fashion fthc countr
th sc
hon thcy Cndcavor t l)lCasc

bcen sent f r fcar of aPPearing ridicul us t

Ncvcrd1clcss,this is not Propcrly a Tra11slati n;but it ratcs morc h )ly

tha1

thcr visc, Tcrcncc dcPloycd this

vcry n ed10d ith thc Comedies that hc to kf1 mN1cnandcr,cvcn though Aulus
Gelhus(locs not lcave ff calling thcm Translati ns;thc namc is of n iluP rtance,
providcd tl at we ha c thc thing Gcer ms rtcd t thc mc mcthod in llls Cy ccs,

hich arc scarccly l)ut a Vcrsion of Panactius; and in th se Vcrsions that hc had
made fl m tlac0rations of Dem sthcncs and Aeschincs,hc says that he v rkcd not
vhich is thc vcry thing that I vvant to say of
as an IntcrPretcr,but as an Orator;
Translation; and the Ancients di(l not translatc

Lucian s Dialo ues9althou8hI(lid not Pern`it n)ysclf thc samc frecd

m throughout

ord for :ord, at lcast as mucb as nc can(lo so

in an clcgant TranslatiOn;therc arc also Passages hcrcin I ha e l ccdcd more vhat
should be said, r hat I c ul(l say,than vhat hc had sai(l,R)lloxl'i11g the cxamPlc
f Vil^gd in those PassagCs that he t ok m Homcr and Thc critus But I ha c
'ithout dcsccnding into deta s,aP1 actice that
hcrc
rcstraincd Iuyself alrnOst cvcry

ill n t Plcasc
arc,ho vc cr,that this
is not follosscd in our tilnc, I am wcll a
ord and cvcry thought of thc
cvcryone, particularly t110sc /h id hze cvcry
I bavc translatcd n1any passagcs

Ancicnts and(lo n t bchc c that a Work can be good ifits Author is st

For thcsc s rtS0f PcoPlC vill carp as thcy(lid in Tcrcncc s tirnc,

l living,

Contan inari non decerc Fabulas,

ith
ay tamPCr
That ne n1ust not corruPt onc sA11thor, rh1any

but I shall

bis sul)jcct;

resPond vith Tcrence s11Cll),

Faciunt nac intclligcndo,ut nihil intclligant,

Qui cum hunc accusant,Nacx lum,Plautum,Ennium

Accusant,quos hic n stcr authorcs habct.

Quorum acmttl i

cx l,tflt nc

cnuam

Potius,quam istorum bscuralll(hligcntiam,9

Ho:wcll bscu1 n diligcntiam articulatcs the dc%ct of scrupul us
a

xx:hich rcquire nc to rcad thc Original to understand the Vcrsi

hat I had t
Thus havc I Prescntcd, NI nsicur,

sa in t11

Tra11s ations,

n!

(lCfCnsc I lcavc t

your valor and shrcvvdness, not to n1cntion vour zcal and affcction, ho `bcst to
CmPloy these veaPonsvhich arc morc strong than bright -should) our namc not
su cc to disPersc my enemics and Prcvcnt thcm om sh wing themsclves C mc

vhat may, I shall attributc e ery favorablc outcomc to thc glory of lny dcfcndcr,
and I shall remain all ln

life,

Ionsieur,
Your n1 st humblc and obcdicnt scrvant,

Pcrrot Ablancourt

PREFACE TO LUCIAN

37

Translator s notes
1

D Al)lanc

urt l)ubhShed thc sccond olun1e in 1644

JacquCS Amyot(1513 1593),ProksS r f

Grcck ancl Latin at thc uni

crsity

of Bourgcs,ProducCd Frcnch` crsions of such

rks as L ngus s DdPhn1S nd
Cf,
c(1559)and Plutarch s Lies(1559, 1565)
Tbc t1 anslati ns ProducCd by thc scholar and theol gian Dcsi(lcrius Erasn us
(?1466 1536)includc a Latin vcr on fthc New Tcstamcnt

The
n1axilu

is actually not AristOtlc s, but attril,utcd t the f ll wers

Pytlnagolas by M nt gnc in his'

1972

122-123n24),

of

rJ%r Rqym nd seb nde(D Al,lanc urt

P

Thc cn1Pcror iS N/larcus Claudius

ho reigned bricHy in d1c third
acitus,
ccntur AD and clain)cd dcscent fI

()l

1t11C historian

Vid1 the suPP rt of Ca1 di11al Richchcu, Valcntin Conralt (1603 1675)
f undcd thc Acad n ic Franqaise in1635and for thc ncxt four dccadcs scr
cd
as lts sccrctar

Marcus Minucius Fchx, an carly Latin aPologist for Christianity,

vrotc thc
(haloguc C)cF vJ1 s :hiCh D Ablancourt translatcd anonym usly in 1637 His
vcrsion of Lucian did not pr c to bc his last translati n; hc subsequcntly
rcndcrcd ThucydidCS(1662)and a c llcction of ancicnt aPoPhthCgn1s(1663)

n this l hctorical work,a jury of`oxxcls judgcs a suit brought by the Greck

lcttcr sign1a against tau E) Ablancou

ith an original con11) si~
t rcPlacCd it

tion,Did` dcs crrrcs( c PF, d r,a hntcasy nF ncb sPelhng s`P1ed to

t

F1

o1nont d Ablanc urt

Al)lancourt drc v thcsc lh1es n c)tn thc Prologue to Tcrcncc s Play

ndi

i tI

(ll,16-21) In a n te hc Pr vided a Frcnch translati n that is gcncrally faith 0l

:h c n itting thc Latin authors names

Thcy undo reason by dint of

vhO scr c as its

rcasoning For by uPbraiding it, thcy uPbraid the Ancicnts,
surcty,and vhose ncghgcnce hc ould rather ilaitatc,than thc bscurc cxac
titude of thcrs (thc French vcrsion is quoted in E) Ablanc urt 1972:

188n25;my translati n)

Cha ter 3

John Dryden

FROh/lTHE PREFACE TO
@/fD/S fPfSTLfS

W Ft
:&lu
1 gI ;if
I
::l

way f VCrsion sccms to mc most Pt oper,

All Translation I supPosc lnay bc rcduccd t thcsc thrcc hcads.

First, that f Metaphrasc, or turnin an Auth ur ord l)y vord,and Linc l)y
Linc, fr m

vas Hordcc
onc Lan8uagc int another Thus, or near ths manncr,

hn,cDn1Thc sccond ay is that of ParaPhrasC,

his Art f Poetry translatcd by Ben
or Translati n vith Latitude, vhcrc the Auth ur it kePt in viC :by thc Translator,
so as ncvcr to bc lost, but his v rds arc 1ot so striCtly ft llo v d asl)is sensc, and
I FF h Translatio1
is adn1ittcd to bc amPlyHcd,but not altcr d Such is NIr
'here
thc Translator
of"r s Fourth i neicl2Thc Third way is that ofIn1itation,
ary flon1dk
t
only
to
(if now hC has n t lost that Namc)assumcs thc hbe y n

that t o

v rds and scncc, l)ut to forsakc thcn b th as hc sccs OCCasion and taking only
somc gcncral hints lion1thc Original, to run division on thc gr und- vork, as hc
vo odCs of Pj,ltfcJr,and onc fH r cc
PlCaSes such is NIr Cpll e Practicc in turning t

into nJfis/ ;

Concerning thc rst of thcsc NIcth ds, ur R/lastcr H r cc

has gi en us this

Caudon,
Nec crbun1 crbo curabis rcddcrc, dus
IntcrPres~
rd r
ir n'9F nsbre As tllc drF

Nor word r

rendcr d it+Too faithfully is indccd Pedantically

1680

of R

sct,n

920n has excellcntly

tis a f1ith likc that

vhich Procccds

FROM THE PREFACE T0 0yfD/s EP

sTLfs

39

i 1suPcrstltl n,bhnd and zcal us:Takc it in the ExPrcssi n of sirohn D n dm,

do5
to sir RicJa Fdnshd ,on his Vcrsion of thc PdsFOr
That ser ilc Path,th

un bly

do st dechne,

Of tracing vord by v rd and Linc by Linc;

A nc v and noblcr vay thou do st pursue,
T

make Transladons,and Translators t

Thcy but PrcSCr e1he Ashcs,th u the Flamc,

Truc t his scncc,but trucr to his Fame.

is ahn st imPossi )lc

Translatc vcrba y, and vell, at the same tilllc; For

crc and ComPcndi us Language) Ren exPresses that in nc

vvord,
vhich cithcr thc Barbarity, or thc narro vncss of rn dern T ngues cannot

thc I rin, (am st sc

suPPly in m re, Tis frcqucnt also that thc Conccit is couch

vhichvill

d in s

me ExPressi n,

bc l st in nf`isrl

atquc idcn1 cnti vcla demquc fcrcnt6

What Poct of our Nation is so haPPy as to exPress this thought Litcrally in

r,JFisfl,

and t strikc Wit or alrnOst Scnse out ofit?

In short thc Vcrbal C Pycr is incumbcr d vith s rnany(hfHcultics at once,that

he can nc cr discntanglc hin sclfo1u all,Hc is to c nsider at thc samc timc thc

thought of his Authour,and his

an thcr

v rds,and

t hnd ut thc Countcrpart t cach in

con nc hi1nsclf t thc c mPaSS f

Languagc and bcsides this hc is t

Numbcrs,and thc slavcry f Rhimc Tis luuch like dancing on RoPes wid kttcr d
Leggs: A man may shun a%ll by using Caution,but thc gracefulncss fN1oti n is

vhcn vve ha e said thc bcst f it, tis but a f ohsh Task;

rn sobcr n1an would Put hin sclf int a dangcr rd1c Applausc of scaping

vithout l)rcaking his Ncck Wc see B n oJ,ns n Coul(ln t a i(l bscurity in his
htcral Translati n f Ffordc , attemPted in thc samc comPass f Lines: nay fJordcc
not to l)c cxPcctcd: and

hi1nsclf could scarcc ha c donc it to a G

Brevis cssc lab0r , bscurus

Eithcr PcrsPicuity or graccfulncss

a

idcd

b tll

tl

rcc

Poct.

Ho7

vill frequcntly bc /anting Hor cc has indccd

ese R cks in hs Translation of tllc thrcc rst hnes ofFf mcrs O ,sses,

vhich hc has C ntractcd into tvo,

Dic m iM aV um caPt PoSt tCmPola Trol

:i i : !

Btlt th thtS n of u,sses,WhiCl

arc omittcd,

Og ua Jr o o x0 :

>

re a Con cuc pt.

d tl l t

40 JOHN DRYDEN
The C nsiderati n of these difscultics,in a scr ilc,literal Translation,not lon8
sincc maclc tw f ur%m Wl , r ohn Denhdm,an(l Mr,Co '` to contHvc
anothcr ay of turning Auth urs into our Tonguc, call d by thc lattcr f thCn1,

ughts on

In1itauon, As thcy wcrc Fricnds, I supPosc thcy Con1rnunicatcd thcir th

tl

is Subjcd t cach otlacr,and tllcrebrc tht,lr K ns r it arc littlc diffc

though thc Practicc of onc is n

nt

uch m re modcratc,I takc In1itation of an Auth ur

in thcir sensc to bc an Endcavour of a latcr Poct to vrite like

nc xs ho

has

rittCn

bc rc him on thc samc Su Cd th is,not to Translate his : rds,orto be Con

ritc,

to his scnsc, but only to sct hilu as a Patern, and to

as he suPP seS, that

Authour xs:ould have do11e,had he li d in ur Agc,and in ur C untry Yctl dare

not sa that either of thc1havc carried thir libcrtinc

vay of rcndring Authours(as

Mr CoTlF calk k)so hr my Dehniti()nK hcs,For in tllc P,nd

Custon`s and Ccrcmonics of Ancicnt Grccc are stdl Prcscr

(l

ri

Odcs,the

butI kn w not what

hen 'riters
n1ischicf rna arisc hcrcaRcr fr lll the ExamPlc ofsuch an Inn vation,
of uncqual Parts to hilu,shall in1itatc so l)old an undcrtaking;to add and to di1ninish

hatvc PlCase, vhich is thc ay a ov d by h" ,ought only to be grantcd to N/Ir

Co
cy,and that to nly in11is Translati n f Pind r,becausc hc alonc vas able to
make him amcnds,by gi ing him bettcr of his own,whcn e er hc rc d his
vant
vriter, to
Authours thoughts P I,dt,r is gcncrally kn0 vn to bc a dark
s

Conncxion, (I n1can as to our understanding) to s

a1

out of sight, and lca c his

Rcadcr at a Gazc Sovild and un8 vcrnablc a Poct cannot bc Translatcd littcrally,
his Gcnius is too strong to l)car a Chain,and sdzllPsOI likc he shakcs it off:A Gcnius
so Elcvated and uncon

d as N r C
s, vas but ncccssary to lnake Pindclr spcak
/

bc PCrfornn d by no othcr way than Imitation But if

r Ovid,or any rcgular intcl1igiblc Auth urs bc thus us d, tis no longer t be call (l
En
ish and that was t

thcir w rk,whcn ncithcr thc th

u8hts nor words are drawn om thc Original but

instcad of thcm there is something ncw Produc d,which is almost tbe crcati n of

anothcr hand By this` ay tis true, so1uc vhat that is Exccllcnt ma bc in cntcd
PerhaPs rn re Excellcnt than thc Hrst dcsign,though I1 rnust bc still cxccptcd,

vhcn that PcrhaPs takes placc

Yct hc /ho

is inquisiti c to kno v

an Authours

vill
thoughts vill be disapointcd in his cxPcctation And tis not alvva s that a lnan

vhcn he cxpccts thc Payment fa Debt

To statc it rly,Imita on of an Auth ur is thc mOst advanta ous way br a
vhich can be d nc to thc
vrong
Translat r t shc v hi1nsclf, but thc grcatcst
bc c ntcntcd to havc a Prcsent rnadc hhn,

Memory and RCPutation

than hc t

f thc dcacl sir J n Dcn

dm(wh

ad

dm rc

L crty

k hilllsclf,)givcS thiS Rcason r his Inn vauon,in his admiral)le Prcfacc

bcf rc thc Translati n ofthc scc

nd ncitF: Poctry

is of s subt a spirit,that in

P uring out of onc Languagc into anothcr,it vill all E aporatc;and if a nc v sPirit
bc not addcd in the transfusion,thcrcill rcmain n thing but a C PuFrorFuum ,I
con ss this Argumcnt h lds good aga1n a littcral Translation,but wh (lc%n(ls it?
In1itation and crbal Vcrsi n arc in n1 OPinion thc t
0EXtrcan1s, hich ught to
bc avoidcd and thcrcf rc hcn I ha c Pr P s d thc mcan bct vixt thcm, it ill bc

sccn how hr his Ar:umcnt will rcach

No man is caPablC f Transladng P ctry,who bcsides a Gcnius to that Art,is
a NIastcr both f his \utl urs Languagc,and of his /n:l`or must Vc undcrf
stand the Language only of thc P ct, but his Particular turn of Thoughts, and
verc indi iduatc
hich arc thc Charactcrs that distinguish, and as it
ExPreSSion,

n t

FRO M.THE PREFAcE To oy

s fPJsTLfs

41

hin11io 1all thcr

riters,

hcn` e arc comc thus far,

tis til,lc to l
k int
ur
scl cs,t confor11 ur Gcnius to his,t
ivc
his
thought
cither
thc
san1c
turn
if
our

fli

T f1J
T :r J

rul

Jtt :sT
t
Ft rs; :

`:

J
ru

:j1P

ft
ll

jf
y

: %l
F W &

:I

rT

:jill

rfi

1 1b

;:

ll#

:T
I


CT:

$STi
N`

:t

:r

samc Ans crv l

servc for l) th,that

then thcy u ht n t to bc Translatcd

Et quac
DCsPeres tractata nitesccrc Possc,rchnquas9

aW
d
b th lov

1:Jl

hJJPTT
I

(l thcm hving,and rcvcrencc thclu n

v thcy arc dcad.But if aRcr vhat I

n1ean tirne it secn1st l))c,that thc truc rcas n :hy vc havc so fc

`crsions vhich

fii[lI:

jil

if1t l

jF11

l;

;f J

:TTi :1~

iF :t

h
lI

: 1
1: :e=tF |:1

ti

42 JOHN DRYDEN
But if shc d cs n t,I an1afraid shc has givcn us occasion to be ashan1 dvh

For Fny o vn Part I an rcady to ackn0 vlcdgc that I ha e transgress d thc Rules

which I ha e givcn;and takcn m rc liberty than a just Translati n w l allow But

so many Gcntlcmcn wh sct and Lc ning arc wcll kn wn,bcing J

yn d

in

it,Id ubt not but that thcir Exccllcncies vvill1nakc you amPlc satisfacti n for lny

Errours

Editor s notes
Thc poct and dramati Bcn Jons n(1572 1637)translatcd H
P ctric

racc s Art

of

around 1605 and thcn rc ised his vcrsion after 1610 vhcn a ne v

cditi n f

thc Latin tcxt apPcared.

In1658Edmundallcr(1606 1687)comPlCtC(l

thc crsi n of the uh

cnc cl bcgun by Sidncy Godolphin(1610 1643), vho dicd in the Ci War
Both Pocts
Vcrc associated
vith the c urt
f Charlcs I Wallcr s sm th
Pr s dy vas rnuch adn

ired in his lifctirnc and during thc cighteenth century

The P ct Abraham C wley(1618 1667) rst Pubhshed his Pind rJquc Odes in

1656

Wentwo h

Dill n(1633

Horace sH
Ess

P eric'into

1685),the urth Earl fR scommon, anslatcd

crse(1680)and wr te a trcatisc in couplets,

blank

n TIdnsf Fed rsc(1684).

J hn Dcnham(1615 1669)wr tc

Thc poct s

an in ucntial translati

the secon(l Hcncjd,clltitled rJ,c DcsrrucriOIa of Tr

(1656),In1648sr Rlchhard

Fansha
e (1608 1666) Pr duced an Enghsh

Pastoral dmma,

crsi n
f Battista

n f

Guarini

(ThC F thf l shcPhcr(l),tll whiCh Dcnham

Pdsror
Contributcd a c 11ncndatory P cm

This linc,takcn f1 mO"d

s Hc1 oi s CDid ACncac, 7,8),may bC rcndercd

dosd as hll ws: And Will thc samc winds carr awa our sails and our
(

idcht

H race s Hrs P cFJcd(1,25)rC

for shortncssc labour,and am stil d/Obscurc

J nson

s vcrsion of this linc fI om

'

D n is quothg a Pornon fO ss 11-2

lt

R bc Fa cs

ls

My sclk

s1996 on

rcndcrs the phrase as drivcn ti1nc and again ff coursc, Hcrc arc Fagles

oPening lincs:
sin8t

mc fthe

Inan,rv

usc,the1nan

ft vists

and turns

driven ti1uc and again oFr c ursc, nce hc had Plundercd

the hall
vcd hcights f Tr y

Many citics frncn hc sa/and lcarned thcir rninds,

many Pains hc suffcred,hcartsick on thc pcn sca

JonSOn

s vcl sion

of thcsc lincs i m

Horacc( 149-150)rcaclS:

letting

/hat hc dcsPaircS,being handled n1ight not sho v

goc/

10

Drydcn is rc%rring to thc n

chst and drama st APhra Behn(1640 1689),
wh als translatcd La R chcfc,ucauld s maxlms (1685) and Bcrnt ld dc
Fontcndlc

D scov ofN br (1688)

Chapter 4

Friedr ch

schleiermacher

ON THE DIFFERENT METHODS

OF TRANsLATING
rra s aFec/by S sa Bernofs/cy

lrWj: f : FJtll : r Tc :
thc nc hand,1ncn are thus brought togcther vho vvcrc Originally scParated PerhaPs
by thc sPan f thC Carth s diametcr,and if onc languagc can bcc me thc rcccPtacle
rittcn many cCnturics l cf rc in a tongue long sh)cc deceascd,
of vv rks
c11eed
not,on the othcr hand,cvcn: bCyond thc b unds f a singlc languagc to cncounter
the sa1t1cl)11Cn mcn n,For not only(lo thc(halccts Of thc(lis rcnt clans tl)at n1akc

uP a PC Ple, and thc diffcrcnt

vays a langua:c r clialcct de elops in diffcrcnt
centurics,already c nstitutc(lirerent languagcs in a strictcr scnsc,bct vccn hich
it is oRen cn ugh ncccssary t translatc;cvcn contcn1Poraricsvho sharc a("alcct
but bel ng to diffcrcnt classcs that rarcly come togcthcr in social intcrc ursc and
divcrgc substantially in thcir cducati n arc coll rnonly unablc to c mn1unicate savc
thr ugh

a sin1ilar mcdiati n Yca, arc xx:c not oRcn collaPcllCd t translatc f r

c uttcranccs of anothcr
1 , th ugh
ur compecr, is of d 1 rent
opinions and scnsib ityP C mPCllCd to translate,that is, hcrcver vvc fccl that the
samc vords uP n ur o
n liPs v uld ha c a rathcr diffcrent imPort than uPon hiS,
r at lcast vcigh hcrc thc m rc hcavily,therc tbc morc lightly,and that, ouldC
oursclvcs d

CxPrcSs just what hc intcn(lcd,we must needs cmPl

turns of P111 asc;and

'hc1

y quitc diffcrcnt r(ls and

wc cxarninc t11is tcling morc clc

scly so d1at it takcs n

thc charactcr of th ught,it`vould aPPear that ve arc translating,Indccd,

ve must

sOmcti1ncs translatc our o

n utteranccs aftcr a ccrtain tin1c hasl)asScd,
vouldve
makc thcn truly our
n again This ability is cmPloyCd not nly to transPlant t
f

reign sil thc scientiHc and rhct rical accomPhshn1Cnts of a gi cn t nguc, thus

1813

44

FRIEDRIcH SCHLEIERMACHER

cnlar ing

thc sPhcrc of thcir inHucncc; it also enters into busincss transactions

d trcnt indi i(lual PeoPlCs and in diPl matic rclations bct veen indcPCnd~
cnt govcrnil)g bodics, cach f vhich, l)y custom, sPCaks only its `n lan8uagc

hcn addressing thc othcrs so as t maintain strict cquahty othout thcir availin

bct vccn

thclusclvcs f a clcad language

still,n ta1l that lics vithin this br ad rcalrn sh uld Play a rolc in ur prcscnt

inquiry ThC conlPulSion t

vill

ah ays be to

translatc in resPonsC t a rnorc or lcss Ino11,cntary nccd

consncd t thc m n1cnt in its cffects to rcquire othcr guidancc

vcre to bc gi cn,they uld havc to be

duce a PurCly m ral statc of rnil)d in 11ich the sPirit1 cmains rcccP-

than that of fcchng; and if rules for this

such as t
ti c
f

I)r

cven to vhat is most unhkc itsclf Lct us sct this casc asidc and rcstrict oursclvcs

r the noncc to Considering only translati ns

hcrc t

h on1af

rei:nt nguc into our o

n;

cVill bc ablc to distil`guish t vo separatc arcas -not clcarly dCHncd,t

bc surc for that is rarcly Possiblc,but cvcn thcsc blurrcd b

undarics vill aPpcar

disti11ct enough if(,ne exatnines thc ultimate goals in cithcr casc Thc interPrctCr
Plics his tradc in thc area of busi11css,

hilC thc translat r proPcr =orks al)ove all

in thc arcas of sciencc and art If thesc deE11itions aPPca

arbit1 aI

intcrPretation

bCinE conunonly undcrsto d to rcfcr lnore to oral translation and tra11slati n Pr Pcr
c~
to thc vritten sort,n1ay
1:ivcn R)r ch sin8to uSc thclll thus out of con
^c bc fo

nicncc in thc prescnt instancc,Particularly as thc t rs`o terllls are not at all distant
from nc anothcr The arcas ofa and scicncc arc bcst scr cd b thc vrittcn ord,

vhich alonc can n1akc d1cir

vorks cndurc; and intcrPrcth1g scic11ti c or artistic
ducts aloud
fould bc just as uselcss as,it seems,in1possiblc For busincss trans-

Pr
actions, 110 vc Cr,

riti1 g is only a mcchanical n eans;

Crbal ncgotiation is thcir

original m dc, and cvery vritten interPrCtation should bc sccn only as thc rccord

of a sPokCn cxchangc
B rdering this arca are t vo othCrs cl

scly akn to it in sPirit and naturc, yct

glx

en tllc8rcat varie of objCcts embraced by thcm,they drcady rm a ans ion

thc areas of art, in thc nc case,and of scicnce, in thc othcr. For c ery nC8oti-

ation involving an intcrPrctCr is an cvcnt

chosc Particulars are set clo vn in tvvo
cliffcrent tongucs But cvcn thc translati n f Purcly narrative or(lcscriptivc xl:ritings vhich mcrcly transmits a Prcvi

usly dcscribcd scqucnce f cvc11ts into anothcr

tonguc can still ha c much about it of thc intcrPrCter s tradc Thc lcss
aud1

ious tbc

s PrCSCncc vas in thc iginal,and the lll rc hc servcd mercly as an organ

1

of aPPcrcePti n gui(lcd by his ol

thc translati

jcct

s sPatial and temP ral organizati

n dl bc a tuatter()f mcrc intcrPrCdng Thus thc translat

n,thc morc
r ofnc

s~

PaPer articlcs and rdinary travcI litcrature tcnds to makc common cause ith thc
intcrPretcr,and it ill s n bcc n1c ri(liculous if hc clail s f r his rk too high a
status and ishes t bc rcsPcctCd as an artist,Thc rnorc,h vvcvcr,thC author s
vn
Particular ay f sccing and dra ving conncctions has dctcrnnincd thc charactcr of
thc xs ork,and thc m re it is organizcd acc rding to principlcs that hc hin1sclf has

citbcr frccly choscn r that are dcsigned to call forth a Particular imPrCSSi n, the

morc his
vork ll

pa1

akc of thc l ghcr realn of art, and s

t o

thC trans ator

must bring diffcrent Po vCrs and skills t his vork and bc fan1ihar vith his author
and thc auth

s tonguc in a di rcnt scnse than the interprctcr Evcry ncgotia-

cs,as a rulc, sctting do n a Particular statc oI

within a sPCcinc amewc)rk;tlae intcrPretcr is worl lng only fcDr thc bcncst

tion that uses an intcrPretcr invol

irs
a

oN THE DIFFERENT METHODs OF TRANsLATING

45

ol ParticiPants sufhCicntly fa1niliar vith thcsc affairs, and the Ph1 ascs that exPrcss
thcn1 i11b th languagcs arc lctcrn1incd in advance eithcr by laxs=or by usage and

1t mattcr c tl,cs l ts fI1eg

n1utually agrced upon co1) cnti0ns,Quitc a diffc
tiations that,alth ugh oftcn sirn ar in f rn to tllc convcntional oncs,arc intcnded

tC)Cstablish ne :iamew rks Thc lcss thc lattcr can thcmscl cs bc con dcred

Pcci c instanccs of a rcc gnizcd gcncral P1

inciplc,thc luorc scientiRc kn xs-lcdgc

an(l carc vill bc rcquircd in thcir vcry composition,and thc grcatcr thc kno

of tcchnical dctails and tcrn1in logy necdcd f r

thc t anslator t carr

this t
of ld laddcr,thcn,thc translat

lcdgc

out his task.

r asccnds higher and higher above thc

he rcachcs thc rcahn most Properly11is, namcly, thosc ' rks of
art and scicnce in vhich thc author s frcc indi idual combinator faculties n the
nc hand,and thc spirit of the languagc al ngvith thc cntire systcm of ie :s and
scnti1nents in all thcir shadings rcprcscntcd in it, on thc ther, c unt for e ery
t11ing;the objcct no lon cr d n1inatcs in any vay,but radlcr is govcrncd by th ught
LIlD n

intcrPrctcr unt

and fccling; indecd, it ften comcs into Cxistence only throu:h bCing uttercd and
exists onl in this uttcranCC

Yct vhat is thc basis f r this imPortant distinction that is

b rdcrhnc

isible cvcn in thcsc

rcgions but shincs forth1n st brilhand at thc furthcst cxtrCmcs?Bush1css

dcahngs generally inv l can1atter of rcadily aPParCnt, r at lcast fairly cll(lchned

objects;a negotiati ns arc,as it wcrc,arithmctical or gcometHcal in naturc,and
nullrlbcrs and mcasurcs comc to onc s aid at evcry stcp; and cvcn in thc casc f
n1Pass thc 8reatcr and lesscr

notions that, as thc ancicnts alrcady obscrvcd, cnc

vith"1themscl cs and arc indicatcd b

a gradcd scrics f tcrms that vary in ordh1-

ary usagc, rnaking thcir i1nP rt unccrtaiI),habit and c nvcntion soon scr c to x
thc usagc of thc indi idual tern s so long as thc sPcakCr(l cs not sn ugglc in hidden

vagucncsscsvith intcnt t dcceivc,or crr out of carclessncss,hc vill be Pcrf ctly

c mPrChCnsible to any nc 1th kno vlcdgc of both thc matter undcr (liscussion
an(l thc languagC, and in any gi cn casc Only shght`,ariations in languagc use`vill
v l bc scarccly any doubt that cannot cas y bc
bc cncountcrcd Evcn s thCrC
rcmedicd as t
vhich cxprcssion in thc Onc language corrcsPonds t any 8i cn
exPresSi n in the othcr Thus is translation in this rcaln11ittlc1u
rc d1an a1ncchan~
ical task vhich can bc perfOl^rncd by anyone vho l)as modcratc kno vlcdgc of thc
t v

languagcs, vith littlc differencc to bc found bct veen bcttcr and lcsscr efforts

as long as ob ious errors arc a oidcd,W11cn,ho vcvcr,artistic and scicntiHc

^orks

arc to bc transPlanted fron10ne language to an ther, t o sorts of Considcrati ns

vhich altcr the situati n Forifin any t vo languagcs cach
a1ise
vord in the onc
vvcre to CorresPond PCrf ctly

t a vord

in thc Othcr,cxPrcsSing thc same idca

vith

thc samc range of meaning; if thcir(lcclcnsions (lisPlaycd the samc relationshiPs,

and thc structures ofthcir PcriodS c

inci(lcd s that thc t vo languagcs in fact diffcrcd

onl t thc car;thcn all translation in thc arcas of a1

t and scicncc,assun1ing the so c

mattcr t be c n)municatcd l as thc inf rmation containcd in an1 ttcrancc or Piccc

^riting,

asi lc

'ould bc as Purcly mcchanical as in busincss transactions; and, sctting

rDcl cxd bx tOrlc d mt n ll,ollC ght ch of tllly gvm

thc cIlfk:c

translation that it PlacCd thc forcign reader in thc san

c rclati ns11ip to dlc aud) r

and his w rk as was thc rcadcr f thc original As it haPPcns,howcvcr,juSt thc

PP SitC iS truc f r all languagcs that arc n t so closcl relatcd as to count ahuost
as diffcrcnt dialects f a singlc tongue, and the furthcr rcmovcd thc arc fr m onc

46

FRIEDRIcH sCHLEIERMACHER

another in ctymol :y and ycars,thc m rc it vill be sccn that n t a sin lC vord in

onc langua8c
l c rrcsPond Pcrfcctly to a v rd iI)an ther,n r does any pattcrn

nc contain PrCcisely thc samc n ultil)hcity of relati nshiPs as

v uld likc t call it,pcrmcatcs all clcmcnts
ft vo languagcs,it1nust als0 to be surc,affcct that sPhcrc of b urgcois affairs
c
clcclcnsi ns in thc

in another Sincc this irrationahty,as I

bavc menti ned Yct it is obviousl lcss of a hindrancc hcrc, ha ing littlc or n
effect A"w rds d1at stand or blccts and actioI1s thc t can bc ofc 11sC(luCnce are,
as it vcrc,gaugcd according to a standard mcasurc,and cvcn if,
ut of unfounded
faint~hcartcd ersubtlcty, onc vcrc to Protest that thc
v rds verc l)cing incon~
sistently aPPhed,thc Si1

Plc f cts ofthe n attcr sh uld

serve to resolve all quibblcs

QuitC diffCrcnt is thc casc in thc arts and scicnccs,and indecd in cvery sPhcrc in

vhich thought thatis onc

ith sPccch Prcd n1inatcs and it is n t thc facts that ll akc
f thc sx ord a PcrhaPs arbitrar y dctcrn i11cd and thcn irre cably xcd sign F r
/11at hrm kn0 v~

,
languagcs docs it rcquire! And h Rcn,
vhcre it
is gcncrally acknoxx lcdgcd that a Pcrfect cqui alcnt f r an cxPrCsSion cannot bc

h
v

in6nitcly laborious a11d knotty t11e busincss l)ccomcs hcrc!

lcdgc and mastcry of the t

und,d

c en

tbc n10st kno :lcdgcable sch lars1 vell-vcrscd in both thc languagc

kself ti11d tlac quL lctt matter,(li

crgc signiscant|in th

rt t

mP

to ch sc

dk

m st ntting vord This is cqually truc ofthc vi id Picturesquc cxPrcssi ns f poctic

v rks and of the rnost abstract vorks of d)cn blcst scienccs that shox1
Pr

tIS thC I

ost

und and univcrsal naturc of things

Thc second mattcr, ho 'c cr, that makes translati n pr Pcr a quite diffcrcnt

activity
om rdinary interl)rcting is tbis, Wherc

readily aPParcnt o

ct

er utteranccs arc not b und b

tS Or cXtcrnal circumstanccs ic11it is n1crcl

1

d1cir task to

vherc cr, in othcr rds, thc sPeakcr is cngagcd in morc Or less indc~
namc
'

PCndCnt th ught, that is, scl cxPrcssi n, hc stands in a t / f ld rclati nshiP to

languagc, and his v rds vill bc undcrst d aright only insofar as this rclationshil)
itsclf is corrcctly rasPcd, E Cr) hul 1an bcing is,on thc Onc hand,in thc P
vcr f
thc langua8e he sPcaks;hc and a
comPlCte ccrtainty anythin

his thought are its products.Hc cannot think vith

that lies utsidc its boundarics;thc form of his ideas,

thc manner in vbich11c combi11es thCm, and the lil))its f thcsc combinations arc
all PrCOrdaincd by the languagc in vhich hc vas b rn and raised b th his intcllect
and hisimagination are bound by it On the thcr hand,c cry free~thinking,intcl_
lectually indePcndcnt individual shaPes thc languagc in his turn For ho v elsc if n

cgil`nings to its
by theSC influcnces c uki it havc gaincd and gr0 n n1its ra
l

prcscnt, m re PcrfCct State of de

cl

Pn1ent in thc sciences and artsP n this scnse,

then,it is the li ing forcc of thc individual that causcs nc forms

to emergc fron1

thc tractablc mattcr f languagc, in each casc vvith thc initial ai1n of Passing on a
nccting state of c nsciousncss,but lcavil g bchind n
v a grcater,n0 v a faintcr tracc

in the language that,taken uP by others,continucs t

in ucncc

havc an c cr broadcr shaPing

Indccd, ne can say that only t thc cxtcnt that a PcrSOn influcnccs

languagc in this fay docs11c dcscrvc to bc hcard )utsidc his i 11nediatc sPhcre of
cr it rnay bc,Evcry uttcrancc ill quickly Pass avay ifit is such that
any one f a thousand voiccs Inight reproducc it; nly that one is ablc and cntitlcd
acti ity, vhatc

to endurc yhich cOnstitutcs a 1c v mon1ent in the lifc f languagc itsclf, F r

this

rcasOn, cvcry nobler,

rcc utterancc n1ust bc grasPcd in t o diffcrcnt scnscs, rst
in tcHns fthe gc11ius f thc language om whosc clcmcnts it was dch cd,as an

oN THE DIFFkERENT METHODs OF TRANsLATING

cxprcssi c

47

lcans ticd to and dctcr 1ined by this spirit that brou8ht it to lifc ithin

thC sPCakcr; yCt it rnust also be undcrst od in terms f the sPcakcr hirnself, as an
act that can only ha C Cmcrgcd out f,and l)c cxPlained as a product
hiS Particu_

lar being Indeed,every uttcrancc of this sort vill be undcrstood in thc highcr scnsc

fthe rd nl
hcn thcsc t Vo sCts of rclati nshiPs arc concci cd of b th

t gethcr

and in thcir truc connection to onc anothcr,sO that no qucstion rcmains conccrning

hicb f

d n1inatcs in thc utterancc as a

the t
`

vhole and in its indi idual Parts

Onc undcrstands an uttcrancc as an action of thc spcakcr

nly if,at thc same tirnc,

onc can fccl vhcre and hov hcvas seized by thc forcc fthc languagc, herc along

its Path thC lightning Rashcs

f th ught snaked their

vav,
vhcrc and hov in its
R ms crrantima n i()n was hdd hst One understands sPccch both as a w rk f
langua8c and as an cxprcssion ofits spirit only if,
f

vhilc fcchng that only a HC1lCnc,

r instancC, can havc thOught and sP kcn thus, d atnly this language can ha e

in ucnced

a hu1nan sPirit thus, onc at thc samc ti1nc fecls that

mcIn ha c th ught and sP

nl thus can FJa s

kcn in a Hcllcnic manncr, only thus can hc havc scizcd

andv rked t shaPc this languagc, and vhat is hcrc manifcstcd is Only his li

ing

grasp on thc richness of thc languagc,his kccn scnsc of rhythm and cuPh ny,and
his caPacity t think and t fashi n N vv if undcrstanding
vorks of this sort is
alrcady difHcult cvcn in thc samc languagc and invol

cs ilnIncrsing onesclf in

both thc sPirit f the languagc and thc vriter s charactcristic naturc,ho v rnuch yct
n blcr

an art must it bc vvhcn c arc sPcaking of thc Pr ducts f a forcign, far

(listant tonguc! To be sure,
vhoe er has mastcred this art of understandin8 1)y
vlcdgc of the cntire
studying thc language with diligence, acquiring prccisc kn
ofa Pc PlC and Picturing kccnl l)ef re hirn thc individual vorks and

hist rical hf

their auth rs~/,c, to l)e surc, and hc alonc is justi ed in dcsiring to bring to his

coun ymcn and contt,mP mrics ths same undcr anang fthcsc m tc rworh

chcn hc PrcParCs t
f art and scicncc, But his scruPlcs must nCCds multiPly
aPProach the ttlsk,whcn thc timc comcs fl,r him t J spcci h 8 alS an(l hc bc ns
to survcy thC mcans at his(lisP sal sh uld hc rcall cnturc to takc tvco mcn vvho

arc as hr distant om nc anothcr as his countryman wh sPcaks nly his own

languagc and thc`vriter hi1nself,and t bring thcrn togcthcr in s immcdiatc a rcla~
tionship as that bct
ccn a VritCr and his original rcadcr? Or if he ishes to gi c

his readcrs Only thc samc undcrstanding and thc samc plcasurc hich hc hirnsclf
e oys, nc markc(l,t bc surc,with thc tlaccs f his e
,and witll thc%cling
ofthc f reign adn1ixcd with it,h
v can hc achicve e cn this,lct alone Pr ide thc
undcrstanding and Plcasurc f the original rcader, by thc mcans ava ablc to hirnP
If his rcadcrs are to undcrstand, thcn thcy must grasP the gcnius of thc languagc
thatvas nati e to thc vvritcr,thcy must bc ablc to bscrve his charactcristic rnanncr

f thinking and sensibility; and all hc can ocr thcn)as a helP for achic ing thcse
Vo thin s is thcir vvn langua:c, c rrcsPonding in nonc f its Parts to thc othcr

tongue,along vvith hin self,as hc has recognized his vriter no v thc mrc,no v thc
vriter s
ork no v rn rc,no v lcss
Does not translati n aPPCar, ic
ed in this vvay, an utterly f ohsh undcrtaking?

less luci(lly,and as he adn1ircs and aPPlauds the

Thereforc, in dcspair f reaching this goal, or,if ne PrcfCrs, bcf rc the thought
of a goal vas e en fully f rmcd, t vo nc v mcthods
vcrc dcviscd f r maklng the
acquaintancc ff rcign
orks~not f r thc sakc of gcnuine artistic and linguistic
virtuosity, but rathcr t ll a sPiritual nccd, n thc Onc hand, and t scr c a

48

FRIEDRIcH sCHLEIERMACHER

spiritual art, on the othcr-_mcth ds that chn1inatc by forcc sOmc of thc dif cultics mcnti nc|d ab vc, cunningly circunl cnt others, and in any casc altogcther
abando1 the n tion of translati n vc havc bcen pr Posing;these n1cthods are para-

CrComc thc irrationahty oflanguages,

Phrasc and in1itation ParaPhrasc scts out to o

but only in a mcchanical vay Its aPPr ach

is t

say e cn

in my languagc to corrcsPond to thC Onc in thc original,I

if I cann t nd

a ' rd

vill attcmpt to aPProxi^

matc its value by adding restricti

c and amPlil ing n1 di ers

Thus caught bctwecn

a burdcns mc too1nuCh and a t rmenting too~httlc,it laboriouslyvorks its vay

a8rcat n1ass of indi idual dctails, Tl r ugh this aPProach it can PerhaPs
rCProduce thc c ntcnts of a vork vith s mc accuracy,but the imprcssion luadc by

thr ugh

thc
vork luust bc dispcnsed `ith altogcthcr; f r living sPeech hCrcb)i PeriShCs
irrcvocably,it bcing clcar that all thcsc

v rds

could:1 t havc sPrung originally thus

m a human mind,Thc Parapl11 ast trcats tlac clemcnts of thc tw languagcs as

aluc by rncanS
though thcy` crc Inathematical signs that can bc reduced to thc san1c
1i

of additi n and subtraction,and ncithcr thc gCnius of thc languagc bcing subjcctcd
to transformation nor that of the original tonguc bccon1cs aPParCnt undcr this

ProcCdure If,rnorc vcr,ParaPhraSC sCeks to n1ark Psych l gical y the traccs f the
vhCre cr thcse arc indistinct and thrcatcn to disconncctions bct vcen thoughts

aPPCar~ vith thc helP ofintcrP latCd sCntenccs pounded in likc n tice stakes,thcn
in thc casc of rnorc dif cult vvorks it is striving at thc San1c tin

c to takc thc Placc

of a colnrnentary,making it all thc lcss apt to bc c nsidcrcd a form of translation

In1itation,on thc thcr hand,surrendcrs t the irrationabty oflanguagcs;it conccdcs
that one cannot poSsibly Pr ducc in anothcr t ngue a rCphca of a vork of rhct rioukl C0rresPond PcrfCctl t thc indivi<lual parts
ical art that in its individual Parts
ith vhich so
f thc riginal, but that gi cn thc differcnccs bet vcen languages,

n)any other(liffercnces arc esscntially caught uP, vc have no othcr rcc urse but t
contrivc a copy, an cntirc vork comPriscd of Parts that diffcr n ticcably fr 1thC
l

hich in its cffcct comcs so closc to thc Original as thc

Parts of the original, yct

hffercnccs in thc n1atcrial pcrn it, No /such a coPy is11o longcr the v rk itsclf,
and it lnakcs no prctensc to bc shovving us thc spirit of thc Original lan8uage as an
cfective f rcc in its o vn li ht,Particularly

as the foreignness this spirit11as Pr duced

aPpcars vith ch ercnt undcrpinnings; rathcr, a ork of this sOrt, takjng into
account thc dis rcnces in language, n rals and cducation, strivcs to l)e fl)r its
no V

rcaders,as far as P ssiblC,e crything t11e

ri inal

Pro idcd its original rcadcrs;f r

thc sake of Prcserving thc unity()f the in1Prcssion madc l)y thc vork,its idcntity is
sacrinced Thc in1itator,d1cn,considcring impossiblc any s rt of unmediatcd rcla~
tionshiP bct vccn the
riter and thc rcadcr of thc in1itati

n, makcs no cff rt

bring the t
t gcthcr; rather, hc strivcs only to give thc rcadcr an i1nprcssion
similar t thc onc rccei cd by rcadcrsvh shared a languagc and an age vith thc
author f thc Origh1al ParaPhrasc is lnorc con11nonly f und in the scicnces, and
irnitation in thc Hnc arts; and as cvcr nC vill conccde that a vork of art loscs its
tone,its lustcr,indccd its cry charactcr as art once it is paraPhrascd,surcly no one

has yct bccn so foohsh as to attemPt to ProducC an in1itation of a scienti c mastervevcr, ill fan
Both thesc Proccdurcs,h
admiladon br tllc cx llcncc fa l cl~gn m ttSr
v spcakcrs f his
f its in ucncc to include fcll
PiecC9 viShes to enlargc thc sPhcre

PiCcc that rendcrcd its c|

to satis

some nc who,

ntcnts l scly

lled witl

language and has in n1ind a stricter notion of translati

n,Neithcr ProcCdurc,thcn,

0N THE DlFFERENT METHODs OF TRANsLATING

49

as thcy divcrgc frorll this noti n,can reCci c1norc dcta cd considcration hcrc;thcy
havc bccn namcd only aslandmarks sho ving thc boundarics fthc rcgion vith vhich
vc shall conccrn oursclvcs

Nov as for the translat r proPcr vh truly vvishes to bring togcthcr thcsc t vo
quitc seParate PcrS ns, his vvritcr and his rcadcr, and to hclp thc reader, though

th ut forcing hilll t

leavc tl cl)ounds f his

vn nati

c tongue bchind hhn,t

acquirc as corrcct and c mPlctC an understanding of and takc as much Plcasurc in

thc /ritcr as possible

vvhat s rts of paths n1ight hc set ff upon to d is cnd?

In my oPini n, thcrc arc Only t v P ssib itics Eithcr the translat r lea cs thc
auth r in PcacC as rnuch as PosSiblC and m cs the rcadcr t0 vard hi1n; r hc lca cs
thc reader in PcacC as much as possiblc and m ves the vvritcr to vard hi1n, These
t v
Paths arc s vcry(liffcrcnt fr n nc anothcr that onc Or thc Othcr rnust ccrtainly
bc f ll
vcd as st1ictly as P ssiblc, any attCmPt to c mbinc thcm bcing ccrtain to

producc a highly unrchablc rcsult and t

carryvith it thc dangCr thatvritcr and

rcadcr n1i:ht n1iss cach othcr comPlCtCly Thc diffcrcncc bctvvccn thcsc t
vo
mcth ds,as vvcll as thcir relati nshiI)t nc anothcr, should bc ob ious at once
F r

in thc Hrst casc the translat r is cndcav ring, in his v rk, t

thc rcadcr s inability to undcrstand thc

mPCnsatc for

riginal lan8uagc Hc sccks t imPart t the

rcadcr thc samc imagc,thc samc imprcssion that hc hirnsclf rcccivcd thanks to his
kno vlcdgc of thc original language of the
v rk as it
vas
Vrittcn, thus moving
thc rcadcr to his vvn P Sition, onc in faCt forcign to hirn Yct if thc translati n

Vants to makc its R man author,say,sPeak as hc v uld have sP kcn and /rittcn
as a(Jcrman to Gcrmans,this v uld not lllcrcly rn vc thC auth r as far as the P si~
tion of thc translator_ for t hirn as vcll the author sPeakS n

t German,but Latin

~but rathcr thrust hi1n(lircctlv into thc vorld ofthe German readers and turn hi1n
into onc ofthcn1;this,thcn,is thc scc

nd casc.The rst

translati n
ill bc Pcrfect

in its way if onc can say that f thc auth r had lcarnc(l Gcrman just as wcll thc
tramslator has lcarncd Latin,thcn hc

v uld

hac translatcd his vork, vrittcn orig~

inally in Latin, no diffcrcntly than thc translat r has d nc, Thc Othcr mcth d,
h vvc vcr, sho ving

thc author n t as he hilnsclf

v uld

havc translatcd but thc vvay

that hc as a Gcrman vould ha c vrittcn originally in Gcrman,can hardly ha e any

ther standard f Pcrfccti n than if onc c ukl claIl,lf r certain that,ifthc Gc1 rnan
rcaders vcre transformcd nc and allinto c nnoisscurs and conten lD rarics of thc
auth r,thc w rk itsclf w tlld apPcar just thc samc to them as n w,d1c auth r
having bccn transformcd int a Gcrman,thc translation docs This is n d ubt thc
method ima8ined by all thosc vho likc to say that onc should translate an author
just as hc himsclf w uld havc wHttcn in Gcrman From this juxtaP siti n it is
in11ncdiatcly clear h
diffcrcnt a Pr cCdurc is rcquircd in each Particular instancc,
and h vv,vCrC Onc to tergi ersatevithin a singlc vork,thc vvhole , uld bcc

mc

unintelligiblc and pr ntless Yct I vvill c ntinuc to insist that besidc thcsc t

mcth ds thcrc can cxist no third nc that n1ight serve somc Particular cnd F r
t11crc are no othcr P ssible vays of Pr cecdin8,The t v seParatC PartiCs lllust bc
unitcd either at somc Point bct vccn thc t vo- and thatvill al vays bc thc position
f thc translator~or clsc thc Onc must bctakc itself t thc Othcr,and nl onc of
thesc t v Possib ities hcs vithin thc rcallll of translati

n,for thc thcr could ccur

only if,in our casc, the Gcrman readcrs vvcrc to achicvc c

r11Pletc mastcry of thc

Roman tonguc or rather v uld themsel cs bc mastcrcd by it to thc P int f

thch

50

FRIEDRICH sCHLEIERMACHER

ultimatc mctamorphosis, so
vhatcvcr elsc Onc hcars said ab

ut translati ns that

adhcrc t thc letter r to thc mcaning ofa work,that arc

th Jl r cc,and

what

cvcr othcr cxPrcsSi ns n1ight n

v bcin c rnrnon usc~if thcsc t o are suPPosCd
bc diffcrcnt1ncthods,it n1ust be possiblc t dcri e thcm fl rll thc Original t

but if failings and irtucs arc to l)c dcscribed in thcse terms, thcn vhat is faithful
and truc-t lllcaning in the one rncthod, r tOo litcral rt o frcc, v l

ditcr

in thc

thcr It is thcrcf rc my intention, setting to one side all the various qucstions
regarding this subjcct that ha c already bccn trcatcd by thc c

nly the m st gcneral charactcristics of thcsc t

gnoscenti,to exan1inc
mcthods so as to PrcParc for a

morc gcncral understanding of thc charactcristic ad antagcs and dif cultics f cach,
thc cxtcnt tovhich each1n st fully achiCvCS thc goals of translation,and the lilnits

f aPPhcability in cach casc After such a c mPrehCnsivc survcy,thCrc vill remain

t

Vo matters to be trcatcd,for vhich this disc ursc is mcrcly thc introducti n

For

each of thc t v mcthods Onc n1ight outhnc a sct of instructions rcfcrring to thc

dif%rcnt rhctorical gcnrcs,and onc mi :ht comP c and judgc tllc mOst admirablc
cff rts that ha c bccn lnadc according to both vic /s,and by thesc mcans elucidatc
thc1natter cven ftlrthcr B th of thcsc tasks I n ust lea c to others, r at least to
anothcr occasion

Thc mcth d vh sc ai111it is to givc thc rcadcr, thr ugh thc translation, the
irnprcssion hc v uld ha c recci cd as a German rcading thc vork in thc original
languagc, must, to be surc, rst dccidc vhat s rt f undcrstanding of the riginal
language it intends, as it vcrc, to in1itate. For thcrc is

ne sort of understanding

that it rnay not il,litatc,and anothcr that it cannot,Thc Hrstis a schoolboyish undcr~
standing that bunglcs its vayith great eff rt and alll)ut distaste through linc aRcr
h lc, a living grasP of its
hne, and yet no fhere arri cs at a clcar sur cy of thC
contcnts Asl ng as the cducatcd Part of a nati n still has,on thc vholc,n cxPeri-

encc ofa dccPcr kn vvlCdgc of forcign tongucs,thcn1nay e cn th sc vho are furthcr

advanced be Prcserved l)y thcir guardian sPirits from undcrtaking translati ns of this
sort For if thcy vishcd t takc thcir
vn understandin8as a Standard,they thcIn~
sclvcs : ul(l be littlc understood and v uld achie e littlc;but if thei1

translation

vork could n t l)c

airncd to rcprescnt ordinary undcrstanding, thcn thc clumsy

bo cd quickly cnough fron thc stage During such a pcriod,thcn,free in1itations

sh uld Hrst a vakcn and vhct rcadcrs aPPctitcS f r forcign vvorks,and ParaPhraSe
PrCPare f ram rc gcncral undcrstanding, so as to pa c thc vvay for futurc trans_

vcvcr, that no translat r can in1itatc

lati ns,1 Thcrc is anothCr undcrstanding, h
F r let us c
tin

nsidcr th sc cxtraordinar

mcn such as Naturc is in thc habit somc~

es of Pr ducing,as ifto shov hcrsclf ablc to dcstroy c cn thc barricrs f nati nal

Particula1ity in individual cascs, ncn vho fccl such natural afnnity t a forcign statc
f bcing that thcy il,ll crsc themsclvcs, in b th thcir li cs and thcir th ughts,in a
f

rcign languagc and its vOrks,and as thcy occuPy thcmscl

rld,thcy allov

thcir nati c vorkl

cs entircly vith a forcign

and thcir native tonguc to bccomc quitc forcign

to thcm; r clse those thcr mcn

h0 arC dcstincd to rcPresCnt thc Po vcr f
sPCcch in all its glory and for vh m all the languagcs thcy can s mcho v acquirc
arc equally scr iccable and suit thcn1as if rnadc f
P

r thcn thcsc lucn stand upon a

int atvhich thc valuc of translation aPProachcS7cr ;since thcy arc ablc t grasP

f reign vorks

o
n

frcc Fr lll thc influence of thcir m thcr

tonguc,and to pcrccivc thcir

undcrstanding not in thcir rnothcr t nguc l)ut vith Pcrfcctly nati c casc in thc

oN THE DIFF,ERENT METHODs OF TRANSLATING

51

original language of thc v rk,and as they feel no incommc11surability at all bctvveen

thcir thought and thc languagc thcy a
c rcad ng, n translati n can c cr attain or
vatCr into thc sea,
dcPict t11cir understanding And just as it ould mcan Pourin
or into vine,if onc vishcd to translatc for thcm,so too arc thcy

vont to smilc in

ccrtainly n t unjustiHcd c ndescensi n, cvcn pity, at thc cxcrtions bcing madc in

bc sure,if the audicncc f r vhich thc translations arc bcing lnadc

rcsemblcd thcm,thcsc efforts ould bc nccdlcss Translati n,thcn,conccrns a statc

d s arca F r,t

0,and thc translator n1ust takc it as his goal to

furnish his rcader vith just such an il lagc and just such cnjoyn1Cnt as reading thc

v rk in thc riginal languagcvould ha e Pr

i(lCd thc vvcll cducatcd man vvh m
that lics uid
ay bct/een thcse t

vc arc in thc habit f calling,in thc bcst sense ofthc vord,an amatcur and conn

is~

scur,a man who is wcll acqu nted with thc fc,reign language,yct to whom it
remains nonctheless forci8n,vh must no longcr think cach dctail through in his
thcr t nguc likc a sch lb y bcforc hc is ablc to grasP thC vholc,yct vho,cvcn
vvhcre hc can take plcasurc unhindcrcd it1 thc beauty of a

vork, rc n1ains cvcr

conscious of thc(liffcrenccs bct :cen this language and his1uod cr tonguc. To bc

surc,thc don1ain of this s rt of translation and its purPosC reluain unccrtain cnough
c cn aRcr thcsc P ints havc l)ccn setdcd Only this much do
c scc,that just as
the inchnation to translatc cann t arise until a ccrtain forcign languagc abihty has
bccn cstabhshcd alu ng thc cducatcd,so too vill the art of translation gr
v and its

aim bc sct highcr and hghcr vhcn c nnoisscurship and thc taste R)1

reign vorks

bccomc morc idcsPrcad and morc advanced am ng thosc

h have traincd and
cducatcd thcir ears,

vid1out, ho 9c vcr, havi11gn adc thc study o languages thcir

Prirnary occuPation Yct at thc san1c tin1c vc cann0t deny that thc ln rc rcccPti c
the rcadcrs h lnjgbt avail then sclvcs f such translad ns, thc m rc to vcring
bcc mc thc(hficultics of thc task, ab vc a if nc c nsiders thc most charactcristic vorks f

art and scicncc Produced am ng a PcoPlc, thCsc naturally bcing thc

F j t h u ciS a h c,llcal en ty, ok
i1nP sSiblc t aPPrcciatC it rightly ithout an aPPrCciation ofits history,Languages
arc not invcntcd,and all arbitrary ork ne n ight undcrtakst t l,crf rlt1 n and in
thcn1 v ukl bc fc,lly;1 ather,they arc gradually disco crcd,and scicncc and art arc
thc f rccs by n1cans of hich this disc0 cry is furthcrcd and Pe1 ctcd Evcry Prcc
incnt spirit in
hom somc portion Of a nati n s ic vs takcs characteristic shapc in
ne ofthese t
o R r1s luust nccessalily labor vvithin his languagc t luakc this c mc

transl s Phn0PJ ol l t

ab ut,

and the vorks hc Pr duces must thcrcforc als c ntain Part f thc history
of the languagc T11is, to bc sure, causcs the translator of scicntiHc vvorks consid~
crable, yca, oftcn i11surmountable dif cultics; for vh cvcr, arn1ed
vitl adcquatc
kn ll:lcdgc,rcads a preen1incnt ork o this sOrt in its riginal tonguc :ill not fail
to notc thc inHucncc this rk has had 11thc lan

uagC He

ill n te vhich
ords

and ass ciations fidcas aPPCar to11in1thcrc in thc rst sPlend r ofn vclty;hc

sce hov they ha c insinuatcd themscl cs int thc languagc by

ay

of

vill

the sPcci c

nccds f

this spirit and its cxPrcssi C po v crs;and vhat hc thus11 tcs

ill largcly
detern1inc the impression hc rcceivcs Thcrcforc it bclon:s to thc task f transla~

tion t collllllunicatc just thcsc things to thc rcadcr;clse hc will l,e luissin8an

RCn

hat vas intcndcd for hin

quitc signiHcant Pa1 t of

Evcn n a small scalc,how oRcn

t()a nc
vord in thc rigi11al

But h
v is this to bc achie cdP
it haPPcn that thc tcr 1bcst colTcsPonding

l bc nc that in()ur la11guage is alrcady old and

52

FRIEDRIcH sCHLEIERMACHER

vorn out, so that thc translat r,

vould hc sho thc
ork

s c ntribution

to the

dcvel Pment f thc language, v l be f rced to intr duce f rcign content into thc

Passagc,deviating into thc rcahn

fi1nitati

n!How Ren,cvcn vhere

he is ablc t

st sirndar in ctymology and form

not give thc m st faithful account f the mcaning, nally obhging hi1nt call uP
ther associations _if hc v uld prcscrve thc immediatc c ntext! Hc vill havc t
rePlacC nc vvith nevv, vvill thc tcrn1that is m

consolc himsclf that hc vill bc ablc t makc uP f r thc l ss in ther Passagcs vvherc
thc auth r used only ld,fanlihar vords,and thus hc rnay still achicvc at largc

vhat
cannot be acc mPhShCd in cach individual casc If vc c nsidcr,ho vcvcr,a rnastcr s

ntcxt,his use f rclatcdv rds and thcir

roots in grcat quantities of vvorks that1nake refercnce to onc another,ho 'is thc
Po vCr t shaPe the languagc in a larger c

translator to Hnd bisvay,givcn that thc systcm of ideas and thc si:ns f r thcm in
his languagc arc comPlctCly diffcrcnt than in thc ori8inal,and thc r

instead of neatly corrcsPonding to onc anothcr,rather o

ts fthcv rds,

crlaP in thc m st curious

f thc translator c uld

PattCrnsP It is thcrcforc i1nPossible that the langua8e use
cohcrc c cry vhcrc in cxactly thc samcay as that of his author. Herc, thcn,hc

v l

ha c t

fhat hc cannot on thc vhole.

bc contcnt to achicve in thc Particular

He vill stiPulate as a condition for his rcadcrs that thcy do not con1Pare cach

vork

vith others by the same author vith thc samc rigor as`vould be aPPhcd by rcaders
n terms,indccd,that thcy
f the riginal,but rather considcr cach morc n its o
r c cn only
ithin
sh uld Praise hilll vhcn he succeeds vithin individual vorks,
thcir scvcral subscctions, in Prcscrving a ccrtain uniforn1ity in the intcntion of thc

morc imPortant l)jccts

Pr xics,

r the

inal c nHncd itsclf t

f di crcnt
that a givcn w rd is n t matched with a ho
n markcd by a miscellany of cxPrcSsi ns vvhcre thc Orig

translati

a sclcct fc v Thesc dif6cultics arc f

und abovc all in scicnti6c

rks; ther difsculties,and ccrtainly n t lCSsCr onCs,oCCur in the areas of Poctry

and artistical Prose, in vhich thc musical clcmcnt f language that rc cals itsclf in
rhythm and altcrati ns oft nc is itsclf cxPrcssi C and holds a highcr mcaning, It is

v rks
thcsc things arc disrcgardcd or dcstroycd,Whatcvcr,thcrcf rc,strikcs

scnsil)lc to all that the ncst sPirit,thc highcst rnagic of art in its rnost PCrfcct
is l st vhcn

thc judicious rcadcr of thc riginal in this resPcct aS charactcristic, as intcntional,

as ha ing an in ucncc n tonc and fcchng, as clccisi

c for thc n1imctic r musical

accomPanirnCnt fsPeech:all thcsc things Our translator1nustrcndcr But h vv oF en

~indccd,that vc arc not ob1igcd tO say

alvvays borders n the n1iraculous~d cs
nc snd dehty to rhythn and1ncl dy caught in irreconcilable c n ict vith dchty
t dialectic an(l grammar!H w dimcult it is t
Prevcnt,in thc ctcrnal back and
f rth f vhat is to bc sacri ced hcrc andvhat thcre, a result that Rcn is PrcciSCly
the lcast stting! Ho v cven morc difHcult that thc translator must al

vays comPel

hiInsclf to rcPlacC imPartially,

vhercvcr thc Pportunity Prcscnts itsclf, that of

vhicl bc has had t dePrivc thc rcader,not lctting hirnsclf shP,c en unconsciously,
into a Pertinaci us one-sidcdncss becausc his inchnations t)id him fa

or )nc artis~

tical elcmcnt abo c all thc d1crs!For if vhat he l es in thc vork f art is1norc
thc cthical subjcct mattcr and its tlcatmcnt,tlacn hc will bc thc lcss hkdy to n
h w Rcn

hc h donc an injusticc to the mctrical allcl muskd elemcn

te

of tllc rm

and, rathcr than thinking of ho v to Compcnsatc for the l ss, c ntent hirllsclf vith
a renderin8that tcnds cvcr lnorc to lightncss and,as it erc,to ParaPhrasc Sh uld
it haPPcn, ho vC Cr, that thc translator is a musician or skilled in mctrical =crsc,

0N THE DIFFERENT METHODS OF TRANsLATING

53

then l)c vill ncglcct thc logical element so as tO seizc hokl f thc musical, and as
he bec mcs cvcr rnorc clccply caught up in this onc~sidcdncss,he

v l nd

hcn comParing his translation as a vvholc t

increasingly bootlcss;and

his lab rs

thc riginal,

vill nnd that,

vid1out his1 cmarking it, hc will havc appr achcd ncarcr and
onc
nearer to that schoolb y inadcquacy that loscs sight of thc

vh lc

r thc sakc ofthc

)r vhen in the intcrcst of t11c lnatcrial likcncss of tonc and rhyth111xx hat is
Part
CxPressCd in onc languagC
vith hghtness and naturalncss is rcplaccd by clumsy,
(lisPleasing exPrcssions in the othcr,then a quitc diffcrcnt vcrall imPrcssi n lnust
result

Yct othcr(hfhcultics cmcr:e

vhCn the translator c nsidcrs his rclati nshiP t
thc languagc in
hich hcvritcs and thc rclationshiP f his translation t his othcr

vorks ExccPting thosc cxtraordinary n1astcrs vho ha c cqual con mand of several
languagcs, or cvcn hnd that one thcy1

avc lcarncd c mcs m rc naturall)t thclu

than thcir m thcr t nguC, mcn for vvhon

as has bccn said, it is n t PossiblC to

translate excePting thc 1,all ther Pc Plc,as flucntly as thcy1night rcad a lorcign
vill yct retain
tongue,
ing so a fcchng ofthe R,rcign, No v ho shall thc
`hilc(l
translator contri c to clisscn1inatc among11is rcadcrs this scnsc f cnc untcr"`g the

forcignvhcn hc prcsc11ts thcn

vith a translation in their0 vn tongue7surcly one

can rcPly that the s lution t this riddle has l n8bccn b i us,and that,rnorcovCr,
it has been s lvcd, all too oRcn PcrhaPs, m rc than
vcll enough; for the morc

the turns and gurcs f thc Original, thc n rc

PrcciSely thc translation adhcrcs t
f rcign it vvill sccn to its rcadcr By all 111eans, it is casy cnough to sn1ilc at this
Practice h1gcncral et if one is ar of Purchasing this PlCasurc too cheaPly, c)f
t11ro
ing out the n) st lnasterful atten1Pts and thc vc rst schoolb y eff rts ith thc
d
samcl)athvatcr,onc111ust adn it that an indisPcnsablc rcquircment for this n)cth
f

translating is a(lisp

sition fthc languagc that n t only dcParts from the quotidian

but lcts nc PcrccivC that it as not lcft to dcvcl p freely but rathcrvas bcnt to a
forei:n likCncss;and it n1ust bc confcsscd t11at achic

ing this vith art and mcasurc,

ith dctri111cnt ncithcr to oncsclf n rt thc languagc,is PcrhaPs thC grcatcst(lifhcult) ur translat r111ust Confront, This undcrtaking vould apPcar to bc thc m st
cXtrtlordll ly hnn0f humiliat0n to which a iri r of8omc qualky can stll)jcct
hilnscl ,
Vh would not hkc to makc his nati e tonguc aPPcar CvCrywhcre
disPlaying thc n10st sPlcndid charactcristiC bcauty allo`vcd by each gcnrc7
Vho

v ukl 110t prcfer to bcgct children

vho xs
uld Purcly rcPrcsent thCir fathcrs
.

hncagc rathcr than n1

ngrcls7Who xs uld

suffer hilnscll t

be sccn n1ovi11g ith

f
hich he is caPable,and to aPPCar at least
as to chsPlcasc thc readcr just enough to keeP hhn

far lcss hghtncss and g1 acc than that

occasionally harsh and stilr s

hat ne is aboutP Who vcould gladly conscnt tO be considcred ungainly

conscious of
f r

stri

ing to adhcrc s closely to the f reign tongue as his o vn languagc allo vs,

and to bcing critici'cd, ke parcnts vho entrust thcir childrcn t

tun11)lcrs f r their

cducatiOn, for ha ing failcd t exercisc his lu d)er tonguc in thc sorts of gy11)nastics nati

ct it,instcad accuston1ing it to alicn,unnatural cont rtions! And vho,

vith ut1nost condcsccnsi n by

PrcciSely thc grcatest rnastcrs and conn isscurs, vho assure hiln that thcy vould bc
cntircl):unal)lc to undcrstand his laborious,ill-c nsidcred Gcrrnan if thcy had not
thcir kn0 ledgc of Greck and Latin to con1c to thcir aid! Thcsc arc thc sacriices
c ery translator fthis sOrtis obhgcd t 111akc,tbcsc thc dangcrs to
hich hc cxPoses
hnally, oul(l
vish t scc hhnself smilcd upon

54

FRIEDR1cH sCHLEIERMACHER

hilnsclf if, in his attcmPt to Preser

lati

c a f

rcign tonc in thc langua:c of1 is trans_

n,hc(locs not bserve that6ncst f liI1cs,and thcse arc dan8crs and sacri

ccs

hc cannot l)oSSil)ly avoi(l outright, as every PcrsOn dra vs this line in a slightly
(liffcrcnt sPot If hC thh1ks no of the incvitablc in uencc habit rnust havc~ vcll,

thcn, may hc fear that c cn his

vn Frcc ly comPoScd, c)riginal
ritings could l)e

invadcd by coarse and impr Pcr clen ents originating in his o vn translations, and
his dchcatc scnsibnity f r the nativc c )Cing of his o
) languagc l)lunted And
sh ul(l

hc darc to considcr that grcat a

n1y of illnitators and the ind

lencc and

mcdi crity that Pre ail in litcrary circlcs,thcn surcly11C luust l)e seized vith tcrr r
at the thOught ofthc sl cnly clisrcgard for thc rulcs of euPh

ny,thc gcnuinc
ood-

enncss and(hss nancc,thc clctrilnent to thc languagc in arious forms for vhich hc

may no bc hckl joindy rcsPonsiblc; R)r ahnOst only thc cry bcst and thc vcry

orst 111110t

stri C to Pro

t lscly onl l)is cfforts Thc crics that translation of

this sort1uust nccessar y11avc a dctri1 1ental c=`Qct fron1 ithin n thc Purity0f thc

languagc and thc Pcaccf111c ursc of its dcvcloPn cnt ha c ftcn bccn11eard E en
if wc ch osc to dismiss thcm

rd1cm l)1cnt

with thc pcrhaPs CmP0P1 misc tlaat

advantages arc surc to accompany these dctrhnents,and that c

en as all:ood thin:s

come Vith an adn1ixturc of bad,the visc coursc of aCti n ill

alvvays be t

as n1uc11as P0ssiblc ofthe l

acquirc

Dr111Cr vhile takiI1g along as littlc as Possil)le f thc latter,

the difH(lult task f rePresenting the forcign in nc so vn n10thcr to11guc v l rnOst

certainly bring vith it certain consequcnccs First, it is clcar that this mcth d of
translating cannot ourish cqually vcll in all t ngucs,but rathcr only in thosc that
v bounds of a classical st lc bc nd vhich all clsc
arc not conhncd vithin thc I1arr

is dcclned rePrchcnsible Let thcsc bounded languages scck to cxPand thch

tcrri

requirc morc than thcir nativc to11guCs to spcak

^fh
vhich these languagcs are n (loubt adn1irably suitcd; and lct
thcIll, son1ething t
tories by inducin

reigncrs

the 1aPPr PriatC f rcignvorks by mcans ofin1itations or PcrhaPs translati ns of

that ther s rt;but this s rt of translation thcy must lea e t the frecr languagcs

in
vhich dc iations and i11novations are n1orc rcadilv t lcratcd, sucb t11at thcse
de iations

may, in d1C end, co1nbh1c t Pr ducc a nc`v charactcristic modc of

f llo s clCarly cn ugh that this s rt f translati n has no valuc

at all ifit is practiccd only rand n11y in indi idual cascs in a givcn tonguc For hat
is bcin8aimCd at is plainly hr morc tha11mcrcly causing somc indi rcnt so f
ivCn an inkhng,
foreign spiI it to
aft in thc reader s(hrcction;rathcr,hc is t bc

v
hat
thc
rk

vcs t0 it, a1 d
if only a distant onc, of the riginal languagc and
cxPrCssion It als

thus s lne f vhat hc loscs for not undc1 standing the original t nguc is hcrc c

lll-

ihat hc is rcadi11g docs n

pcnsatcd: hc is not only to ha e a vaguc scnsc that

und unquestionably native to his

vn tonguc; rather it should sound foreign

in a quitc sPCci c vay;this,ho vcvcr,is only Possible if hc is able t l akc comPari_
sons on a largc scalc If hc laas rcad sc
cral vorks that he kn
vs VCrC translatcd
s

from lnodcrn languagcs and othcrs fron1ancient ones,and if all of thcn1

vere trans-

latcd in this
vay, thcn surcly hcv l dc cloP an car for thc diffcrcnccs bctvvccn

vever,
thc ancicnt and thc m dcrn Hc vill havc to have read a great deal rn rc,h
be rc hc can diffcrcntiatc bctwcen Works of Hcllenic and R rnan origin,or Italian
and sPanish, A11d yct cvcn this v uld hardly l)e thc highcst goal;rather,thc readcr

f thc translation vill be a match f r thc l)cttcr rcadcr of thc rigi11al vork only

vhen hc is ablc t scnsc and eventually grasPvith conHdcncc n t only thc sPirit

0N THE DIFFERENT METHODs OF TRANsLATING

f the language but als thc aud

or

55

s characteristic sPirit,f r vhich,to

be sure,the

talcnt f intuiti e PercCPti n is thc only P ssil)lc Organ,yct to this end,t o,a far
grcater nun 1)cr of comParis ns arc uttCrly ncccssary ThcSC c

mParisOns cannot

be madc if only indi i(lua1 1nastcrPicccS in individual gcnrcs arc translatcd Evcn
the mOst c(lucatcd readcrs will acquirc in this way only a highly imPer
ct know~
lcdge of thc f reign throu:h translati n;it is inconcci ablc, thcn,that thcy 1ight

d of brmll g actual judgmcnts,bc it ab ut transladons ro1 lginals

This s rt of translation, thcn, clcarly requircs a large~scalc
n, the trans~
r^c to tl c lc

Perati

:aluc
planting of cntirc litcraturcs into a single tonguc, and it has meaning and
only in a natiOn
vhose PeoPlc arc fa orably disPoscd t aPProPriatc thc f reign
Individual
0rks f this sort ha c valuc nly as forcrunncrs of a morc gcncrally
dcvcl ping and burgcOning inchnation If thc cann t arousc the desire to foll
v

this Practice,then thcrc must bc sOmcth ng against thcm in thc spirit ofthc language

and ofthe ume;thcy will aPPcar SimPly as F11ilcd attcmP

ancl Cnjoy httlc or no
succcss Yct c cn if this business PrCvails, it can hardly bc cxpcctcd that a vork
of this s rt,sPlcndid as it might be,will cnj y gCncr aPProbad n Gi cn all
that rnust bc taken int

c nsidcrati

n,all thc dif cultics t

bc surmountcd,diffcrent

ic vs vill dcveloP as t
hich Parts f thc task arc t be emPhasizCd and
hich

dccmcd sub rdnatc,And so(11fkrent schools,as it wcrc,w l brm among thc

astcr Practitioncrs, and d rcnt PartiCs of tl cir adhcrcnts among thc rcading
Pubhc; and cvcn though it is the same mcthod that f rms the basis f cach
n

ns ofthc samc vork n ade fr m diffcrcnt PointS f vie

ill bc ablc t cocXist, and it , uld bc (lifHcuIt t say that any onc of thcn is
as a
vholc m re PerfCct than the thcrs or falls sh rt in mcrit; rathcr, ccrtain
PaSsagcs vill Pr vc m rc suCccssful in nc vcrsion, and othcr passagcs in anothcr
vcrsion,and only thc sum of all thcsc takcn togcthcr and in rclation t
each othcr
~thc
vay onc placcs Particular aluc On apProxllllating thc original languagc,` hilc
the ther rather insists that n iolencc be d nc t its o vn~ ill ful ll thc task
sch ol,diffcrent translati

mPlchtcly,cllld CaC h h its =nH t xslll dw S ha c on rdatl alld su

cctiw

value
Thcsc arc the dif cultics that PPosC this rncthod of translating, and thc flavcs
inherent in it, Yct e cn givcn thcsc, onc must stnl ackn

vledgc the lcgitil11acy of

thc undcrtaking itsclf,vvhose achic cmcnts cannot bc dcnied It is foundcd n t

0
basic c nditi ns that thc understanding of forcign texts bc aCkn
vlcdged as a
kn
vn and dcsirablc statc, and that a ccrtain flexibihty bc grantcd to our nati

tonguc,
hcrc both conditions arc1nct,translation f this s rt vill aPPcar a quitc
natural phcnomenon that in ucnces thc cntirc intcllcctual dc cl Pmcnt fa nauon,
and evcn as it is givcn a ccrtain value,it

But
hat of the oPPositC lncthod,

vill n t fail to gi c Plcasurc as

cll

:hich, ishing to sPare its rcadcr all cxcr~

tion and toil,scts uttO suInmon thc f rcign author as ifby rnagic int

his i 11ncdiate

the v rk as it voul(l bc had thc author hirnsclf vvrittcn it

PrCsCncc and to sh
originally in thc rcadcr s t ngucP This (lcmand has often bccn citcd as
nc that
sh uld bc madc of a truc translat r,rcprcscntin a far noblcr and morc Pcrfcct ai1n
than the ne Prcvi usly describcd;and indi idual attcmPtS ha c bccn undcrtakcn,
PCrhaps c cn mastcrPicccs, that have clcarly cnou ::h assigned it as thcir goal Lct

us no v look at h

mattcrs stand ith regard to this thcr1ncth d,andvhctl cr

v indisPutably lcss common,

it n1ight n t pcrhaPs bc g od if this Practice, till no

56

FRIEDR1cH sCHLEIERMACHER

vere to bc n10rc frequently Cnc untcrcd and

verc t rcPlacC the qucstionablc
nc that is in s
anyvays lacking
It is in rnediately

obvious that the translator s languagc has nothing at all to fear

m this mct11od Hi8 rcm st rulc,

t

af rcign tonguc,rnust bc t

in any righ1al

v rk

`c11d1e reltltion in

vhich his work sttn11(ls

vcd
fthc samc genre vrittcn in his nativc tonguc h`dccd,as n uch
allo v hi111sclf n thi11g that

voul(l not also be all

as anyonc hc has thc duty to hccd at lcast thc same concern for thc Purity and Pcr~
f

cti n f

his languagc and t attcmPt to achiCvc thc samc lightncss and naturalncss

stylc f r vhich his auth

rn1ight bc cxtollcd in thc riginal This t is certain

n akc clcar t
ur cornI)atri tS vhat a vritcr s vork mcant f r
thc languagc in hich he vrotc it, vc can nd nol)cttcr f rmula than t introduce
that if vc vish t

ur language sPeakin:in such a ay as

c must assuluc hc
vould ha c
had ur languagc bccn his
n,Pa1 ticularly if thc stagc of dcveloPI cnt that
his anguage()ccuPicd
hCn hc can)ct it bears son1e silnilarity to thc onc currcntly
ccuPiCd l)y urs, In a ccrtai11scnsc, it is PosSil le f r us to th"1k ofh
v Tacitus
n1ight havc sPokcn had hc bccn Gcrn1an,
r, t bc m rc Precisc, ho a Gcrman

v ukl spcak
h sc rclati nship to our languagc`vas thc samc as that of Tacitus t
his

n; and happy is hc vh is ablc to imaginc this so vividly that11c can rcally

makc him sPcak!Yct whcthcr this = uld succccd if thc ansht r ha(l hm say just
hiln int
SP kCn

the same things as thc Roman Tacitus saklin Latin is quite a diffcrcnt question,onc

c. For it is onc thing to grasP corrcctly and

someh xx:rcPrcsCnt thc innucncc that a rnan has had uPon hiS lan uagc,and an thcr
difHcult t ans vcr in thc afHrmati

thing alt gethcr to gucss at thc turns that11is thoughts and their cxPrcssi

havc takcn l,ad bc origi1 ally been used t

ot11er tonguc! Vhoc

cr is c n h1ced

n oukl

thi11ki11g and c PrcsSi11g hin self in sOn1c

ofthc inncr,csscntial idcntity l)ctxx:ccn thought

and cxPrcssi n~and this c mviction torms thc basis f r thc cntirc art of undcr~
standing sPccch an(l thus f all anslatio11as cll~can hc wish t sc era man iom
his nati c tonguc and still behc c that this man, or c cn so much as a train of
thought, n1ight turn ut the same in t
languagcsP C)r if thc train of thought is
thcn in s mc

ay diffCrcnt, can hc PrCsumc to brcak do vn sPeech to its inlnost

corc so as tO seParatC ut that Part Playcd l)y lan8uagC and thcn thr

ugh a ncxs and,

ccss conjoin thc inncr corc of sPccch vith thc l)cing and
f rcc of anothcr tongueP For vouklit nOt secn that to carry out this task one nust
as it vcrc, chcn1ical pr

flrst ch111iL1atc c

cxtcnt, thc in
childh

crything in a n1an

rittcn x1 ork t1 at sh
s
vcd,c

cn to the shghtcst

uencc f all he had sPoken and hcard in his 111other tonguc fron1

od on,and thcn add,as it cre, to his naked characteristic vay F thinkng

in its aPProach t a particular bjcct all that v uld have rcsultcd h on1all hc vould

in assembhng organic Products through an artihcial chen1ical process h)dced, onc

can say that thc goal of t anslating just as d1c auth r himsclf w uld ha c writtcn
originally in thc languagc of thc translati
itsclf null and
i(l;

f r vh cvcr

n is not only unattainable,but is also in

ackno vledgcs thc forn1ativc po vcr f lan uagC,

vhich is Onc ith thc Particular nature f a PcoPlC, must also conccde that the
entirc kno =ledge of e en the most cxccPti nal1nan,as vcll as his abdity to rcPrc~
scnt it,has c mc to hi1n with and through languagc,and that n

onc has his languagc

0N THE DIFFERENT M ETHODs OF TRANSLATING

57

n1cchanically attachcd to hi1n fr lrll thc outsi(lc as if by straPS,s that nc n1ight,as

eas y as ncvould

unharncss a tcan of horses and rePlacc it vith anothcr,harncss

uP a nC v language as it haPPcncd t Suit one s frame ofrnind;but rathcr that cach

PerS n

ProducCs riginally only in his1nothcr tonguc,and that thc qucstion of ho v

hc v uld havc vritten hisv rks in an thcr languagc ought not cVcn to bc raised.

11nonly cn ugh n ct can be ffcrcd hcrc to countcr

my examplcs First,therc is clcarly such a thing as the ability to vritc in languagcs
T l)c surc,tvvo cascs that are c

thcr than onc s nativc tongue,cvcn in the arcas of ph osoPhy and poctry,and this
not only aPpears in is latcd cascs, although such cascs c ntinuc to ccur, 1)ut is

quitc common Why,thcn,sh uld nc

n t,t

a ail ncsclf

of a m re rehablc P int

f rcfcrcncc, suPPosC this ability in c cry auth r ne intends to translatcP What

sPcaks against this is that thc ab

ity is so constituted as t

aPPcar only in th sC cascs

in vhich the sa1ne thing c uld cithcr n t be said at allin a lnan

at least n t by hi1n If vc go l)ack in tiIne to

s native tongue or

hcn thc R mance languages`vcrc

beginning to cmcrge, ho could say vvhat language vas nativc to thc Pcoplc li ing
thcn?And
h
vould vant to deny that for th se ith scholarly asPirations Latin

vas n ore a nativc tongue than thc

crnacular?This gocs rnuch dcePcr for sPcci c
intcllectual activitics and nccds As l ng as thc n 0thcr tonguc has n t yet grovvn
t

st thesc nccds, thc languagc in hich cndca ors of thc spirit rst announccd

t11cmsclvcs to a PC PlC still undcrg ing dc cloPn1cnt rcmains thcir partial rnothcr
tongue Gr tius and Lcibnitz could n t,at lcast vvithout ha ing bccn ther Pe Plc

c xl-rittcn phdosoPhy in Gcrman and Dutch. Indeed, e en if thc r t

gcthcr and thc runncr bccn t rn a vay R n1 thc old trunk,
:h cvcr is not hi1nsclf a bcing sin ultaneously engaged in shaPing and uPr otin8hiS
cntircly, ha

has shri cled uP alt

language vvill oRcn bc forccd to cleavc t

some f reign lan uagc either ch scn arbi~

trarily or dictated by sccondary c nsidcrations All thc n blcst and ncst th ughts

f ur grcat kng2camc to him in a brcig111anguagc,which hc had madc his mOst

inti1nate ProPCrty Hc could n tP sSibly ha c vrittcn in Gcrman thc philosoPhy
and P etry hc set do vn in French It is rcgrcttablc that thc grcat lo

c ccrtain

mcmbcrs of his fan ily hcld for England di(ln t rcsult in his ha ing bccn instructcd
in English i lu an cady agc,a tonguc hr cl scr to Gcrman,and nc wh sc la
as then in fu Rover But
c can Ccrtainly h Pc thatifhc had cnj ycd
goldcn agc
a1norc rigorous sch larly Cducation,hc ould rather ha c vvrittcn his ph osophy

and poctry in Latin than in Frcnch, sincc, thc1

this instancc, it bcing only in a Particular f

cf rc, spccial c nditi ns adhcrc in

rcign languagc and not in somc arbi-

trardy choscn onc that cach Person achicvcs sOmc particular airn that c uld not havc

bccn reahzcd in his mothcr tonguC, it cannot scrve as c idcncc f r a mcth d f

translation that lncans tO sh
v us ho vs mc nc n)ight havc vvrittcn in some othcr
languagc
vhat he in fact has
ritten in his m thcr ton uc ThC SCc nd case,
h
/c cr,
hich c nccrns rCading and vriting originally in f reign languagcs, vould

appcar morc promising r this mcthod F r who would wish to belitdc ur

courticrs and mcn of thcvorld by dcnyin8that the Prctty sPccchcs that triP fr
their tongucs in arious languagcs vcrc not als

c ncci

cd on1thc Outsct in thcsc

langua es and n t, say, rst translatcd in their heads fron1 thc shabby GermanP

And ju as tllcy e

hmcd r belng ablc to uttcr thesc gtarPlumS f Cl ,quencc

equallyvcll in vari us languagcs,they no doubt think thclla in a thesc lan uagcs

vith cqui alcnt casc, and cach f then

v l no doubt bc instantly in a Position to

58

FRIEDRIcH SCHLEIERMACHER

sa how thc Othcr w uld ha c rmulatcd h Itahan what hc hasjust shed sa ng

in French Yet thcse sPeeches,to be sure,d n t lic in a sPhcrC invhich th ughts
sh t uP f rcefully fl o 1the deeP r
ts f a Particular languagc; thcy arc rathcr

hkc thc vvatcrcrcss that an artR11rnan causcs to sprout vvithout s

il on a vhitc cloth

Thcsc sPccches rePrescnt language neither i11all its sacrcd gravity nor in its Plcasant,

vc lucasurcd Play; rathcr, just as thc Pc Plc of( fFcrcnt nations havc bcgun to

intcrn1inglc in a vay f rmcrly not oftCn sccn,so do vc nd a rnarketPlacc a ar und

us,and tllese conversations arc markct talk,be they Political

r litcrary in contcnt,

or mcrcly con i ial, and they truly fall n t vithin thc domain of the translator,
but rathcr~shall c savP~that fthc intcrprctcr Now whcn sPccch f this s rt,
as somctirncs haPpCns, is intcr vo cn into a PiCcC of vriting, such vriting, vvhich
disP rts itsclf cntircly in thC bright and gay rcachcs of hfc

vithout dcl ing int the

r caPturing thc charactcristic naturc of a pcoPlc, may

Profunditics of existencc

vell be translated acc rding to this rulc;but only vriting of this sort,f r it alonc
1uightjust as wcll havc bccn sct down riginally in anothcr languagc And this rulc
may cxtcnd n furthcr than,say,thc prcfaccs and PreamblCs f rn re sPlendid and
found v rks,
vhich cn arc c nstructcd cntirely in thc rcahn of light social
Pr
intcrcourse For thc morc thc sPcciHc naturc of a PcoplC lCavcs its mark on thc
nl etvvCCn thcn
individual th ughts that apPcar in a vork and the c nncctions dra
t

vhich PerhaPs may CvCn bc added thc stamP of an agc long Past,thc m

rc this

rulc vill ccasc to ha c lncaning For,truc as it rcmains in luany resPects that

thr ugh thc kn vvledge ofscvcrallanguagcs docs a lllan l)cc

nly

mc educated in a ccrtain

scnsc and a cosm P lite,wc must a thc same cn ss thatjust as wc cannot acccpt
as true cosmoPolitis1 onc that at critical momcnts suPPlantS a man sI c f his
fathcrland, s tooVith rcgard to languagcs is a gcncral love not thc ProPer,truly
educati nal sort if, in b th quotidian and noblcr contcxts, itould just as soon

substitutc somc othcr languagc, ancicnt or modcrn, f r thc Paternal t ngue ,nc
must bc loyal to nc languagc or anothcr,just as to onc nation, or clsc drift disoricntcd in an unl cl in-bct`ccn rcahn It is stting that Latin should still be uscd
among us r mcial busincss,lcst wc forgct that ths was thc sacred scicntiic
m thcr ton uC f our forcbcars;it is salutary,too,that this PracticC should c ntinue
throughout the Eur pcan scicnti cc11nunity so as to facilitatc intcrchangc; yet
c cn

in this casc it vill succccd onl to thc cxtcnt that in thesc vorks thc subjcct

ie vs and spccial lnanner of luaking con~

vritcr s
lds truc fR mancc languages Whoc cr is
rccd to w tc such a language in so 1c omoal caPa0ty will cert nly bc wcll awarc
that his th ughts,as thcy a1 C rst conccivcd,arc Gcrman hc rncrcly bcgins to trans-

mattcr is cvcrything and thc

nections count for littlc Thc samc h

latc thcm vvhile thc embrv

is still in an carly stagc of(lcvcl

pmcnt; and vhocvcr

makcs thc sacrincc f vriting in anothcr languagc for thc sakc f scientisc inquiry

ill be ablc t
vritc frccl and vithout constraint,rathcr than secrctly translating
as hc gocs al ng,only when hc can l sc himsclfin his su cc t mattcr To bc surc,
thcrc arc thosc ho Vritc in Latin and Frcnch f r thcir oxxn amuscmcnt,and if the
ity
crc truly to vrite cqually as vc and as rigina y in thc f rcign
ai
`of this acti
ickcd and
v uld not hcsitatc to (lcclaI c this a
tonguc as in onc s oxsrn, thCn I
s
magical art likc the trick f doubhng oncsclf,an atten1Pt not nly to m ck thc la
f nature but also t

bc vdder

This,h vvcver,is clcarly n t its design;rathcr,this

actoJt is onl a s rt of tastc,hl mimetic gamc th allows one to ilc away a

0N THE D1FF9ERENT METHODS OF TRANsLATING

59

pleasant hourin thc antcchambcrs ofscicncc and art What nc ProducCSin a forcign
tonguc is n t original; rather, 1ncmorics of sOmc Particular vritcr or PcrhaPs the

stylc of a ccrtain pcriod,rcPrcscnting, as it vcrc,somc gcncral Pcrs nagc,aPPcar

bef rc the1nind s cyc ahn st likc a living imagc in thc Outsidc Vorld,and the in1itation of this image guidcs and dc ncs vhat onc Pr duccs,Thus rarcly docs anything
Comc about by this l11eans that n1ight havc truc vorth beyond n1imctic precision;
and one s PlCasurc in this PoPular trick is all the rn
illlitated is rcadily visiblc thr ughout,But

re innocuous as thc pcrson bcing

ifsome ne has turncd against naturc and

Custom and dcscrted, as it vcrc, his m ther t ngue, devoting hilnself instead to
anothcr,it nccd n t bc affcctation or mockcry
hcn hc assurcs us he is n longcr
in a PoSition to movc frccly in his nativc languagc;rathcr,by this justiscation hc is
sccking to convincc hhnsclf that his nature really is a natural vvondcr that subvcrts
all hicrarchiCs and la vs,and to rcassure othcrs that hc is at lcast n tvall0ng about
d uble

likc a ghost,

Yct too l ng havc vc tarried over mattcrs forci8n to ur inquiry,crcating tllc

irnprcssion that ve lncant to spcak of v rks vrittcn in f reign tongucs rathcr than

anslati ns iom thcm In hct,it is as fDllows r it is imP

in a f rcign langua

ssible t

writc o nally

es mCthin8that at oncc rcquircs and is v rthy of translati n,

insofar as translation is an art,or if this rnust at lcast bc sccn as a rarc and ndrous

cxccption,thcn onc cannot Put f rth as a rulc for translation that it Fnust d1ink

h w

thc auth r himself w uld ha e writtcn just thc samc thing h the translator

thcre arc all t ft,w cxamPlcs f hlhgual writcrs iom wh m wc

might derive an analogy vhich thc translator might follo v; rather, in acc rdancC

vitl thc f rcgoing, he

vill havc littlc m re than his imagination t assist hin in
dcahng hthvorks that rcscmblc ncither li8ht Cntcrtainmcnt nor thc style f busi_

tonguc; r

ness tnnsacdons Indccd,what ettion can bc madc if a tlanslator says to his

k asthc man v uld have vrittcn it had hc vrittcn
readcr I crc I bring you thc b
in German;and thc rcadcr rcsPonds:I am just as obhgcd to you asifyou had br ught
mc thc PicturC fa man thc ay hc vould l ok if his m thcr had concci cd hirn
by a diffCrent father?For ifin all

v rks

bclon ing in the higher sense to the rcahns

f scicncc and art thc auth r s charactcristic sPirit iS the rn ther,thcn thc fathcr is
his PatCrnal tonguc Each of thcsc artisccs v uld lay claiFn t mystcrious insights
t

hich no ne is Pri y, and nly in play can ne cnjoy thc onc r thc Othcr of
thcn1vithout rcser c,
That thc apphcability of this rncth

d is g1

catly lirnitcd,bcing indccd vcll_ni8h

zcro hcrc translation is conccrncd,is bcst b

rnc ut vhcn nc observcs thc insurmountablc dif culties vith hich it so ften bccomcs cntanglcd in ccrtain branchcs
of thc scicnccs and arts since onc must conccdc that c
are only a vcry fc

f vords

cn in cveryday usage there

vords

in any gi en t nguc that corresPond PCrfcctly t0

in any othcr such that thcse latter can bC emPl

yed in any contcxt suitablc to thc

formcr,and that in corrcsPon ng contcx caCh will Producc just the same efect
as the thcr,this is rn rc truc oftcrms thc m rc thcy ha c a ph osoPhical imPort,

vhich

is ab vc all thc casc in PhiloS

phy propcr Hcrc1norc than any vhcrc is it thc

case that any languagc, dcspitc thc diffcrcnt concurrcntly and consecuti

ely hcld

vicvvs cxPressCd in it, cncomPasscs

vithin itsclf a singlc systcm of idcas vvhich,
PrCciscly bccause they are c ntiguous, linkin: and c mPlcmCnting onc anothcr
wid n this languagc,brm a sin e whole~wh sc se eral Pa s,h wCvcr,(l not

60

FRIEDRIcH sCHLEIERMACHER

corresPond to th sc to bc f und in c mParablc systems in other lan uagcs,and this

is scarcely cxcluding CJod and

F r c

bc/

thc noun f nouns and thc verb f verbs

cn uni ersals, vhich lic utsidc thc rcall l f Particularity,arc illun ined and

col rcd

visd m f

by thc Particular This languagc systen1subsumes the

all indi~

viduals Each dra vs fron1 vhat is PrCsCnt, and hclPs t bring to light vhat is n

yet present but only Prc gurcd Only thus can thc visd m of thc indi idual comc
ah e,and nly thus can it go crn his existencc, vhich hc sets do vn cntircly vithin

this languagc If, thcn, thc translat r f a philosophical auth r is not rcsolvcd t
bcnd thc languagc of his translation t accord t thc grcatcst PosSiblC extcnt vith
thc languagc of the riginal so as to8i c aS full a scnsc as Possiblc f thc syStC 1 f
ideas inhcrcnt in this Othcr lan8uagC, if hc sccks,rathcr,to have his auth
r sPcak
as th

ugh hc had originally f rmed his th ughts and f rmulatcd his uttcrances in

anotller language,vhat choicc vill this translat r ha c,givcn thc unhkcness f thc
elements in the t

lan8uagcs?Eithcr he must ParaPhrase

vhich vill

his PurP sc, for a ParaPhrasc can and vvill ncvcr aPPcar to ha

originally h thc samc languagc~or clsc he musttransbrm hs man

n t ful

s cntirc wis<l

and kn0 vlcdgc into thc systcm ofidcas in the othcr languagc,transforn
Parts acc rdingly,in vhich casc it is hard t

ll

c bccn comPoscd

ing all its

scc h
v thev dest arbitrariness could

bc kePtvithin bounds,Indccd,it rnust be said that vhoc er has the shghtest resPect
vill hardly l9c found engaging in
f r Phil soPhical aspirati ns and de cl
PmcntS
such ca ahcr play,Lct Plato ans ver for it ifI n vv Pr

cecd o1n y discussion of

ph osophcrs to thc vriters of comcdics,;This litcrary genre lies,as rcgards its use

f language,closcst to the rcalln

dra vs

fs cicty c nvCrsation

Thc cntirc rcPrcsCntation

its brcath fron1thc custo 1s of thc agc and of a particular nati n,and thcsc

in turn Find thcmscl cs mOst aPtly rCHCcted in its lan :uagc Lightncss and naturalncss in gracc arc its principal irtucs;and prcciscly for this rcason thc difEculties of

translation accordin8t thC method ve ha e bcen considcring are forn1idablc F

C Cry

attcmpt to aPprOxi1natc Onc s languagc to a f rcign tonguc is dctrilncntal

to thcsc virtucs as thc cxist ithin a vork And if thc translati n novv scts out to
makc a Playxsright sPcak as though he had vritten originally in the langua c ofthc
translation,thcn thcrc ill bc many things hc cannot bc allo
ed t utter, as thcy
arc not native to this particular nati n,for vhich rcas n thc languagc contains no
signs to cxPrCsS thcm Thc translator,thcn,lnust cxcisc Vhole Passagcs,destr ying
thC Po vCr and for1 f thevhole, r clsc Placc OthCrs in their stead In this area,
then, strictly foll

ving this formula vill lcad, it sccms, either to in1itation Plain

and si1nPlc rt an e en more disagrceably c nsPicu us and disc nccrting llaixturc

of translati n and in1itation, vhich rncrcilessly tosscs thc rcadcr back and f

rth likc

a ball l)ct vccn

hisvorld and thc f reign one, l,ct ccn thc invcnti c Po vCrs and

vit of the author, n thc Onc hand, and f thc translat r, n thc othcr,
hich is
ccrtain to bring hirrl no true Plcasurc but instcad rcsult,in thc cnd,in(lizzincss and
fatiguc Thc translator vho vvorks acc rding to thc othcr mcth d, l)y contrast,is
not callcd uPon t undcrtakc such singlc-handed transf rmati ns, sincc his rcader
is alva s

v rld and
vr tc in
to rcmain a varc that thc author li ed in anothcr

an ther t nguc

Hc is bound nly to thc adn1ittcdly difscult art of suPplying this

knowIcdge of the reign world by the swiRcst,m st e Caci us mcans,whilc
a

ving

thc grcatcr lightncss and naturalncss of thc

where These t

riginal t shine thr ugh e ery

v
cXamPlCs taken om thc hrthcst reachcs f science and art sh

0N THE DIF

ERENT METHODs OF TRANsLATING

61

clcarly ho v littlc thc truc goal f all translation,thc fullcst possil)lc unadultcratcd

cnjoymcnt of forci8nw rks,can bc achicvcd through a method that insists on

brcathing into thc translatcd rk thc spirit of a languagc foreign to it. NIorc vcr,
c ery languagc has its o vn charactcristic fcaturcs, including thc rhythms of its
cll as its P ctry,and ifthc sction is to be Put f
rth that thc author
Pr SC as
als ha c
vrittcn in the languagc of thc translat r, onc vould ha c t makc

night

hirn

aPPCar in the rhythms f this language, vhich v uld dis gurc his vork cvcn morc
and lirnit to a far8reater cxtcnt thc kn
vledgc of his particular charactcr,
vhich
thc translation vas to PrcscrvC

And in fact this cti n,vvhich al nc pr idcs the l)asis f r thc the ry f trans~
lating :e are at PrcsCnt considcring, gocs far bcyond the ailn f this cndcav r
Translation as rcgar lcd iom thc hrst P int f vicw is a mattcr of ncccssity r

a PCoPlC f vhom only a small numbcr are able t acquire sufncient knovvledgc of
hreign languagcs,whilc a largcr numbcr are rcccPtive t the c yment f brcign

vorks, If this latter grouP could bc subsumcd cntircly into thc f

rmcr, thcn all
translation
oul(l bc in vain and scarcely anyonc c ukl bc f und vho n1ight bc

villing to undcrtakc s thankless a task Not s

ith thc scc nd1uethod. It has
n thing to do vith nccd but rathcr is the v rk f vant nncss and Presumption
E cn

vvcrc thc kno dcd:C ff rcign languagcs as vidcly chstributcd as possiblc and

thcir noblcst vorks rcadily accessible t

any caPablC Pers n, still it v uld remain

a Pecuhar undcrtaking,one ccrtain to dra v all the rn re cagcr listcncrs,if s me ne

w us a work by Ciccr or Plat st aS thCsc gendcmen would havc

vrittcn it thcmsclvcs (hrcctl in Gcrman And if s mcOnc

CrC tO suCCced in
Pr miSed to sh

achie ing this not nly in his o vn native tongue butin nc f reign to hi1n,vc vvould

certainly thcn hail hhu as a grcat Inaster of the difEcult, all but imP ssible art of
making the sPirits of diffcrcnt t ngues interl1ainglc,But nc can scc that this
n t be translation in the strictest sensc,and its ailn

v uld

vould not be to fac itate thc

oftl ew rk themscl cs;rath ,it w ld bccomc m rc and

more an imitation,and only he` ho had acquircd(lircct kn0 vlcdgc of the vriters
m st

dl1 cct

el l ymcnt

in quCstion by od cr lucans
0uld bc in a P Sition to c"oy such v rks f art, r

fslcight of hand And its truc ain1could bc Only to rc

cal thc sin1ilarities l)et

vccn

diffcrcnt tongucs in thc vay SPCcinc CxPrcssions and phrascs rclatc t ccrtain csscn-

f the languagc, and, in gcncral, t illun1inc thc language using t11c

fa rcign mastcr,who,howc cr,has bccn cntircly cut m
and scParatCd i m his languagc As thc formcr is1nercly an artful and agrccablc
pasti1nc,and thc latter bascd uPon a ction that ould be all but imPosSil)lc t bring
ab ut, ne can undcrstand vhy translation f this s rt is Practiced only scldom,in
CxPCliments hich themselves sh
v clcarly cnough that this1nethod is in Practi^
tial f aturcs

distinctivc sPirit

cablc On a large scalc Onc lnight als say by`vay of cxPlanati n that nly thc ln

accomplishcd maste wh mayjudge themsekcs caPal)lC

to VCork aCCording t

f mc r d

this n cthod;and nly thoSC arc truly justi

ha c alrcady Paid thCir(lucs t

us ats

st

arc ablc

ed in d ing so vvho

thc v rld and thus can alF rd thcmscl cs thc lcisurc

f this cbarrning and sOmcwhat dangcrous pastimc All thc m rc c mprchensiblc

is it that thcsc masters who kcl thcmsdvcs caPablC f attcmPtlng such a thing
sh uld
ith s n c(lcgree f Pity look doxl n uPon thC activitics f ther translators,
For they beheve thcmsclvcs al nc t be engaged in that Hnc and free art, vhcrcas
s vork,though it

thc thcrs, s they suPPosc,stand1uuch cl scr t thc intcrPrctcr

62

FRIEDRlCH SCHLEIERMACHER

ren ains truc that thcy t o arc

orbng

And thesc thcrs

t lulHll a nccd,all)cit a rathcr11igher c nc

als aPPcar t thCna v rthy of Pity for thc rcas

n that thcy cxpend

far m re lab r and art than is rncct uPon a l

vly,thanklcss task For vhich rcas n
thcy havc al vays rcady at hand the counscl that nc sh uld, chcnevcr Possible,ha c

rccoursc to ParaPhrasc such as intcrPrctcrs cmPloy in(lifhcult, c

ntCntious cascs,

instead of translations of this s rt

And vhat n0v? Sh uld `vc ad Pt this ic v and Iollov this c unse17 Thc
ancients,it
ould sccn ,translatcd cr littlc in this1nOst authcntic scnsc,and cvcn
among thc modcrns, most have bccn (lisheartcncd by the difHculties of authcntic
translation and contcnt thcmsclves vith in`itation and Paraphrasc Who voukl clairn

that anything has cver bccn translatcd,

hcd cr

fr

n1 an ancicnt or a Gcrmanic

tonguc,into Frcnch!But wc Gcrmans,while we might willin y

gi`e car t such

counsel, vill surely not follo v it An inner ncccssity,in vvhich a Pccuhar calling

ur PC Plc asserts itsclf clcarly cnough,has driven us to translation cn r

is no turning l)ack,vvc l)1ust kccp forgi11g on Just as it iS pcrhaPs only thr

tissc;thCrc

ugh thc

cultivation of f rcign Plant lifC that ur soil has becomc iChcr and m re fcrtiIc,and
ur chmatc morc Plcasing and lllildcr, s too doc feel that our langua8e, sincc
ur l`ordic lassitude Prevents1 s fron1cxcrcising it sufsciently,can m st igorously
vith thc
n st1 cngth
nly thr ugh c xtcnsi C contact
flourish and dcveloP its

forcjgn And vc must add t this,it sccn1s,that our Pc PlC9becausc of its cstCCI11
br thc brcign and its wn me(liating naturc,may bc dcst cd to unite allthcjewds
1ing,as
ff rcign sciencc and art t gethcr vith our ovVn in our o
`n languagc,for
it vcrc, a great historical
hole thatvill l)c prcscrvcd at the centcr and hcart of

clp of our languagc,c`cryonC` ill bc ablc t cnj y

Eur Pe,s that no v, ith thc
all thc beautiI l things that thc m st diffcrcnt agcs ha c gi en us as Purcly and
pcrfectly as PossiblC f r nc vho is f rcign

to thcm Indccd,this sccms to be thc

truc historical g al f translation as a vholc,as it is no v nati c to us But this goal

is served onlv bv one1ncthod of translati n,thc ne ve

i1

st notcd AI t1aust learn

to conquer its difHcultics, f `hich ve havc lnadc nO sccret,to thc grcatcst cxtcnt
SsiblC Ag od bcginning11as been madc,but thc grcatcr Part still rcmains,Many
exPcriments and cxcrciscs wi sdll havc to pavc thc ay bc rc a fk:w cxccllent

v rks arc achicvcd; and much that initially glittcrs v l thcreaRcr bc surPaSsCd l)y
t o crCon1c thcsc difh~
a bcttcr The cxtcnt to vhiCh indi idual artists ha c in pa

cu tics, in Part skil

e cn if s

mc f

fully c

lesser sk l

aded thc 1, can bc obscrvcd in arious cxamplcs And

als wrk in ths cld,wc wnln t be so inthcaltcd as

fcar that great harn1rllight comc to ur languagc through thcir cff rts For it
must srst f all l)c cstabhshcd that in a languagc in
vhich translation is practiccd
ns largc a scale thcrc111ust bc an arca of thc language rescr cd for translati ns,
and to them ccrtain conccssions
v l bc
lnade thatvould n t be to erated clsc~
t

whcrc,Hc who n ncthclcss

t1

ansplants such novclucs with ut liccnsc will

or11o follo vcrs,and if vc agrcc not to tally uP thc acc

nd kw

unts too soon, ve vnl be

ablc to rcly on the fact that thc assin1ilating l)1 ocCss0f the language

ill cast ut
cvcrything that vas takcn uP nly to ful ll a tcmporary nccd and is n t truly in
accordanceith its naturc C)I1thc Othcr hand, vc lnust not fail t rcahze that rnuch
vas dcvel Pcd, r rcstorcd from
in our languagc that is bcautiful and str ng
Ve sPeak to little and engagc in rclati ely too
bhvion, nly throu8h translati n
n1uch idle chattcr;and it cannot bc dcnicd that for s

e tirne n0 v

cvcn0ur rnanncr

oN THE DIFFERENT METHODs OF TRANsLATING

fvriting has(lisPlayCd this tcndcncy t

far t

has c ntributcd not a littlc to Pr moting

comcs vhcrcin vvc have a pubhc life that

f

ru rc

63

o grcat an cxtcnt_ and translation

a morc rigorous stylc WhCn thc tilnc

vill gi c

us, on thcne hand, as cicty

substancC morc attcnti e to languagc and, on thc Othcr, a frccr spacc for

thc talcnts f the sPcaker t unR)ld,then vvill vc PcrhaPs ha c lcss nccd of tl^ans~
lati nf r

the dcvclopn1ent of our language And may this tirne arrivc bcf rc =c

ha e c mc full circle in ur survc of thc translator s tra ails!

Notes
This was,on thc wh le,thc condition fthc Gern ans at the ti1ne f which
G cthc cl qucntly says that Pr sc translati ns,c en of Poctic vorks,and thcsc

ill

al
a

s havc to bc more or lcss ParaPhraScS, arc morc bcncscial for

cducating young PcoPlc,and thus far I can agrcc

vith hirn cntircly;R)r in such

an agc forcign litcraturc Can bc madc comPrChCnsit)lc Only in its substancc,

and thcrc cannot ct bc an ackn wlcdgcmcnt of its mctrical and musical

aluc Yct I cannot bchc c that c cn now Voss s H mcr and Schlcgcl

ShakcsPcarc Sh uld scr c nly for thc cntcrtainmcnt of thc lcarncd among
thcmsclvcs;and ju as htdc that c :cn today a Prosc translation f Homer
n1ight aid in Pro1n ting tastc and an acsthctic scnsib ity;rathcr,thcrc should

ung and ld a

Vc PCrhaPs d not yct Possess;

v nothing that n1ight Pr tably bc includcd,
bct vccn thcsc t Vo, I kn

bc f r childrcn an adaPtation like Becker s, and for adults y

1nctrical translation such as, to be surc,

lSchlciCrmachcr is rc rring to Gocthc sc mmcnts on translation in his autobiograPhical w rk D1cJlrunf und I9hJlrllciF (Po F- ` dnc/ Trurll For an Enghsh
translauon f thcsc c mments,scc Lckverc1992a:74-75Johann H nrich

1826)publi cd translati ns of Homcr sJ dd(1793)and O s

(1781)in hcxamctcr verse~an unPrecCdcnted kat in Gcrman Thc werc

V ss(1751

much cliscussed, rst vi(lcly laudCd butlater reviled August Vilhclrn schlcgcl

(1767 1845)tranSlatcd scvcntccn of shakesPcarc

s Plays,all but nc bct vccn

1796and1800,Trans l
IFrCdCrick II of Prussia (1712 1786), kn /n as Frederick the Grcat, vvas
raiscd sPcaklng only French at the ill f his father,Fredcrick William I,and

c a grcat amatcur of Poctry and PhilosoPhy /oltairc

vas a frcquent
gucst of his at sanssouci Casdc utsidc Potsdam Trans
bccan

[schlcic1

machcr himsclf tlanslatcd the collected w rks of Plato into Gcrman

His translati

ns were PubliShcd betwccn1804and1828 Trans

Cha ter 5

JOhan"WoIfgang On Goethe

TRANsLATIONS
Tra/,s/aFed by S/larc,l,S/oa/,

t;`

TT
PurP

i l
sC

1I;y r`:Vl

Prose in and ofitsclf serves as thc bcst introducti

i r l

n:it comPlCtcly neutral~

sort of P ctic art and rcduccs cvCn thC mOst

atcr Thc plain PrOsc translation
cxuberant vavCs of Poetic cnthusiasn1 to still
izcs thc formal charactcristics of an

surPrises usith )reign sPlend rsin the n1idst of our national d lncstic scnsibility;
in our c eryday livcs,and vithout our rcahzing :hat is haPPcni11g to us by lcndin:
our li cs

a noblcr air~it genuincly uphRs us Luther

this kind

fect

s Biblc translation

vdl ProducC

ssith cach1 cading,

,` n had been sct in

lNIuch ould l)avc bccn gaincd, for instancc, if the ibc
good,sohd Prose at thc Outsct,and labclcd as P Pular literature Thcn thc brutal,
dark, solcmn, and strangc scnSC of chivalry v uld Still ha e sPokCn to us in its
vcr VVhcdlcr this voukl still bc fcasiblc r c en ad isal,lc n0 /is bcst dccidcd
full P
vho have morc rigorously dcdicatcd thcmscl es t thcsc n1attcrs of
by those
antlquity,

A sccond cpoch follo vs,in xs hich the translat r cndcavors to transport hirnsclf
into thc forcign situation but actually only aPProPriates thc forei:n idea and rcPre~
scnts it as11is

xx

n I vould like t call such an cPoch P

disric,in the Purcst sensc

it wh cl drawn t thc Parodistic.Thc

f that word,It is most oRcn mcn f

Frcnch1nakc usc of this st lc in thc translation of all Poetic

idC hundrcds ofcxatnPlCS
lations Pr

1In thc samc

nunciation,tl)cy adaPt Clings,tboughts,c

rC n u thcre must bc a substitutc grown in thcir own soil

1819

Dehllc s trans-

ay t11at the French adaPt forcign

^

w or(ls to thcir Pr

v rks

re
cn ot Jccts;l

cry

TRANsLATIONs
Wicland s translations arc of t11is kind;2hc,t

65

,had his0 vn Pecuhar under-

standing and tastc, hich he adaPtCd to antiquity and forcign countrics Only to the
cxtcnt that he f und it c n cnicnt, This suPcrb lnan can bc sccn as the rePrcscn^
tativc f his tiluc;hc cxcrciscd an in rdinatc amount ofinHucncc in that,no luattcr

hat aPpcalcd t hi1n,n mattcr hovv hc absOrbcd and passcd it on to his contcm_
P nriCs,it was rcccived by thcm as somcthing Plcasant and c oyablc
Bccause vc cannot lingcr for cry long in cithcr a PerfCct or an imPerfcct state
but rnust,aftcr all,undcrgo onc transformation aRcr an thcr,
vc cxPerienccd thc
third cP ch f translation, vhich is thc nal and highest ofthe three In such Pcri dS,

the goal of thc translation is to achic

c pcrfect identity
vith thc riginal, so that

thc One d es n t cxist instcad of thc thcr but in thc thcr s Placc

This kind mct

ith thc m st rcsistancc in its early stages, because thc trans~
idcnti cs s str ngly
vith the original that he m re or lcss gi Cs uP thc

lat r

vn nation,crcating this third l nd oftext f r :hich the taste of

uniqucncss of his
thc lnasses has to be dc

cl

Ped

At rst thc Public was n t at all satisscd with V ss3(who will never bc hlly
aPPrcciatcd)untd gradually thc Pubhc s car accustomcd itsclf to this nc v kind of
translation and bccamc coluf rtal)lc vith it N Nxr an onc v11 asscsscs the cXtent
of hat has haPPcncd,
hat crsatility has comc t thc Gcrmans,vhat rhythmical
and n ctrical advantages arc availablc t thc sPirited,talcntcd bcg"1ncr,ho Ari st
and Tasso,shakcspcare and Calder n ha c been br ught to us t
0and thrcc tirncs
ovcr as Gcrmanizcd f rcigncrs,1nay hopc that litcrary history`vill oPenly ackn0 v~
lcdgcvho vas thc rst to ch sc this path in sPitc f so luany and aricd obstaclcs
For thc InOst Part,thC v rks of v n HalrL rner indicate a si1nilar treatlnent of
oricnta1 mastcrPiCcCs;4 hc su8gcsts that the translati n apProxi1natc as closCly as

PosSiblC thc cxtcrnal rm ofd c Ori nal w rk,H w much morc con incing thc
Passagcs of a translation f Firdausi Pro c t bc vhcn ProducCd by ur friend hi1nself
vh sc cxamplcs can bc rcad in thc
coluparcd t th sc rc vorkcd by an adaPt r
fun rtlbcn s Di gklring a Poet in this w is,in ur o on,thc saddcst mistake a
diligcnt and quite caPable translator can lI1akc,

Sincc,ho vc cr,in C cry litCraturc all fthcsc thrcc cPochs arc f und t rePcat
and revcrse thcmscl cs, as vcll as cxist silalultanc usly, a Prose translation f thc

n,cz6and thc
rks of Nizan1i v uld st l bc in rdcr It could be used f ra

hich
uld Pcn up thC Csscntial lncaning of thc vork:
vc could
quick rcading,`
s 0

cnjoy thc11ist rical,thc lcgcndary, thc largcr cthical issucs,and c vv uld gradu~

ally bccomc%miliar with thc attitudcs and ways of thinl

lng,until we could at last

fccl a kinship vith thcn

Think nly of thc undisPutCd aPplausc vcc GCrmans havc attributcd t

such

n f thc sd unr Fd,7 vh se succcss vc can m0St dc nitcl ascril)c to its

se,
into vhich the Poem haS been dissolvcd No v v uld be the ProPcr
Plai11Pr
til,lc for a ne translati n of thc third tyPC that v uld n t only corrcsPond t thc
a translati

arious dialccts,rhythn1s,ll ctcrs,and prosaic idioms in the original but voul(l

in a pleasant and hmiliar manncr,rcncw thc Pocm in all of its distincti

als

:cncss ft)r

us sincc a manuscriPt of thiS Ctcrnal vork is a ailable in Paris, a Gcrn1an living

thcrc c ukl carn undying gratitude f r undcrtakin8such a v rk
miltar ,thC English tlanslat r of lfcss nJcr ofrhc cJouds:dcscr cs c
ery hon r,
SilnPly becausc Our Hrst acquaintance
vith this kind fa v rk is al vays such a

/OLFGANG

66 JOHANN

1
(l;

VON GOETHE

C
ir :ll

r` F T\:
Jl;

:f

:f
a

ll1k 1

f
1

r;; l;tiJl

e|

R:

Ft

din8

:i
`

Jl

r :L

lnatclV Comcs closc to an intcrhncar vcrsion and greatly facilitatcs our undcrsta1

lrl

and c unkn0

l:i

n constantly1n vc,is nally con1PlCtC

r|3 l :; r
:,r
rr l

: 1

;tI1iJ

i} {ii

cxametcrs

wrotc in Pcrsian,is thc author of IdlFd dn : nun

Thc st, unr

: yI:l
9

`tt is a verscdran1a in Sanskrit b)the Indian Poct and dran1atist

M n pu ed h d d s

:r

![:

J h FfoIll

univcrsity of Jena R

:l

6)wSan O1 lcntah tlt thc

Jri 1;

m1817to1824

Chapter 6

Friedrich Nietzsche

TRANSLATIONS
TJ/a/,s/arec/by V/a/ er KaLlf/,,a

HE DEGREE0F THE HIs

oRICAL sENsE ofm))=agC

in rred m thc manncrin xs'hich d1is agc makes rIdns`

f

uay bc

IFions and trics t abs rb

rmcr agcs and b oks In thc agc of Corncillel and e cn f thc Revoluti n, thc

Frcnch took P sscsSi n of Roman antiquity in a vay for vhich vcvould n

ha c

ngcr

couragc cn ugh_ thanks to our more highly dc cloPcd hist rical scnsc And

forcibly and at thc samc ti1ne ho` nai cl it t ok

Roman antiquity itself: h
hold

f c crythi11g

good and loRy of Grcck antlquity,which was rnorc ancicnt!I

they translatcd thiI1gsinto thc Roman PrCSent!Ho

ov

v dchbcratcly and1 ccklessly they

brushcd thc dust or thc :ings of tbc butter that is callcd momc11t!Thus H racc
now and d1cn translatcd Alcacus or Archilochus;and PI oPcrtius did thc samc ith
Callimachus a11d Philetas(pocts of t11c samc mnk as ThcOc1

itus,if `cr,,

XlVhat vas it to thclu that thc rcal crcator had expericnced this and that and

1I

judgc)2
vritten

thc signs of it into his P clla?As pocts, thcy had no symPathy f r thc andquarian
inquiSiti cncss that PrCccdcs thc hist
th sc

rical scnsc;as PoCts,thcy had no ti1nc for all

vcry Pcrs nal things and namcs and vhatc er rnight be considered the costumc

and mask f a city, ac ast, or a ccntury: quickly, thcy rcplaccd it vithvhat as

contcmpora1 y and Ro an They seclyl to ask us: sh uld

c not naakc nc v f r
ourselvcs vhatis old and nd ourselvcs iI1itP shoukl vvc not havc thc right to l9rcathc
our ovn sOul into this dcad b d P For it is dead after all; ho v ugly is cverything

dcadr9They did not kno :thc dchghts of the hist

rical sense; ss hat vas past and

alicn was an embarrassment fc,r thcm;an(l bcing R mans,thcy saw lt as an inccntivc f

raR n1an

conquest, Indccd, translation vas a forn1 fc nqucst N t only

(lid nc n1it hat

as historical;one als added allusi ns to thc l rcscnt

1882

and,abo c

68

FRIEDRIcH N1ETZSCH E

all,struck ut thc namc ofthe P et and rePlaccd it vith one s0 vn- not ith any
scnsc of thcft but vith thc cry bCSt conscicnce of the imPcrium Romdnurl,,

Editor s notcs

Thc Frcnch P ct and dramatist Picrrc Corncillc(1606-1684)based many

his plays on classical themes

Alcacus(c 600Bc), Archilochus (Hc 650Bc), Callilnachus (nc 26o:c),

and Philctas(c 330-275BC)wcrC Greek lyllc PoctS wh se w ting wt s
illlitatcd and in s

mc cascs frccly translatcd by such Roman Pocts as Catullus,

H racc,Ovid,and ProPcrtius The Grcek Poet ThC

wrotc Pastoral crsc that vas in1itatcd by Vir8il

c1

ItuS(C 310-250Bc)

s0 61-s0061

HE MAIN TRENDs intrans|ation theOry during this period are rooted in

German "terary and ph"osophica| traditions` in ROmanticism` hermeneutics`

and existentia|phenomeno|ogy.They assume that|anguage is notsO much cOmmunicative as constitutiVe in its representation of thought and rea"ty` and so trans|a-

tion is seen as an interpretation /hich necessar"y reconstitutes and transforms

the foreign text, N ineteenth-century theorists and practitioners "ke Friedrich
sch|eiermacher and VV"he|lnn von H umbo|dt treated trans|ation as a Creative force
in

c trans|ation strategies might serve a variety of cu|tura| and sOcia|

^/hiCh speci

functions` bui|ding |anguages` }iteratures` and nations

At the start of the t /entieth

century` these ideas are rethought from the vantage point of modernist moVements
XAlhiCh prize eXperiments xvith "terary form as a
/ay of reVita"zing cu|ture,
Trans|ation is a focus of theoretica| specu|ation and forma| innOvation,

An innportant assulmption in this deve|opment is the autonOmy Of trans|ation`

its status as a text n its o/n right`derivative but nonethe|ess|ndependent as a
/ork
of signincat n In VVa|ter Benjamin s1923essay(induded

in this vo ume)`a trans

(t/be'/ebe/,) of the foreign text` enacting an

interpretation that is informed by a history of reCeption (
the age of its fame
|ation participates in the \\after"fe

This interpretation does

more than transn it messages it recreates the va|ues that

accrued to the fore gn teXt OVer t"me. And insofar as the "nguistiC differences of
this teXt are s gnaHed in the trans|ating |anguage` they u|tirnate|y cOnVey a ph"o

\pure |anguage`
sophica| cOncept`

a sense of how the \ mutuaHy exc|usive

differences among |anguages coexist /ith\\Comp|ementary intentions to Communicate and to refer` intentions that are dera"ed by the differences. FOr Benjamin`

\harmony/
trans|ation offers a utopian vision of
inguistic

72

19oos-1930s
This speculative approach is|inked to a particu|ar discursive strategy The pure

|anguage is re{eased in the trans|ation through "tera"sms` especia"y in syntax`

which resu t in departures from current standard usage Benjamin is reViving

Sch|eier| acher s notion of foreigniz" g trans|ation`wherein the reader of the trans-

|ated text is brought as c|ose as possib|e to the foreign one thrOugh c|ose renderings

Benjamin quotes Rudo f Pannwitz s|ike-

that transform the trans|ating|anguage

minded cOm|mentary on the German trans|ation tradition`

hich cOmp|ains about

trans|ations that \ germanize hindu greek eng"sh instead of hinduiz ng grecizing
an9"cizing german

(Pann tz 1917 240 trans. JOhn Z"COsky), Pannks/itz sees

/

trans|ation as an experimenta| |iterary practice`xVhere the trans|ator\

must broaden

_just as Pannwitz s oWn rose

tampers ltlith con entiona| Ger man syntax` ca ita"zation` and punctuation.

and deepen his oWn|anguage with the foreign one

Ezra Pound s trans|ation theories and practices share the Gern an interest in
ost|y unfavorab|e connments on German poetry
"terary experimenta"sm.
His for
rare`
nonethe|ess
nc|ude praise
Rudo|f BOrchardt s innovative version of Dante`llvhich

begins to appear in 1908 (POund 1934

55), BOrChardt s use of archaiC German

/ith another thirteenth-century Ita"an poet`

dia|ects resemb|es POund s o/n\ ork
Guido Cava|canti In the 1929 essay reprinted here` POund sees arGhaism as a
discursive strategy that m ght go some l/ ay to /ard registering the "terary and
histor

ca| differences of Cava{canti s Ita"an.

The ex eriment ans/ers to Pound s search for a sty"stic eq uiVa|ent Or ana|ogue`

\

/eight about equa|to that of the origina|.

a verba|

the trans|ation discourse he chose for Cava|canti-

But he is perfect|y aware that

pre E"zabethan

E ngIish poetry

_ doesn t llnatch nnedieva| Tuscan in any Chrono|ogica| sense

e re|ation POund

estab"shes betxveen his trans|ations and the foreign text is partia|` both
ncOmp|ete
\We are preserving one va|ue of ear|y Ita"an
and s|anted tovAlard What interests him

ork` he observes of one rendering`

the Cantab"e.

In POund s Vie /` the autonomy of trans|ation takes t /o forms A trans|ated

text might be interpretive` a critica|

accompanirnent/ usuaHy printed next to the
fOreign poem and cOmposed of linguistic peCu"arities that direCt the reader across
the page to foreign textua| features` |ike a |exiGa| choice or a prosodic effect. Or a
trans{ation might be\\orig

na|
/riting` in xVhich "terary\ standards in the trans-

|ating cu|ture guide the relA/r ting of the foreign poen so decisive|y asto seem a

ne /

poem in that|anguage.The re|ation bet

/een the txA/o teXts doesn t disappear
just masked by an"usion of origina|ity`a though in target angua9e terms,

it is

POund s standards are lmodernist

they inc|ude phHOso hica| and poetic va|ues

"ke pOsitivism
so he trans|ates
recOver foreign
poetries
that might and|inguistic
advance these precision.And
va|ues in En9"sh
POund sto
experimenta|
versions
of

Cava|canti cha"enge previous Eng"sh attempts`

ictorian trans|ations
/hiCh seem

obfuscated by pre-Raphae"te medieva"sm He a|so /ants to invigorate

to h"m
\six centuries of derivative conVention and
the Eng"sh |anguage by Overco| ing the

have Obscured the exact signinCanCes 0f such phrases as

(Anderson 1983 12),
death of the heart/and The departure of the sou
|oose usage Ethat

Trans|ation theory and practice in the ear|y t

t

The

^/entieth century are marked by

/o cOmpeting tendencies on the one hand`a forma"st interest in technique`usua"y

1900s-1930s

73

expressed as innovative trans|ation strategies that match ne / interpretations of

foreign texts and On the other hand` a strong funct|ona"s n

` a reCurrent yoking of

trans|ation projects tO cu|tura| and po"tica| agendas, During the 192os A/artin
Buber and Franz Rosenz
/eig hope tO cOntribute to a renaissance Of German Jewish

Cu|ture through a c|ose rendering of the Hebrew Bib|e that eVokes the Ora| qua"ty
of the Hebrellv To distinguish the r Jelvish reading of the text from the nuency of
Luther s Christian Vers on`they deviate from standard usage`not on

ing the syntax of their German` but a

(e.g, Buber

s\ Le tlvorte`

y by Hebraiciz-

so by inserting archaisms and sty"st

c devices

comparab|e to the modernist technique of creating recur\\|eitmotifs

rent patterns in a wOrk of art

).

NOt every accOunt of these tendencies is enthusiastic` even XlVithin the German

tradition In 1925 the phi|osopher Kar|

oss|er argues that trans|ation is instru-

menta| in the preservation and deve|opment of nationa| |anguages`especia"y high|y

|iterary projects|ike BOrchardt

s experimenta r,eu

sC e

Da
e`Where\ the sense of

|anguage produces its fna| and rarest nox/vers ( oss|er 1932 177), But oss|er
a|so sees an \aesthetic imperia|ism
n these projects which casts doubt on their
c|aims tO register the fore gnness of the foreign text in the trans|ating |anguage.

\are the
The artisticaHy perfect trans|ations in a nationa| |iterature`
\

he xlvrites`

means by
hich the|inguistic genius of a nation defends itse|f against What is foreign
by cunning|y stea"ng fronl it as | uch as possib|e (LefeVere 1977 97). In the
German tradition` foreignizing strategies are intense|y nationa"stic` a fortincati n

of the |anguage against such forces as French cu|tura| dominat|on during the
N apo|eonic ars, oss|er recOgn zes that imperia"sm might be the dark underside

of trans|ation driven by a Vernacu|ar nationa"sm.

MOre cOnserVatiVe theorists who reject sty|istica y innovat|Ve trans ations st
irnagine a sOcia|function for trans|ating

In Hi|aire Be"oc

s1931Tay|orian|ecture

since the
at Oxford` \\any hint of foreignness in the trans|ated version is a b|emish

\our cu|tura| unity in the west`

\\soCia| irnportanCe of trans|ation

is to preserve

current|y threatened because \

the tradition of Latin

C0lTl|mon bond of cOmprehension

has \\|ost its effcacy as

\a

(BeHOc 1931 9` 22).

During the 192os` the

HamOVV/itz-Nq eHendOrff urged

h"o|ogist U|rich VOn

trans|ators of c|assica| |iterature to

spurn the |etter and fo"o /the spirit sO as
\

to |et the anc ent poet speak to us c|ear|y and in a manner as ilmmediate|y inte|-

(Lefevere 1992a 34` 169). This suggests` not

"gib|e
as he did
his olt/n
time
the
"tera"sm
of inGerman
trans|ation`
but the freedom so esteemed in the French

and Enghsh traditions` not H0|der"n` but D Ab|ancOurt` Dryden` and N atthe /
Arno|d. In

s Case` c|arity and inteHigib" ty are important because he

"amoxvitzOf the \\Greek idea| can \\check the mora| and spiritua|
fee|s that trans|ations
dec"ne our nation is moving to /ard

(ibid

167).

ter JOrge Luis BOrges`these theoretica| issues undergo

ith the Argentine

^/r

a subt|e and incisiVe deve|opment. H is1935essay on the trans|ators of the^rab`a/l

/V`9/, s(reprinted

here) shows that |iterary trans|ations produce varying represen-

tations Of the same foreign text and cu|ture/ and their

veracity or degree of

equiVa|ence is ah^/ays in doubt` regard|ess of their ilnpact or innuence, AntOine

Ga"and se ghteenth-century Vers

on is \ the

|east faithfu1

but \

the most|y
^/ide|y

74

19oos-1930s

read

for the next two hundred years

Such facts of trans|ation are not to be

amented` holA/eVer` but ce|ebrated` studied historica"y` and interrogated for their
ideo|ogica| imp"cations, BOrges argues that \

it is

the trans|ator s innde"ty` his

happy and creative innde"ty/that must matter to us,

Of course` not a" in de"ties are equa| tO BOrges In his deta"ed discussion of
the different trans ations` he performs ideo|ogica| critiques that ex

ose their invest-

ment in various cu|tura| va|ues and po"tica| interests` Orienta"st and anti-selllitic`
mascu"nist and puritanica|`midd|e-c|ass and acaden

ic. His approach is exemp|ary

he ana|yzes textua|features`such as|exicon and syntax`prosody and discOurse`and

exp

ains thenn

\|iterary habits

and the "terary

^/ith reference to the trans|ator

traditions n the trans|ating anguage BOrges nnOst appreciates trans|ations that are
kAlritten \\in the

/ake of a "terature

and therefore \\presuppose a rich (prior)

prOcess. This|eads him to va ue\\heterogeneous

tion

g|orious hybridiza|anguage`a

that mixes archaism and s ang` neo|ogism and foreign borro /ings.
hat he

misses in a scho|ar|y German trans|ation is precise|y the foreignizing impu|se of the

ROmantic tradition` \\the Germanic distortion`the t/l,l,e|m chke` of Germany/
At the end of the1930s`trans|ation is regarded as a distinctive |inguistiC practice` \\a|iterary genre apart`

`/ith its o

vllrites the Spanish ph"osopher Joso Ortega y Gasset/

/n norms and its oxA/n endS (Ortega y Gasset1992 109) It attracts

the attention of |eading

/riters and thinkers/ "terary cr|tics and ph"o|ogists

It

becomes the topic of scho|ar|y monographs that surVey trans|ation theory and praCtice in particu|ar periods and|anguages(e

Amos1920` Allatthiessen1931` Bates

1936). And it generates a range of theoretica| issues that are st"| debated today,

In 1937 0rtega takes up these issues |n

The M sery and the sp|endor of
Trans|ation` a str king phHOsOphica| dia|ogue that argues for the GOntinu

importance of the German trans|ation tradition, The \

ng

m isery of trans|ation is its

impossib"ity` because of
rreducib|e differences

/hich are not on|y "nguistic` but

Cu|tura`incommensurabi|ities that stem from \different menta| ictures`from

The
sp|endor of trans|ation
s its manipu|ation

of these differences to force the reader from his "nguistic habits and ob"ge him
disparate inte"ectua

systems,

foreign author (Ortega y Gasset 1992 108) FOr

to move
/ithin those of the
Orte9a` trans|ating is usefu| in cha"enging the com |acenc es of cOntemporary
cu|ture because it fosters a\\historiCa|consCiousness
the mathernatica| and phys

ca| sciences

de9ree that they are dissimi|ar to us`

(ibid

(ibid

110)that is|acking in

e need the ancients preCise|y to the

111) he xlvrites`so that trans|ating can

introduce a critiGa| difference into the present

Further reading
Benjamin 1989` B|anchot 1997` Jacobs 1975` KeHy 1979` Krista1 2002` N ouss
enuti 1995
1997` ReiChert1996/ Robinson 1991` Steiner1975`

Chapter 7

Waker Be amin
THE TASK OF THE TRANSLATOR

AN INTRODUCTION TO THE
TRANSLATION OF BAUDELAIRE S
/
3LE/ t/XP/ fPfSfF/VS
Trz s/a ed

by arry

zo/l

eJ
1[lJ l:)c l` FJJ l1 :Jt ;.\: 1
|;l:1F F :l

or its rcprcscntati cs rnisleading,but c cn thc conccpt ofan idcar rcccivcr is dctri-

mcntal in thc thcorctical considcration of art,sincc all it P

sitS iS thc cxistcncc and

naturc of l1,an as such Art, in thc samc vay, Posits lnan s Physical and sPiritual
cxistcncc,but in n ne f its v rks is it conccrncd Vith his rcsPonsc, No Pocnn is
intendcd for thc rcadcr,n

Picturc for thc l)eholder,n symPhony fc)r thc listcncr

Is a translati n meant f r rcadcrs
vho d n t undcrstand the ori:inal? This

: uld scclm to cxPlain adequately the divergence f thcir standing in the rcaln f
art M rcOvcr,itsccms to be the nly concci ablc rcason for saying thc samc thing

rCPCatCdly For
vhat does a litcrary
vork say P What d cs it con n1unicatcP It

tclls
cry littlc to th sc vho undcrstand it, Its cssential quahty is n t statcmcnt
or thc imparting of in rmation Yet any translau n whch htcnds t Pcrbrm a
transIlaitting function cannot transrllit anything l)ut inf rmati n- hencc,sonrlcthing
inesscntlal,This is thc hallmark of bad translati ns Butd
c not gcncrally rcgard
as thc csscntial substancc f a litcrar
vork vhat it c ntains in additi n to information as c cn a Poor translator vill adn1it__thc unfath mable,thc rnystcrious,thc

Poetic/ Somcthing that a translat r can rcPr ducc nly if hc is als aP et?This,
actually,is thc causc f anothcr charactcristic of infcrior translati n, vhich conscqucntly vvc rnay dcHne as the inaccuratc transrnission of an incsscntial contcnt This
vill bc true vhcncvcr a translation undertakes t scrvc thc rcader, H

vc Cr,if it

crc intended f r thc rcader,thc same vould have to aPPly t thc rigina1,If the
1923

76

/ALTER

BENJAMIN

original d es n t cxist for thc rcadcr s sakC,h

vc uld the translation bc undcr~
st
d n

thc basis f this Prcn1isC?

Translatlon is a rnode To c mPrChCnd it as rnodc nc rnust g back t the rig

inal, f r that c ntains thc la v 8
erning the translation

its translatab ity, The

v rk is translatable has a dual meaning. Eithcr
Will an
qucstlon f vhcther a
adcquatc translat r c cr bc f und am ng thc totahty ofits readcrsP Or,rnorc pcrtincntly: Does its naturc lcnd itsclf t translati n and, thcreforc, in vic v of thc
signiHcancc fthc m dc, call for itP In I)rinciPlc,thC hrst questi n can bc dccidcd
only contingcntly; thc sccond, ho vc cr, aPodictically only suPerscial dainking
v ill dcny thc indcPcndent meaning of the lattcr and declarc both qucstions to be

of cqual signiHcancc

It should be Pointcd out that ccrtain correlative conccpts

rctain thcir n eaning, and possibly thcir forcmost signincancc, if thcy arc rcfcrrcd

cxclusivcly t man, ()nc n1ight, for cxamPlc, sPCak of an unf

rgcttablc hfc r
1nomcnt cVcn if all mcn had f rgotten it If the nature of such a lifc Or momcnt
rcquircd that it bc unforgottcn, that Predicatc

0uld not irnPly a falschood

but lncrcly a clain1n tR lnllcd by mcn, and probably als

a referencc to a rcahn

in
vhich it 1s ful lled: God s remcmbrancc Analogously, the translatability of
linguistic crcations ought to bc considcrcd evcn if n
latc then

Given a strict conccPt of translation,

cn should pro e unable to trans_

v uld

thcy n t rcally bc translatablc

to sOn1e dcgrecP Thc qucsti n as to

vhcthcr thc translation

f ccrtain linguistic
u8ht iS ahd here
If translation is a modc,translatab ity must be an csscntial fcaturc f certain vorks
Translatability is an csscntial quahty of ccrtain orks, vhich is n tt say that
creations is called f r ought to bc PosCd in this sense For this th

it is csscntial that thcy bc translated; it mcans rathcr that a sPeciJ iic signincancc
inhcrcnt in thc Original manifcsts itsclf in its translatability, It is Plausil)lc that no

translation,h
vc er good it rnay l c,can havc any Signihcancc as rcgards thc Orig
inal, Yct, by irtuc of its translatability thc original is cl
scly connected 1th thc
translation;in fact,this conncction is all thc closcr sincc it is no longcr fimP rt~
ancc to thc original
a

itd

Vc rnay call this connection a natural onc,

r,rnorc sPcci ca y,

connccuon.Just t S the mamkstati ns of hfc arc indmatdy connectcd with

the Phen menon of hfc vithout being filnportance to it,a translation issues from
thc h nal-not s

muCh m its hk as m its aRedik F ra ansl i n comes

nd

latcr than thc Original,and sincc the ilnPortantv rks ofv rld litcraturc ncver
thcir ch scn translators at thc thnc ofthcir

rigin,their translation1narks their stagc

fc ntinucd lifc Thc idea f hfe and aRcrhfc in v rks of art

with an entirely unmetaPhorical bjccd ity E cn in umcs f

sh

uld bc rcgardcd

narr w|Pr udicCd

thought therc vas an inkhng that lifc vas n t lirnitcd to organic corPorcahty But
it cannot bc a rnatter of cxtcnding its don1ini n undcr the feeb1c sccPtCr ofthc s ul,

as Fcchner tricd t d , r, c nvcrscly, of l)asing its dcnniti n n thc cvcn lcss

conclusi e factors f anin ahty,such as scnsation, vhich charactcrizc lifc Only cca~

sionally.Thc concePt
its o vn,and

f hfC is gi en its cluc only if e crything that has a hist

is not rnercly thc sctting for hist

ry of
ry,is credited vith lifc.In thc hnal

analysis,thc rangc()f hfc rnust bc dctcrn1incd by hist

f all by such tcnu us

fact

ry rathcr than by naturc,lcast

rs as scnsation and soul,Thc PhilosoPhcr s task c nsists

in comprchcnding all of natural life thr

ugh thc more cncomPassing life of history

And indecd, is n t thc continucd lifc f vorks of art far casier to rccognizc

an

the continual liF Of anin1al sPcciCsP The hist ry of the grcat vorks of art tclls us

THE TASK OF TH TRANsLATOR

77

antcccdents, thcir rcahzation in thc agc of thc a1 tist, thcir P tentia y

Vhcre thjs last n1anifcsts itself,it is callcd

ctcrnal aRcr"fc in succcCding gcncrations
hmc TraI1slations that are morc than Jal smissions of subicd mattcr comc into
being vhcn in the coursc of its sur ival a vork has 1 cac11ed thc agc ofits famc,
Contrary, theref rc, to tbc clailns f bad translat rs, such translations do not so
al)

ut thci

much scrxc t11e Work as oxxe thcir cxistcncc to it Thc l"

of thc oH nals att ns

iI1thcn1to its ever-renc vcd latCst and mOst abundant n

vcri118

Bcing a sPccial and high for1n f lif , this overi11g is govcrncd by a spccial,

high Purposivcncss Thc rclati nshiP bct

cCn lifC and PurP sefulncss, scCn ingly
b i us yCt al1nOst bcyond the grasp of the intellcct,rc cals itsclf only if thc ultimatC Purposc to
ardVhich all singlc functions tcnd is sOught not in its o n sPhere
butin a highcr onc All PurP Scft11rnanifestations oflifc,including thcir vcry PurP ~
sivcncss, in thc nal analysis ha c thch end n t in lifc,but in thc cxPressi n ofits
nature, in thc rcPrcscntation of its signiHcance Translation thus ulti1natcly ser cs
the Purposc of exPrcssing thc ccntral reciProcal rclati nshiP bctvccn languagcs It
cannot Possibly rcvcal or estabhsh this hi(ldcn relati

nsh")itsCl but it can rcpre~

cahzing it in cn1bryonic or iI1tcnsivc form T11is rcPrcsCntation of

isil)lc is fs
hidden signiicancc through an cn1bry nic atten pt at n1akiI g it
sent it by 1

singular a naturc that it is rarcly met`

id1in the sPhCrc of n nhnguistic lifc This,

in its analogics and symbols, can dra /on other vays of suggcsting mcaning than
intensive- that is,anticiPati C,inti1natin8 -reahzation,As f r thc positcd central

kinshiP f languages,it is11narked by a disti11cti c convergcncc Languages arc not

strangers to onc anothcr,but arc,a Priori and aPart9orn all11istorica rclationshiPs,
inter1

clatcd in vvhat thcy ls ant to cxPress

Wid this attemPt

an cxplication our sttldy aPPears t

r oln,aRcr

htile

dctours, thc traditi nal thcOry of translation If thc kinship of languagcs is to bc

nc but by conveying thc form

and lneaning of thc o1 iginal as accuratcl)as P ssiblc?To bc surc,that the ry ould

dcm nstrated by translations,hovv clsc can this be d

bc11ard Put tO dCnnc thc11ature of this accuracy and thcrcF

rc c uId shcd11

light

Cvcr,thc kinshiP of languages

n vhat is important in a translation, Actually,h
is br u8ht()ut by a translati

n far1norc Profoundly and clearly than im thc suPcr

v0rks of literaturc To grasp tl c gcnuinc

cial and i11dc nablc shunarity f t
o
rclatlonshil)bct vcCn an original and a translation rcquircs an in
gous t thc argumcntation by `vhich a critiquc of cognition

csti ation

ukl have t

analol)l

o c

thc in1possibdity f an iluagc thcory T11e1 c itis a n atter of sh

ving that in c gnition thc could bc no objedi ity,not evcn a daim to k,if k dcalt with images of
rcahty;hcrc it can be de nonstratcd that no translati nvould bc P ssiblC if in its
ultin1atc csscncc it strove f r likcness to thc riginal For in its aRerhfe~

vhich

could n t bc callcd tl)at if it vere not a transf rmation and a rene val of son1cthing

ords ith Hxcd n1caning can

hc obvious tcndcncy of a ritcr s literary style luay

livi11g ~ the original undcr oCS a changc Evcn

undcrgo a rnaturin{::ProcCss

in tiluc
vither a :ay, nly to gi c rise to hnmanent tcndcncics in the htcrary

hat
vas oncc
crcation What sOundcd flesh oncc may sound hackncycd later;
current rna somcday sound quaint T scck thc cssence of suCh changcs, as vvell
as thc cqually constant changcs in mcani11g, in the subiccti ity of Postcrity rad1cr
than in thc cry lifc of langua8c and itS vorks, voul(ln1can~ even allo ving l r the
crudcst I)sych logism~to confuSe thc1 oot causc of a thin
vith its Csscncc.More

78 WALTER BENJAMIN
Pertinently,it vould mcan dcnying,by an imP tCncc of thought,one ofthe n1ost
po vcrful and fruitful historical Pr cesses

last strokc of the Pcn int

thc ccluP d

And even if ne tricd to turn an author

cc f his v rk, this still voul(ln t

Jr

sa c

that dcad thc ry of translati n,F rjust as thc tcnor and thc signiicance f the grcat
ss Orks

f litcraturc undcrgo a con1Pletc transforluati n ovcr the ccnturics, thc

11ilc a P ct S
rds endurc

n10thcr t nguc oft11c translat r is transforn1cd as vvcll

i11his o vn

langua8e,e en thc grcatcst t1 al)slati n is(lcstincd to bec mc Part ofthC

gro vd1ofits

vn language and cvcntua

is so far rcn ovcd fr

y t

be absorbcd l) its rcnc val Translati

n11)cing the sterile cquation

ft vo

dcad languages that of all

hterary forms it is thc Onc chargcd :id1thc sPecial rnission of vatching ovcr the
maturing Process of thc Original languagc and thc birth Pan s of its0 vn
If thc kinshiP f languagcs manifcsts itsc f in traI1slati ns, this is not accornPhshCd thr ugh a aguc ahkcncss bct vccn adaPtation and()riginal It
that kinshiP docs not ncccssar y involvc likcness Thc c nccPt of
hcrc is in accord vith its rnOre restricted con11non usagc:in b th
bc dc ncd adcquatcly by idcntity of origin,although in dc ning thc

usage thc concePt f ri8i11rCmains indisPcnsablc

of t v

stands to rcason

kinshiP as usCd
cascs, it cannot
m rc rcstricted

Whcrcin rcsklcs thc rclatcdncss

languagcs,aPart frorn hist ical considcrations7Ce1 tainlv not in t11e silnilar1

ords Rathcr, all suPrahist rical kinshil, of

Vorks of litcrature or
vccn
languagcs rcsts in thc intention undcrlying cach language as a hole an intcntion,
hich is rcahzcd()nly by
ho vcver,vhich n single languagc can attain by itsclf but
itv bct

thc totahty of thcir intcnti ns supplcmcnting cach od cr:Purc

indi

language Wh e

all

idual clcmcnts oF forcign languagcs- ords,sentences,structurc_ are mutu-

ally exclusive,these languages suPPlement onc another in thcir intcntions X/Xlithout

(listinguishing the i11tendcd bject ion1t11em dc f intcntioI),no
basic la v

rm rasP

oftllis

vords Bror and`

of a PhilosoPhy f languagc can bC achic cd. Thc

ct,but thc
intcnd thc same obj
o :ing to these modcs that thc w

jn

modcs f this intcntion arc not the same It is

1

(l Bro

mcans sOmcthing ch trcnt t a German

ords arc not intcrchangcable for

than thc vv rd PcIin t a Frenchman, that thesc
thcn1, that,in fact, thcv st1 i C to cxcludc cach othcr As to thc intcndcd objcct,
ho vcvcr, tbc t v

v rds mean thc

er

11ile
same thing

thc l))

dcs f intcntion

in thcsc tw Words a1 c in conHict,intcnJon and oblect of intcntlon complcmcnt

ccach of tl c two languagCs om which tl ey arc der ed;thcrc tllc ed iS c mPlc
mcntar to thc intcntion,In thc individual,unsuPPlCmcntcd languages,1ncaning is
ne er Found in rclative indcPendcnce,as in indi idual v rds Or scntcnccs;rather,
it is i11a constant statc

of flux-until it is ablc t emergc as Pure languagc frona thc

harluonv oF all thc arious luodcs of intcnti n until thcn,it rcn1aiI1s hiddcn in thc

languages If,hovc cr,these languagcs c ntinuc to gro v in this manner until thc
cnd f thcir tirne,it is translation vhich catchcs rc on the eternal hfe of thc c rks
and thc PcrPctual renc val of langua8e Translati n kccPs Puttin8 thc hallo
ed
gro vtl of languages to thc tcst

How hr rcm cd

is the

hiddcn meaning om

cl sc can it bc brought by thC kno vledge f this rcm tcness7

This,t bc surc,is to adn1it that all translati n is nly a sOnlc vhat Pr visi nal

rc elati n,hovv

kn instant and nal rathcr

vay of corning to tern1s vith thc f rcignness oflanguagcs

than a temP rary and Pro isi nal soluti n of this f reignncss rcmains out of tbc

rcach of lnankind; at any rate, it eludcs any dirCct attcmPt Indirectly, ho

vc er,

thc grovth f rcligions ripcns thc hiddcn sccd imt a higher dc cloPment of

THE TAsK OF THE TRANsLATOR

79

langua8c. Alth ugh translati n, unhkc art, cannot Clairn Pcrmanence for its Products,its goalis undeniably a Hnal,c nclusivc,decisi c stagc of all linguistic creauon

vcrc It

In translation thc original riscs into a higher and Purcr linguistic air, as it
cannot li

c thcrc pcrmancntly,t bc surc, and it ccrtainly docs not rcach it in its

cntlrcty Yct,in a singularly imprcssi c manncr, at lcast it points thc vvay to this
region thc Predestincd,hithcrto inaccessiblc rcalrn f rcconc iation amd fulhlln cnt

of languagcs The transfcr can nc cr be total, but vhat rcaches this rcgion is that
elcmcnt h a translati n which gocs beyond transmittal f sublect mattt r,This
nuclcus is bcst de ncd as the clcment that d cs not lcnd itself to translati n,E en
vhcn all the surfacc c ntcnt has bcen cxtractcd and transn1ittcd, thc Pri1nary

conccrn ofthc gcnuine translat r remains clusi c unhke the vv rds of the original,
it is not translatablc,bccausc thc rclati nshiP bctvvCen content and languagc is quite
(hffcrcnt in thc original and thc translati

n Whilc contcnt and languagc form a

n

ccrtain unity in thc original,likc a6 uit and its skin,thc languagc of thc translati

cnveloPs itS c ntcnt hke a r yal robc vith amPle f lds F r it signi cs a rn rc cxaltcd

languagc than its o vn and thus rcmains unsuitcd to its c ntcnt,ovcrPo vCrin8and

ahen This disjunctl n PrCvCnts translati n and at thc st mc tirllc1nakcs it suPc1

Huous For any translauon fa vork originating in a sPecisc stage of hn:uiStic history
rePresents, in rcgard to a spcci c asPcct f itS content, translation into all othcr
langua cs Thus translation, ironically, transPlantS the riginal into a morc dcnni~
ti

c linguistic rcahn sincc it can no longcr be disPlaced by a sccondary rcndcring

The riginal can nly bc raiscd there ane and at thcr P ints f ti1nc,It is no lllcrC

coincidcnce that thc

ord ir nic hcre brings thc Romanticists to n1ind Thcy,

morc than any thcrs,wcrc giRcd with an insight int

the li f hterary w rks

vhich has its hi hest tcstimony in translation. T bc surc, thcy hardly rcc gnizcd
translation in this scnse,but dc tcd their entirc attcntion to criticis another,if
vorks But evcn though thc
a lesscr, fact r in the c ntinued hfe f litcrary

ritings, thcir
vn
n
in
tbcir
thcOrctical
Romanticists virtually ign rcd translati

8rCat translations tcsti

,to thCir scnse of thc csscntial naturc and thc dignity of this

hterar luodc, Thcrc is al)undant cvidencc that this scnsc is not ncCcssaril

Pron unccd in a PoCt;in fact,hc lnay bc lcaSt oPCn to it Not c

most

cn litcrary history

suggcsts thc traditi nal noti n that grcat pocts havc bccn cn1incnt translators and

lcsscr P ctS ha c bccn imdi fcSrcnt translators,A nun 1)cr ft11c1n st eluincnt ncs,

such as Luthcr,
ss,and SChlcgcl,arc incomParably morc important as translators
than as crcativc vritcrs;soluC ofthc grcat among thcrll,such as H ldcrhn and stc%n

George, cannot bc sirnPly subsumcd as poets, and quite particularly not if`vc

vn, thc task of thc

translator,t ,n ay bC rcgardcd as(listinct and clcarly di fcrcntiatcd frolll the task
f thc poct
The task of thc translat rc nsists in nding that intcnded cffcct[JnrcnFj nl uPon
thc languagc int
hich he is translating vhich pr duccs in it thc cch f the ri~
consi(lcr thc 1as translators. As translation is a mode of its

ginal,This is a fcature of translad nvhich basically diffcrcntiatcs it fi m the P et

vv rk,

bccausc thc cff rt f thc lattcr is ncvcr(lircctcd at thc lan:uage as such, at

its totahty, but solely and iFnn1ediately at sPccisc hnguistic contextual asPccts

rk
unhkc a

of litcraturc, t1

anslation docs not nd itsclf in thc ccntcr f thc

languagc forcst but n thc outsidc facing thc voodcd ridgc;it calls int
cntcring, ain1ing at that single sPot

it vith ut

vhcrc thc echO is ablc to givc, in its o vn

80

/ALTER

8ENJAMIN

languagc,thc rc crbcrati n ofthe v rk in thc ahcn onc Not nly(locs thc ahn f
translation diffcr from that f a litcrary vork it intcnds languagc as a vh lc,taking
an indi idualv rk in an ahen languagc as a Point f deParture~but it is a diffcrcnt
eff

rt alto8cthcr ThC intcntion of thc P ct is sPontanCOus,pri1nary,graPhic; that

f the translator is dcrivati e,ulti1natc,idcational,For thc grcat rn tif of h1tcgrating

many tongues into onc truc lan8uage is at vork,This language is nc in
hich the
indePcndcnt scntences,works ofliterature,critical ju(lgmcnts,will nc
cr c mmunicatc for thcy rcmain dcpendent on translation;but in it thc languagcs thcmsclvcs,
suPPlCmcnted and rcc nciled in thcir rnodc of signi
such a thing as a languagc of truth,thc tcnsi

cati n,harm

nizc If thcre is

nlcss and e en silcnt deP sitory of the

ulti1nate truth vhich all thought strives for,thcn this languagc of truth is~_thc truc

language. And this

ery lan:uage,
hose divinati n and descriPti n is thc only
n
a
philosoPhCr
can
hoPe
f
r,is conccalcd in c ncentratcd fashion in transPcrfCcti
lati

ns Thcrcis no musc ofPh soPhy,nor iS thCrc nc of translation.But desPitc

the clairns of scnth cntal artists, thcsc t

arC not banausic, For thcrc is a Phil _

SoPhical gcnius that is charactcrizcd l)y a ycarning for that language

itself in translatlons.

cs Fdnfucs1mP

jF

Pcnser rdnr cr r sdns dcccssoir s,ni cJluchor menr IlltIis FtIc1Fe cnCor
d1 crsir

,sur'rrc,dcs1dion,
dP` un qu

hich manifests

ircs cn ccfd que PF1Isicu , mdnquc Fd s1IPr mc

F

s IllP chc Pc nnc dc Pr? rcF cs I,,ors q1

imilaorrCFFe P

i,sinon sc

ro c,f

@LI Cr

ienr,

ff m mc m' ri fFcmcI,F Fd
J If what Mallarmo e
kcs

hcrcuncJ
is fully fathomablc to a Phil
`dr

s
Pher,translati n,vith its rudilncnts of such a
languagc, is n1id vay bCtvvcCn p etry and doctrinc. Its products arc less sharPly

dcnncd,but it lcavcs no lcss of a lllark n history

lf thc task of the translat

r is vic

vcd in this light,thc roads t

vard a soluti n

seen1to l)c all thc1 re obscurc and impcnctrablc Indccd,thc problcn1of riPcning
thc sccd of Pure languagc in a translati

n seen s to bc insolublc,(lctern1inablc in no

soluti n

F r is not the ground cut fr m undcr such a soluti n if the repr duction
of thc scnsc ccases to bc(lccisi c?Vic cd ncgati ely, this is actually the mcaning
f all thc forcgoing, The traditi nal conccPts in any discussi n of translati ns arc
dchty and liccnsc~thc frccd n)of faithful rcpr duction and,in its servicc, dchty
t the v rd Thcsc idcas seen1to bc no l ngcr scrviccable to a thc ry that looks
f r othcr things in a translati n than rcproducti n f1ncaning To bc surc, traditional usage makes thcsc tcrms apPcar as if in constant conHict vith each thcr

What can sdchty rcally(l

indi idual

r the rendcring of rncaningP Fidchty in thc translation

vvords can ahnost ncvcr fully rcproducc thc lucaning they ha

original F r scnsc in its Poetic Signincancc is not lhnitcd t

c in thc

meaning, but dcri cs

fr rll the c nnotations convcycd by thc vord ch scn to cxprcssit VVc say of vords
that thcy have cm tional c nnotations A htcral rcndcring of thc syntax complctcly

dcnnohshcs thc thcory of rcproduction f rneaping and is a direct threat t comPrchcnsibility Thc nineteenth ccntury considered H ldcrhn s translations of soPh clCS
as rnonstrous cxamPlcs of such litcralncss Finally, it is sel

c ident h
v grcatly
sdchty in reProducing thc form irnpcdes thc rcndcring of the scnse.Thus n case
f

r litcralncss can bc based n a dcsirc to rctain thc tlncaning Meanin:iS Servcd far

better and litcrature and languagc far worsc~by thc unrestrained liccnse of bad

tmnslat0 Of ncccs ty,tla cfo ,tllc dcmand for hterah s,wh e ju cadon
is bvi us, vhosc legiti1natc ground is quitc

mcaningful contcxt. Fragmcnts of a vcsscl

bscure,rnust be undcrst d in a1norc

Vhich arc t bc glued t gcthcr must

THE TAsK OF THE TRANsLATOR

81

t bC hkc nc
n1atch one anothcr in thc slllallCSt dctails, although thcy nccd n
f
rcscmbhng
thc
mcaning
of thc
n,
instead
anothcr In thc samc vvay a translati
ri inal,must lovin81y and in dctailincorP rate thc Originars1n dc of signi cati n,
thus making both the riginal and thc translation rccognizablc as fragments of a
grCatcr languagc,just as agmen are pa of a vcssel For this cry rcas n trans
lati n

mustin largc mea~sure rc ain m wanting to communicatc somcthing,

rendcring thc scnsc,and in this thc

om

riginal is imP rtant to it only insofar as it has

already rchcvcd thc translat r and his translati n fthe e F rt f asscmbhng and

CxPrCSSing
vhat is t be conveyed In the reahn
f translati n, t o, thc
v rds
v aQx nv

o og Iin thc beginning was thc worcl]aPPly,On tlac Othcr hand,as

rcgards thc mcaning, thc language f a translation can~in fact, must ~let itself
go, so that it gi cs voicc to thc iz,rcnFio of the o1

iginal n t as rcProducti n but as

vn

harm ny, as a supplcmcnt to thc languagc in vhich it cxpresses itsclf, as its o

kind of inFenF1o Thcrcf rc it is not thc highcst PraisC

f a translation,Particularly

in thc a8c ofits origin,to say that it rcads as ifit had originally bcen

lan8ua:e Rathcr,the signincancc

f dchty

vrittcn in that

as cnsurcd by litcralncss is that thc

re ccts the grcat longing for linguistic corllPlcmcntation '1rcal translati

vork

n is trans-

vs the Pure
Parcnt;it d cs n t covcr thc original,docs n t black its light,but all
language,as though reinforccd by its vvn luedium t shinc uPon the riginal all the

mre fully This may bc achic cd, abo c all, by a litcral rcndcring of thc syntax

vhich Pr ves v rds rather than scntcnces to be thc Prirnary clcmCnt of the trans_
lat r

For if tbc scntcncc is the vall bef re thc language f the riginal, litcralncss

is thc arcade,

Fidchty and frccdom in translation ha c traditi nally becn rcgardcd as

c nnicting

tcndcncics, This dcePcr intcrpretation of the one aPParcndy doCs n

;in%ct,it see 1s to dcny the thcr all justincauon F r

serve to reConcilc thc t

hat is lueant by frccdom but that the rendcring f thc sensc is no longer to bc

rcgardcd as all important7(Dnly if thc sensc of a linguistic crcation may bc cquatcd

ith thc inf rmation it conveys docs some ultiI atc,dccisi c clcmcnt rcmain bcy nd

- quite closc and yct in nitcly remote, conccalcd or distin_

guishablc, fragmcntcd or po vcrful In all languagc and hnguistic crcations thcrc
rcluains in additi nt0 vhat can bc c n cycd sOmething that cannot be co 11nunicatcd;dcpcnding on thc contcxtin vhich it aPPCars,it is somcthing that symbohzCs
or son1cthin syn b hZcd It is thc f rmcr only in thc nite products f language,
all c 1Inunication

the lattcr in thc c lving ofthe languages thcmscl cs And that vvhich sccks t

rcPrC^

scnt, to Producc itsclf in the cv lving of languagcs, is that cry nuclcus f Purc

language Though concealcd and iagmcntary, it is an acti c forcc in hf

as tl c

syn bohzcd thing itsclf,

vhercas it inhabits linguistic creations only in syn 1)ohzed
/hilc
that
ulti1uatc
csscncc, Pure languagc, in the various tongues is tied
f rm,

vcightcd
nly t linguistic clcmcnts and their chan8cs, in linguistic crcations it is

ith a heavy,ahen mcaning To rchc c it ofthis,to turn the symbohzing into the

sylnb hzed,t rcgain Purc languagc fully f rmCd in thc linguistic flux,is the tremen~
d us

hich n longcr lncans

and nly caPacity of translation,In this Purc language

`

r CxPresses anything but is, as cxPrcssionlcss and crcativc Word, that vhch is
1ucant in all languagcs all inf rn1ation,all scnsc,and allintention Hnally enc umtcr
a stratum in vhich thcy arc(lcstincd to be extinguishcd This vcry stratum furnishcs

a ncw and highcr justi

cati

n br ce anslation;this

justi6cadon d cs not dch c

82

/ALTER

BENJAMIN

m the scnsc of what is to bc con

cyed,ft,r thc cmanciPati ni m this scnse
is thc task of dehty Rather, f r thc sakc of Purc languagc, a flce translati n
bascs thc test n its oxl'n language It is thc task of the translator to rclcasc in his
f1

vn Ianguagc that Purc languagc vhich is under thc spcll

languagc imprisoned in a
vork in his rc~crcation of that

f an d cr,to

liberatc thc

vork, For thc sakc

PurC language hc brcaks thr ugh dccaycd barriers ofhis sx n languagc.Luthcr, ss,
H ldcrhn, and Gcorgc havc cxtcndcd the b undarics of thc Gcrman languagc ~
And vhat f thc sense in its imPortancc for thc rclati nshiP bet vCCn translati n and
o1

lginalP A s nile may hclP here.Just as a tangcnt touches a c cle hghtly and at but

one l) int,vvith this t uch rathcr than vith thc P int setting the la f according to

vhich

it is t c ntinuc on its straight Path to in

nity,a translation touchcs thc

ri_

inal lightly and only at thc in nitcly small Point f thc scnsc,thcrcuPon Pursuing

coursc accordh g to t11c la

s of idchty in thc frccd n1 f linguistic flux
Vid ut cxPhcitly nan1ing or substantiating it, Rudoll
Pann vitz has cha1 actcrizcd
thc truc signi cancc f this frcedom. Iis bscrvations arc containcd in D1e Kr1sis dcr

its o /n

euroP isc/lcn KuJrur and rank vith Gocthc s N tes

to thc "%sF FFich r

D1 `dr, as the

bcst con1ment on thc thc ry of translation that has bccn Pubhshed in Gcrluany

m a T ng
Pannwjtz
vritCs: Our t
anslatl ns, cVcn d1c bcst oncs, ProccCd
Thcy
want
to
turn
Hindi,Gl^cck,English
into
Gcrman
instead
oF
turnin
PremisC
rs
ha
c
c a hr greatcr I crcncc
Gcrluan into Hindi, G1 cck, Enghsh Our translat
f r thc usagc of thcir
vn languagc than f r thc spirit t thc f rcign vorks .
Thc basic crror of the translator is that hc PrcsCr es thc statc in
hich11is ovvn
langua:e happcns to be instcad of alloxx:ing his lan uagc to l)cP
vcrfully affcctcd
by tbc f rcign t nguc Pa1 ticularly vhen translating f m a lanuage cry l~cn10tc
fro1u his
n hc n1ust go l)ack t thc prirnal clements of languagc itself and Pcnctratc to the P int vhcrc
rk, image, and tonc converge He must cxpand and
dccpcn his language by means of thc forcign languagc. It is n

t generally reahzcd

hat cxtent this is l)ossiblc, t0 vhat extcnt any language can bc trans rlllcd,
h language differs
i n 1anguagc ahnost thc
ay dialect diffcrs
n dialcct;
t

ho vevcr,

this last is truc o111) if one takcs languagc scriously cn ugh, n t if nc

takes it lightly

Thc cxtcnt tohich a translati nn1anagcs to bc in kccping vith thc naturc f

f tl C r nal Tlk l wcr
vhich it is
thc quahty and distincti n of its languagc, thc largcr thc cxtent to
information, thc lcss fcrtilc a Hcld is it f r translati n, until the uttcr PrCP ndCr~
aI1ce of contcnt,hr ml,cing thc lc cr rat1 anslati n Of distinctiv(J Iuodc,
this m( c is dctcrmhcd o cctivCly by thc translatabni

renders it imPossiblC Thc highcr thc lcvcl of a v rk,t11c111 rc docs it rcn1ain trans-

n nly ncetingly This,of coursc,aPPhcs

n thc Othcr hand, Pr c t bC untranslatablc n t
bccausc f any inherent difnculty,but bccause of the l scncss ith vvhich n1caning

attachcs t them Con r nation of this as

ell as f evcry other imP rtant asPcct is
suPPlicd by Holdcrhn s translations, Particularly thosc f thc t vo tragcdies by
latablc c cn if its rncaning is touchcd uP

to originals only Translations,

soPhoclCS In them thc11arm ny ofthe languagcs is so Prof und that sense is t

uchcd

by languagc only thc`vay an acohan harP is t uchcd by thc vind H ldcrhn s translati ns

arc PrototyPCs()f thcir kind; thcy are to c cn thC mOst Pcrfect rcndcrings

ftheir tcxts as a PrototyPc is t a modcl This can l)e dcn) nstratcd by coluParing
H l(lcrhn s and Rud lf Borchardt s translations f Pindar s1 1ird Pvthian()dc F r

THE TASK OF THE TRANSLATOR

d s

83

vcry rcason H ldcrhn s translati ns in particular arc subjcct to thc cnorn1ous

dangcr inhcrent in all translations thc gatcs of a languagc thus cxPandcd and modi_
ncd lua

slan

cncc I1

shut and cnclosc thc translator vvith s

klcrlin

s translations

on1abyss to abyss
in thcn1111caning PlungCs
until it threatens to bccome lost in t11c bottornlCss dcPths
f languagc, T11crc is,
h
cvcr,a stoP Itis uchsafed t Holy Writ al nc,in hich lncaning has ccascd
t bc thc
atcrshcd for thc rl
f languagc and thc fl
v()f rc clati n, Whcrc a
tcxt is idcntical ith truth rd gma,
here it is suPP scd t l)c thc truc language
in all its literalncss and
vith ut thc mcdiati n of lncaning, this tcxt is unc nditionall translatable In such casc translations arc callcd f r nl becausc of thc
Plurahty of1an uagcs JuSt as, in thc riginal, language and rc clati n arc nc

ithout any tcnsion, so thc translation Illust bc onc vith thc original in d1c )rm
somc
f thc intcrhncar crsion,in vvhich litcrah)css and frccdorll arc unitcd For t
ccn the lincs; this is
degrcc all grcat tcxts c0ntain thcir P tcntial translation bct
truc to the highcst dcgree of sacrcd `t1tings Thc interhncar crsion of thc
fr n1 s

Ph cles verc11is lastvork;

ScrilDturcs is thc Prot typc or ideal of all translati

A note on IIarry zohn s translation

s

cvcn Rend

In1968Harry Z

ll lDtlbhshc

d a uonce1 tng anslauc,nt,f Wakerl3cnjamh

des Ubc1 sctzCrs, entidcd Thc

Task f

thc Translatoi

Dk Au alDC

Bccausc of coPyright rcstrictions,

m in
hich Bclllan1iI1 s hmous essay is 1own
Thcsc notes exan inc ccrtain ProblCms raiscd by Zohn s

Z 111) s crsi()n col`ti11ucs to bc the maln ll)1

to Enghsh languagc 1 cadcrs

Thc n10st ob ious arc R)ur glaring o1nissions C)11c ofthcse has been n

ted by a numbcr

of critics

gc

`'issc Relati

nsb(

sie nicht vo11 rne

:Jlrc11gutcn,ja cllcicht bcstcn Sinn bchalten,wcnn

berein ausschhcsshch auf dcn Mcnschen bczogcn /crdcn

g 1

(Benjamin192 10)
certain corrclati e conccPts rctain their n1eaning, and P sSj1)ly thcir f remost
signi cancc, if thc

arc rcfcrrcd cxclusi ely to n1an

(BCnjaluin1968:70)
Herc tllc omissi n ofd,e ncgati
in1Possil)lc to foll

c cOI1

Pletcly in erts Bc11jamin

s mcaning and n1akcs it

thc logic of his argun1cnt at this Point Paul(lc Man,in his c n1n1cn-

tary on Z hn s translatl n,regardcd this n1ission as particularly crucial bccausc it conccals

vhat dc Man sa ,as Benja1in s asscrtion ofthc inhuman,1neChanical peratio11oflanguagc,

of thc cssentlal jn vm ni,

of languagc(de lMan1986)

A sccoI1d omission I11a c11ot sCCn mcntioncd l)v critics()ccurs Iater in the essa

Vcnn abcr dicsc derart bis ans111cssianischc Ende ihrcr Gcschichtc

achscn

(Benjamin1923:1+l
If,ho vc cr,thCsc languagcs continuc to gr

v in

d is

n1anner until thc end of

their tilnc

(BClllamin196 74)

\^/ALTER BENJAMIN

84

e u
I
t1W
e,

n1cssianism in Bc an1in

j:n

FllFc111

: 1 \ I`

s th ught in gencral and in this essay in palticular,

The third on1ission, xx=hich als

sccms to haVe Passcd unnoticed, occurs in thc crucial

PaSsage whcrc Bcl lan1in is discussing d`c wesenhaRc Kcrn that is thc truc translator s chicf
Conccrn, and xx!hosc ripening Points to
fards thc (mCssianic)
rcalnl of reconciliation and

fulhllment f languages
vithout c cr quite reaching or reahzing it:
Den erre|Fht CS lllCht mit sttlmPf u11(l sticl,aber in ihm stcht dasjcnigc,was
an cincr ubersetzung mehr ist als Nlitteilung Gcl`aucr10sst sich dieser wcscn-

haftc Kcrn aIs dasjcnigc bcstimmen,was an ihr sdb

nicht vicdcrum

tIbcrsetzbar is

(BC11jami11192 15)
Thc transfcr can never bc t tal,but xk hat rcachcs this rcgion is that clcn1ent h
a translati

n
hich gocs bcyond t1 ansmittal f

bcst dcnncd as the elen1cnt that d

sul jcct

n atter

This nuclcus is

es n t lcnd1tself t translation

(BCnjamin196 75)
v rds an ihr and
icdcrun1
in the second sentence,

lt
that
it
seems
Bcltlamin
is
suggesbng
tllat
thc
ot,lect of thC translator s chief

In this casc,Zohn fails to translatc the

ith

thc r

Conccrn lics comPlCtCly outsidc his reach Although in()nc sensc this ll,ay l)e truc(as Paul

dc
an I1as argucd),the Point here is surely that vhate cr asPcct of thc
vcsenhaRc Kcrn
is cchocd in a translatlon( an ihr clcarly rcfcrs l)ack to die Llbcrsctzung in thc Preceding
scntcn ce) canl) t be translatcd again This PresuPPoSC

that thc
vesenhaftc
Kcrn can bc translatcd a Hrst tirne Thc reason it cannot bc translated a8ain-that is,thc
, of( oVrse,

a;

s
I:;
i
us
&
JT J

I/}l; ;

ea
1r
yl1
: T: T
a
F

|l;

:l

;c

;,

lil
I

A ft)urth(,n1ission, VhiCh alsO secn s to have gonc tlnnoticcd,c

Bcnjal lin is discussil)g the traditional conccPts

urs
(

in a PasSagc

vhcrc

f frccdom and dchty in translation

ssen
Vicdergabc und in i11rem
ort~sind die akhergcbrad1tcn Bcg1 l in jcdcr

Trcuc und Freihcit ~ Frciheit dcr sinngclv

Dicnst T ue gsgcn das

Diskussion von Ubcrsctzungen

(Bcnjamin192 17)
The traditional conccPts in any discvssion of translations arc hdclitv and liccnsc

~thc ccd m f

hith h cPr dutti n,and ll lts scrXlcc, dclity

(BCnjami1

Zohn s translatlon o its the words si

meanlllg ),tllus maklng lt h

is tbe frccdom~dc111aI1dcd b

d r

ln emJss n

thc rcader t

111cJ

cw rd
1968:77~78)
tl

c( icndcring in accord with thc

ecdom Bcnjamh rc rb t

sce that thc

l1

translation thcorists fron1Horacc to Drvdcn and bc

ond-

to deviate ion1thc lettcr of the tcxt in ordcr to rendcr its sPirit

This n1ission is apparcndy conncctcd

ith a Rlndan1ental n1isunderstanding of

Benjan1in s text re cctcd in zohn s translati n of thc follo vin8Passage

THE TAsK OF THE TRANsLATOR

85

enn Trcuc und Freihcit dcr Llbersctzung scit jehcr als xslderstrebcndc
Tcndcnzcn betl^achtet vurden,so schcillt auch dicsc ticfere Dcutung dcr eincn

bcidc nicht7u crsl,hncn, sondcrn inl Gcgcntcil alles Rccht(ler andern abzu~
enn nicht auf die Vicdcrgabe
sprcchcn Denn vvorauf bezicht Frciheit sich,
dcs sinnes,die aulhorcn s ll,gesetzgcgcbcnd zu heissen?
(Bcl lamin192

18-19)

Fidchty and frccdon1ha e traditionally l)een regarded as c nflicting tcndcncics

This(leeper intcrPrctation of thc()nc aPParcntly docs not serVe to reconcile

;in hct,it sccms to dcny thc thcr alljusu cati n F r whatis mcant
by frecdom but that thc rendcri11g ofthe se11se is no longer to be rcgarded as
the t

all in

Portant?

(Bcnjamin196 79)

Zohn s rcndcri11gn akes it aPPcar that thc rcintcrPreted conccPt is frecdon1,and that
thc rcintcrPrctation clepri

es thc c nccPt of ndChty f any justi cation This is precisely thc

reverse of vvhat Bcnjamin s tcxt says The Prcccding Passage has offt

red a rcintcrPrctation

of dchty t the v rd(II0rr jc

eir)that disc nnccts it froll1the translatjon of rncaning,and
lt is clcarly this rcintcrPretati n to which Benjall ln is rckrllng hcrc Thus thc concept that

is dePrived f any justi cati n by this rcinterPrctatlon is frccd

sh uld rcad

vhich

is n

Forvhat ca11thc Point of frccdon1bc,if n

rmati c?

rn, and thc last sentcnce

t the repr duction of Fucani11g,

ngcr to bc rcgarded as n

Notc

The imPcrfCcti n of languagcs consists in thcir Plurahty,thc suPrcmC

ne is

vhisPcring, thc
vithout acccssOrieS or cvcn
vriting
thinking is
ilnmortal
ord still remains silcnt;thc divcrsity of idioms n earth prcvcnts
vords
vhich ther visc, at one singlc str kc,
cvcrybody fr n1 uttering thc
lacking

vould matcriahzc as truth,

Chapter 8

Ezra POund

GUIDO'S RELATIONS

rJa;F

a;a i
t
Ja J f1R
focus attention uPon matter of intcrest that oul(l other vise ha e Passcd vithout
vlcdgc or

vhen hc has any rCally 8cncral kn

nds

ith
rcgard
to other
cate
his
iR
or
other),
l
(s`

noticc; hc may, in the rare cases

PercePtion f relati

ns

htcrary invcntions;hc luay,thirdly, r as you1 ight say,con crsCly and as l)art and

hich
suPPlcIncnt of his acti ity, construct cloacac to carry off thC`vastc mattcr,
ork,and vhich is continuously being hcapcd up and causcd
stagnatcs about thc rcal

bcsc pubhshing houscs, and c mbinations of

botb,such as thc Ox rd Prcss ( Vc n tc thcir Partictlla1 h1hmy in a rcccnt rc
to staEl1atC by acadcI 1ic b dics,

i1s F?uns

bl

hK on

c ccln

mon

R yl as

h W

H ;1

FJ
i T; F

1 T | T
y lh

rl: :1 ,

1r1

yr

C(

f1 , T

:n

; :l

:.; fr ;
If

Lt

1
1929

1i

GUID0 s RELATIONS

87

Thc litcraturc of thc Meditcrrancan races continucd in a steady dcscending

ard uctuations.The best pcriod of

v onc cxCcllcnt Itahan tcnnisItahan poctry cnds in thc yCar1321 so far as I kn

cur c of renaissanccis1n.Thcrc arc n1inor uP

cal litcrature
Player and n knovvn Itahan vritcr has thought of considcring thC l
in rclation to thc rcst of the vorld

LCoPardi rcad,and in1itatcd ShakcsPcarC The Princc of Montc l`cvOs has bcen
ablc to build his uniquc contemPorary position bccausc f barbarian contacts,

vhethcr c nsciously, and vi visual sti1nulus from any Printcd Pagcs, r siluPly

ning If
vas a vare of, lct us say, the existcncc of Wagncr and Br
bccausc hc
Nostro Gal,riclc startcd somcthng ncw in Italian Hating Barbarism,tcutolllsm,
ne cr lncntioning thc existcnce of thc ultirllatc Britons,unsurroundcd by any s

of socicty or lylilicu,hc ends as a sohtary,supcr

rt

cially ecccntric,but vith a surpris-

ingly sound standard f valucs, valucs, that is, as t thc rclativc ss,orth0f a fc v

ntrasted to a grcat dcal f flub~dub and action

PCrfCct lincs of riting,as c
Thc Only li ing author vh has c cr takcn a city or hcld uP thC diPlomatic
.

craPulc at thc point ofmachinc-guns,hcisin a P

than a batch f ncurasthenic incomPctcnts or of

sition to sPcak vith

l11 rc

iom thcir jobs,might be,or carc,suPPoscd by thc scicntists and thc P

bc incapablc of action Likc other scrious charactcrs
t

h c

authority

vritcrs vho never ha ing svcrvcd

and to learn to livc, hc has PasSed thr

pulacc to

vho ha c takcn sc cnty yCars

ugh pCri ds vvhercin hc h cd

(or wr tC)wC Should n t quite Say lcss ably ,but with less immedately dcm n
strablc rcsult

This Pcriod ncl rnezz ,this Passage f thc Sel a oscura takes rncn in diffcrcnt
ays, so diffcrcnt indecd that con1Paris n is morc likcly to bring ridicule on thc

comparcr than to focus attcntion on the anal gy oRcn adn1ittcdly far-fctchcd

In many cascs thc c mPlctC man makcs a

cry

pron1ising start , and then

aPPcars t n undcr f r tcn years,or for t vcnty or thirty(cf, Henry

mc solt of dcm nstration,
JameS s mi(ltlle Peri d)to en(l,if he sur vc,with s
n undcrs r

disc
cry, r othcr justi

cation f his having gonc by thC routc hc has(aPParCntly)

stumblcd on,

hcn I translated Guido cightccn ycars ago I did no scc Guido at all I sa v
F
Juovd,jn somc Places
that R ssetti had madc a rcmarkablc translation of thc
in1Pr

scnt

ving (or at least enriching) thC

vas undubitably thc man

riginal; that he

,or Choscn r that Particular job,and that thcre was s mcthing in Guido

that escaPed him OI that was,at any ratc,abscnt

m his

translati ns A robus cz'

a rnascuhnity, I had a grcat enthusiasn1 (PCrfcctly justiscd), but I did m t clcarly

scc exterior demarcations- Euchd insi(lc his cubc, vith n Prcm nition of Carteslan axes

My Pcrccption xx:as not obfuscatcd by Guido s Itahan, difncult as it thcn vas

r me to rcad I was bhscatcd b thc Victo1 lan langua8e rIha ln9t bccn,I very
uldn t ha c d nc
P sSibly c

thc job at all I should have seen thc to

great rnulti~

phcity of Problems containcd in thc nc Pr blcm bcforc mc

Id n t rncan that I didn t sec dull spots in thc sonncts I sa

that Rossctd had

takcn most ofthc bcst s nnCts,that nc c uldn t rnakc a comPlete Cdit1on of Guido
si1nPly by takng Rossctti s translations and lling in tlle gaPs,it vould ha e been
t

drcary a job E cn th ugh I saw that Rossctti had madc bcttcr English Pocms

88

EzRA POuND

than I
vas likcly t 111akc by (in intCntion) sticking cl scr t d1c (hrccti n of thc
original I l Cgan l)y meaning lucrely t 8ivc PrOSc t1 anslati n so that thc rcader
ignorant f Itahan could sec vhat thc lnelodic original n cant It is, h
cvCr, an
illusion to suPPoSC that1nore than nc Pers n in cvcry300,0OO has thc Paticncc Or

vhat are
the intc igcncc to rCad a foreign t nguc f r its sound, r c cn to rcad
knovvn to bc thc1)1astervorks of forcign mcl dy,in rdcr t lcarn the quahties

that mel dy, r to scc vhere0nc s o n falls sh rt,

What bfuscatcd111cvaS

n0t thc Itahan but the crust of dcad En:hsh,thc scdi~

lncnt prcscnt in111yo n a ailablc vocabulary

vhich I, let us h Pc,g t rid of a

'ou can t8or und this s rt of thing It takcs six or cight years t

fC

`years latcr
get cducatcd in one s art,and an ther tcn to gct rid of that education

Neither can anyonC lcarn Enghsh, nc can nly learn a series of Enghshes
Rossctti lnadc his ovvn languagc l hadn t in19101uadc a language,I don t rncan a

language to usc,but cvcn a languagc to think in

It is stuPid t

ovCrlook the lingual in`entions of Prccurrcnt authors,evcn

vhcn

thcy arc f ols or flaPd dlCs r Tenn)sons It is s mctirncs advisable to s rt out

hat and vhy they are

thcse languagcs and invcntions,and to kn0
Kcats,out of Ehzabcthans, Svinburnc Out of a larger set f Ehzabcthans and a
xcd bag(GrcCks,und so c1tCIl,Rossctti out of shccts,Kclly,and co Plus carly
ling Kin
nccslt s,baIlads and
Italia11s(written and P nted);and S b h,indt
carols

Lct mc not(liscouragc a possiblc readcl r spoil any

nc s nai

ce oyment,by

saying that ruy carly 'crsi ns of Guid arc boggcd in Dantc Gabriel and in Algcrnon
It is true, but let us Pass by it in silcncc,

hcrc b tb Rossctti and I ent ff thc

rails vas in takJ11g an Enghsh sonnct as thc cquivalcnt f

r a sonnetin Itahan I d

mcan in ovcrlooki11g thc rnild(liffcrcncc jn thc rhymc schcme Thc rnistakc is

n t

quite

natural , ery fe rnistakcs arc unnatural

ri1ncs off a g d sonnct,and thcrc is a

Rimc l oks vcry i nPortant,Take dlc

acuum And l)esidcs thc m cmcnt ofsomc

cry likc thatin sOme sonnetsin Enghsh Thc fcn1ininc rhymc gocs
agai11for b i us rcasons It had gonc by thc board,quitc ftcn,
i11Provcngal Thc Frcnch 1ade an ecclcsiastical la` about11sing it50/50
Itahan s nnets is

by the b ard

As a bad anal gy,imaginc a Giotto or simonc Martl11i esc

ils

by sir

, translate(l i11t

J shua , r sir Frederick Lcighton.somcthing is lost,s n)cthing is somc~

vhat dcnaturcd,
VC ha c a Cirllabuc d nc in oil, not by Holbcin, but by
suPP se, h
vcvcr,

some contcmporary f Holbein wh

can

tP nt as well as Cimabuc

Thcrc are ab ut sc cn reasons

hy thc anal gy is incorrcct, and six m rc t

cc thc rcadcr s rnind fron1prcc nccivcd

notions about the Enghsh of Ehzabcth and hcr British ardcn fsong birds ~And
to considcr languagc as a mcdium of cxPrcssion

supposc it invcrtcd,but it rnay scrve to f

(BrCton f rgi cs Flaubert n hcaring that Fathcr(]ustavc was trying only to ive

PK oll dc,h dctlr

jat lle

( ,P12))

Dr schc ing has lccturcd about thc Itahanate Enghshman of ShakcsPcarc

I nd t v

S day

ShakcsPcarc plots vithin tcn Pages of each thcr in a f rgottcn hist ry

f Bol gna,PrintCd in 1596 Wc havc heard f thc effccts fthe t1 avclling Itahan
thcatre c mPanies,c n2n2 did dc`F drr ,etc VVhat haPpcns vhcn you idly attc nPt to

G UIDO s RELATIONs

89

translatc carly Itahan into Enghsh,unclogged by the Victorian era,frccd fr ms nnet

bscssi n,but trying1ncrcly t sing and t lCave out thc dull bits in thc Itahan, r
thc bits ou don t undcrstand?

Guido in C dcx
I ffcr y u a Poen1 that don t mattcr , it is attributcd t
Barbcriniano Lat 3953 Alacci Prints it as Guido

s;Silnonc OcChi in1740says that

vithout PrinciPlCs,and
Whoc cr vrotc it, it is,

Alacci is a f ol r v rds to that cffcct and a carcless man

Pr cCCds to Print thC P

indubitably,not a cdPo

Mad nma

vVith th se of Cino Pist ia,

dr rcl

la v stra bclta cnf h

si li rnei chi

chc mcnan lo corc

A la bataglia ovc l

Che(lcl

cll

'

MS

oJJli

anosc amore

stro Placcr armato uscio;

us o

Si che ncl priln asalto chc asah

Pass dcntr la rncntc e fa signorc,
E PrCSC l alma chc fuzia di fore

Planzcnd cli dolor chc vi scntio

Pcr
A/1

cdctc chc stra bcltatc

ha und c il cor morto

ssc la f

Et a lnc nc con icn clamar PictatC,

Non Per calnpar,lna Per a Cr conforto

Ne la mortc crudel chc hr min htc

Et o rason sel non inzessc il t rt

Is it

,orth an cdit

attracti c

s vhilc

to include it am ng dubious attrit)utions?It is not

cry

until onc starts Playing vith thC sirnPlest Enghsh Cquivalent,

Lady thy bcauty d th SO mad ll,inc eycs,

Drixlng my hcart to strifcS whcrcin hc dics

sing it of coursc,don t try tO sPcak it It thor ughly faIsi cs thc m vcmcnt oF thc
Itahan, it is an oPCning quitc g d Cnough for Hcrrick r CamPion, It v l helP

you to undcr and just why Hcrhck,and CamPi n,and Possibly D nnc are still
:ith

us.

The ncxt linc is rathcr a chch ;thc line aftcr l orc Or less lackln in intCrcst

Wc pu uP on:

Whcrcby th u

sccst ho v fair thy l)cauty is

To comPass d n

That ukl bc cry nicc,but it is hardly translati n

Takc thcsc scraps, and thc ahnOst imPossiblC c nclusi n, a tag of Pr en al

v l help you to undcrstand somc fA/1,
dc schl ezcr s rcmarks ab ut stravinsky s trcnd to vard luelody,And you ill als

rhythn and luake them int a Plenum,It

sCCVhat the best Ehzabcthan lyricists did,as vvcll as vvhat thcy didn

t,

90

EzRA POuND
My t
o lincs takc dlc pcning and t

and a half of thc Itahan, Enghsh more

concisc;and thc octave gets too light for thc scstct, Lighten thc scstct

so unto Pity1nust I cry

N tf r safcty,but to dic
Crucl Dcatl

is n

w mine ease

If that he d inc cn o

is,

Wc arc Prcscrving onc valuc of carly Itahan

v rk,thc

cantabilc;and vc arc losing

anothcr,that is thc sPccinc vcight.And if c n ticc it vc fall on a root(liffcrcncc

Thc Phil S Phic sch l con1ing out of Bol gna , and tllc
Ehzabcthan lyric or in thcsc t v couplcts,and in attacking this sonnct,I havc lct
vcrc all I, rathcr bhndly, had to carry
hich
go thc fcrvour and thc intcnsity,
through Iny attcmPt of t vCnty years gone
And I tl ink tl t if any nc now lay,or if wc assumc tl tlley mostly Fh n(in
thc exPansi C days)laid, idc carc r coHc statcmcnt of emoton,a dogmatic
vhonl it rnattcrcd vhcther hc
statcmcnt,lnadc vith the scriousncss of somc nc t
had thrcc s uls,onc in thc hcad, nc in thc hcart, nc P Ssibly in his abdomen,or
bct vccn

carly Itahan,

lungs, r vhcrc cr Plat , r Galcn,had l catcd it;if thc ani1na is still brcad if the
re scrious than it
St
PPed bcart is a dead hcart, and if it is all scrious, much m

v
Hcrrick,thc imaginary invCstigator `ill see m rc or lcss11
thc Ehzabcthan m dcs camc into bcing
Let hirn try it for hi1nscl n any Tuscan author f that tirnc,taking thc` ords,
n t thinking grcatly of thcir signiHcancc,n t baulking at chch s,but bcing grcatly
intent on the melody, n thc singlc uninterruPtCd n w f syllables~as pCn as
PossiblC,that can bc sung Prettily,that arc not cry intcresting if spokcn,that don t
c cn
ork int a PCri d r an cven mctrc if spokcn,
kcn,as
And t1 c mastcry,a minor mastcry,will hC in kccPing this linc unbr

vvould havc l ccn t

unbr kcn in s und as a line in nc of Mir s latcst dra vings is on papcr;and gi ing
it PCrfCct balancc, vith no breaks,no bits sticking incPtly ut,and no losscs t thC
forcc f individual Phrascs

Whcrcby thou sccst ho v fair thy bCauty is

mPass doom

ery P ssiblc

t regularly ian11)ic

to t in thc Hnishcd P

em

There is oPP Sition, not only bct`vccn vhat M dc schl czcr distinguishcs as
musical and P ctic lyricis but in thcvriting itsclf thcrc is a(listincti n bct vecn
f thc crbal m cmcnt, and thc meloP Cic
P ctic lyricislu, thc cmotional force
lyricis thc letting thc vords fl

v on a mclodic currcnt, rcahzcd rn t,rcahz-

ablc r not,if thc linc is supposcd to bc sung on a scqucncC of n

tes of diffcrcnt

Pitch

But by tahng thcsc Itaham sonncts, VhiCh arc n t rnetriCa y thc cqui alcnt f
thc Enghsh sonnct,by sacri cing,or losing,or sirnPly n t fcchng and understanding
thcir c gcncy, their sobricty, and by sccking sirnPly that far from quickly or s
casily

as it-looks attainable thng,thc pcrfect1nclody,carclcss

f cxactitudc f idca,

or carcless as t0 vhiCh Profound and fundamcntalidca you,at that ln

ment,uttcr,

GUID0 s RELATIONs

91

vay thc aPParently non-functi ning

pcrhaps in prccisc cnough Phrascs,by cutting a

phrascs( vhoSC appcarancc deccivcs)you nd yoursclf in thc Enghsh scic

nFO song

b
ks

Dcath has bcc mc mclodi us; sorro v is as scrious as thc ni8htingalc s,t mb~
stoncs are shel cs f r thc rcccption of rosc lca cs, And therc is, quitc oftcn, a

M zartian PCrfcction of rnclody, a visdol1R, alrnost PcrhaPs an ultirnate visdon

dcplorably lacking in guts. a y phrasc is, shall vc say, ulgar Exactly,bccausc it
R ls in Prccisi

n,Guts in surgcry rc rs to a ery hmitcd rangc f intcrnal rnish~

ings.A thirteenth-ccntury exactitude in scarch for thc cxact

rgan bcst i1lustrating

thc lack, vould ha c savcd lnc that Plungc Wc rnust turn again t

the Latins When

thc latc T Ro sevelt was inter iewed in Francc n his return orll thc jungle,hc
uscd a phrasc vhich vas translatcd(thc Pubhcati n of the intervie v rather ann yed
him)ThC French at thc P intI mcntion mn: Ils Ont voulu me briscr les r ns mais
je lcs ai s lidcs

And n vv the readcr n ay, if hc likc, rcturn to thc problcm f thc cycs that
lcad thc hcart t batdc whcrc hi1n lo c kills This was not%lt as an in crsion It

was1280,Italian was sull in thc statc that Gcrman is to-day How can you ha c

PROSE in a country whcrc thc chambcrmaid comcsinto your r om and cxclmms:

Sch n ist das Hcmdr

Continue:who is armcc1with tlly dclight,is comc hs that at thc Hrst assault

the1nind,and lords it there,and catchcs thc brcath
`ard t
(s ul)that`vas
ccing, lamcnting the grief I fecl

Vhcrcby th u seest hov thy bcauty ln veS the Iuadness, hencc is the hcart

hc assads,hc passes in

dead(st Pped)and I must cry n Pity,not to bc savcd but to havc easc ofthe crucl
(lt,ath th u PuttC
n mc,AndIam r ht(0sa c tlae wr ng him conquCrctll

hcn thc rcadcr

v l accePt this littlc pr

blcn

in mcloP ia aS Substitutc for

thc cr ss-V0rd PuzzlC I a 1unablc t Prcdict I lcavc it on thc suPP sition that thc

philosoPhcr Should try aln st cverything oncc

As second cxcrcise, c n1ay t1 y thC s nnct by Guido(Drlando vhich is suPposCd
t

ha c invitcd Ca alcanti s Don,,d mi Pr f

Say vhat is Lovc, vhcncc d th hc start

Thr ugh hat be his c urses bent

N

?
?

cnaory,substancc,accidcnt

A chancc of e e rvill of hcart

\

/hence he statc Or rna(lncss Icadcth

Burns hc vith c nsun ing Pain

Tcll mc, cnd, n

what hc kc(lcth

How,whcrc,and
cr

wh ln d th

hc rcign

say
hat is Lo c,hath hc a facc
Truc f rm or :ain sillailitudc
Is thc L c lifc,or is hc death
Th u sh uldst kn0 for rum ur saith:
scrvant shoukl kn0 his rnastcr s1 ood~
Oft art thou ta cn in his dwclling placc,

7
7
?

92 EzRA POuND
I gi

e the Itahan t

sh
/that

there is n decePti n,I havc invented nothing,I

havc:ivcn a vcrb

f thc riginal, and arrj cd at this

about
cqual to
cquahty by droPping `xl=cight
a couplc of
syllablcs
pcrthat
linc,Thc grcat Past-luastcr of Pastiche
has,it 'ould sccn1,p scd this xl`ay bc rc me A hne ortxl'

of this,a kw more

llom Lorc11zo Medici,and he has c ncoctcd onc ofthc ncst gcms in our language,

(Dndc si n1ovc c(l0ndC nascc Aluot c

qual su Pr Prio lu go,ov

ei din

0ra

sustanza,o accidcntc,o ci rncmoraP

E cagion d cchi, v lcr di cu re/
Da che ProcedC su stato o furorcP

Comc fuoc si sente che div raP

Di chc si nutrc d

lnaand i ancora,
Colnc,c qual`(lo,c di cui si a signc)rcP

Chc cosa ,dico,amor?ac flguraP

A PCrsC R)rma Pur son1iglia altrui/

E lta qucsto amorc o cro C m0rtc/
Ch l

ser e(lCc

savcr(li sua natura:

Io nc d n1ando
oi,Guid ,di lu
Od chc m lto usatc in la sua cortc

Vc arc n t in a rcal1n of Pr o , I suggcst, si111Ply, thc -ay in

vhich early
ltahan poctry has bCcn utilizcd in England Thc Itahan f Pctrarch and his succcssors is of no intcrcst to thC practising
dynan1ics in languagc,thc collcct

vriter or to thc student fc mParative

rs of bI ic~ ~brac

Thcrc is n qucstion of givin8Gui(l

arc Outsi(lc ur d main

in an En hsh co11temP ral^y to hin1scl

thc ulti1natc Britons vcrc at d1at datc unbrecched,PaintCd in

voad,and gruntin:

in am i oln hr m re di cult hr us to mastcr than thc Languc d

Plantagcncts or thc1 iIagua(li si,

Oc f

the

If,ho
'c rcach back to Prc_Ehzabcthan Enghsh, or a pcriod
c Cr,

vhcn thc

ritcrs `crc still intcnt n clarity and cxPlicitness,still PrCfCrring thcm to rnagniloqucncc and thc thundering Phrase,our trial,or nlinc at lcast,rcsults in

XVh is shc that comcs,lnakying turn e cry man s cyc

And n1akying the air to trcmble

ith a bright clcarencssc
That leaded1 vid1hcr L c,in such ncarness

No man may IDroffCr

f sIDCCch morc than a sigh?

Ab GOd,what s11c is hkc

hen hcr wne cyc turncth,is
Fit R)r Amort sPcakc,hr I can11ot at all;
Such is hcr luodcsty,I
E cr

ould call

man elsc but an uselcss uncaslness

No one c ukl cvcr tell all f hcr Pleasauntncss

In that c cry high noble 'ertu lCancth t her vard,

so Bcaut shclylcth hCr forth as her Godhcdc;

s RELATIONs

GUID0

o,

Nc ,cr bcbrc so high was our mind lcd,

N r havc wc sO muCh f hcal as will aford

That our lnind rnav takc hcr imn1cdiatc in its cmbracc,
The objcctions t suCh a mcthod arc:thc doubt as t0 vhcther nc has thc right to

takc a scrious Pocln and turn it into a mcrc cxercisc in quaintncss;thc

rnisrePrcscntation not ofthc P ern s antiquity,but fthc proportionatc fccl fthat antiquity,
byvhich I mean that Guido s thirtcenth_century languagc is to t vcnticth_ccntury

Itahan scnsc much less archaic than any fourteenth-,HRccnth~,

ccntury Enghsh is f r us Itis cvcn d ubtful vhct11cr rny bunghng
years back isn t morc
fcr
ur
in tll

faithful

r early sixtcenth~
crsion oft venty

, in thc scnsc at lcast that it tried t Preserve the

t occur in Enghsh Poetry
of the original And as this fcrvour sirllPly does n

sc ccnttlrics tbcrc is no rcady madc verl)al ugmcl t br s otDlccd caJ n,

In thc long run thc translator is in all Probabdity impotcnt to do czF

f

r the linguistically lazy rcader Hc can sho

v vhcre

of thc vork

thc treasurc lics,hc can guidc

the rcadcr in choicc f vhat t ngue is to bc studied, and hc can cry matcrially
assist thc hurricd studcnt ho has a smattering of a languagc and thc cncrgy to rcad
the ori8inal tCxt al n8side thc mctrical gl zc

This rc rs to intcrPrctati c translatl n Thc othcr sort , I mcan in cascs

ihcrc thc translatcr is dc nitcly lnakin8a nc pocm,falls sirnPly in thc domain
f original vriting, or ifit d es not it must be ccnsured acc rding to cqual stand~
ards,and PraisCdvith sOmc sOrt ofjust(lcduction,asscssablc nly in the Particular
casc

C hapter 9

JOrge Luis BOrges

THE TRANSLATORs OF
TFfr9t s/

s/a eC/by

/V 9/

A/D OJV F/VfG TS

fsr/ler A

`'a

1 Captain Burton

AV

I
l htnaW

tnc: 1J1
t ir
n a famoust1 ansCaPtain Richard Francis Burton,the Enghsh consul~cn11)arkcd
lation of the(:2! Iirdb FyFdi` tId F iFd,whi thc roum know
tllC udc,TJ,c TJ,o sdnd
rkvas thc annihilati n f anotbcr
dnd Onc NifJ
s Onc of thc sccrct aillls of his
gentlcman(also weatherbeaten,and with a dark M rish bcarcl)who w c mPiling
a
ast dicdonary in England and vvh dicd l ng bcforc he vas annih ated by Burton

Ii s

That Cntlcman as
crsion ofhc

) c

Ed vard

r/, usdnd nd

Lanc, the Oricntahst, author of a hi8bly ScruPulous

Onc i\JiJhFs that had suPPlantcd a crsi n by Galland

Lane translatcd against Ga and,Burt n against Lanc;to undCrstand Burt nvc1nust

undcrstand this h sulc d nast

n witll tllc bun(lcr,As is kn wn,Jcan Ant inc Galland was a

Frcnch Arabist vh camc back on Istanbul
vith a diligcnt collccti n ofc ins,
I shall l)e

an1onograPh on thc sPrcad f

coi cc,a coPy ofthc N^ JlFs in Arabic,and a supplcn1cntary Maronitc vhosc mcmoryvas no lcss insPircd than schchcrazadc s T this
bscurc consultant~whosc namc I cl
not wish to brgct;it was Hanna,thcy
say~ wc owc cCrtain fundamcntal talcs unkn wn to the ori8ina thC st rics of

Aladdin;thc Forty Thicvcs;Princc Ahmad and the Fairy Pcri-Banu;Abu al Hasan,

the sleePer altd waker;the ni t advellturc of CahlDll Harun al R hd;tlac txl,o
sistcrs vh en icd

1935

thcir youngcr sistcr, Thc mcre mcntion of thcsc namcs amPly

f TL|OUs

D D

O f rvlrG Ts

95

dcm nstratcs that Ga and estabhshcd thc can n, incorPorating storics that ti1nc
voukl
comc -his cnen1ies

vould rcndcr indisPcnSal)lc and that thc translators t

n t

darc n1it

undcniablc. Thc luost hmous and cloqucnt Cnc rniums

lcri(lgc,Thomas De Q nccy,stendhal,
Tcnnyson,Edgar Allan P c,Ncwman~arc fl m readcrs of Galland s translatlon.
An thcr hct is als

f fllc FJ,ousdnd dnd One NiJhFs~by C

T
f

hundrcd ycars and tcn bcttcr translati ns havc Passcd,but thc luan in Eur
Pc

or thc Amcricas
ho thinks of rl,
of this sr translati

n Thc spani

Tfl

sdnd dnd Onc ^ Jhrs thinks, invahably,

a ccsti e mi un n chcsco Ithouqand

and onc

nhts CSquc] mi un n c cro is to Argcnunc,m undnocrurn overly variant~has

n thing to do vith thc cruditc obsccnitics of Burton or NIardrus, and everything
to do with Ant inc Gdland sb oux and sorcerics,

V rd R)rw r(l,Galland

crsion is thc m

rly
st P

writtcn of dacm all,thc

lcast faithftll,and thc wcakcst,but it was thc m

st wi(lcly rcad,Thosc xx

intilnate vith it cxpcricnccd haPPincsS and ast

nishmcnt Its Oricntahslu,

8rcw

vhich

sccms ugal to us now,w bedazzling to mcn who to k snuf and composcd

aPPcarcd ln1707to1717,t vcl c
volumcs that
vcrc innumerably read and that Passed int various languagcs,

tragcdics in vc acts T vclve exquisitc olumcs

Vc,thcir rncre anachronistic rcadcrs fthc t vcnticth

ccntury,PcrcCi c only thc cl ying a r f thc cightccnth ccntury in thcn and not
thc c aporatcd ar ma fthc Orient vhich t vo hundred years ago vas thcir n
clty
and tllcir glo ,N nc is to blamc br this disjunction,Gallan(l lcast f all At
timcs,shiRs in thc languagc work against him In thc Prchcc t
a Gcrman trans
/Cil recorded that thc merchants f
ctor

lati n f Tllc ll us ncl IQd O,ae i

JflFs,D

thc incxcusablC Galland equiP thcmSClves vith a ahsc full f datcs cach tilnc thc
including Hindi and Arabic

talc obhgcs thcn1to crOss thc dcsert It c uld bc argucd that in 1710thc mcntion

is
ahsc,but that is unnecessary
f datcs alonc sufnccd t crasc the imagc of a

then,vas a sub-spccics of saddlcbag

Therc 11a e becn othcr attacks In a bcfuddlcd PanCgyric that sur

es in his

Gide itupcratcs thc liccnscs f Ant inc Ga11and,al1

thc bcttcr to crasc( /ith a cand r dlat cntircly surPasscs his rcPutation)thc n ti n

f tl eh ralness fM drus,who is
n dc" c Gallall hs0ghtccntl centtlry,
1921 J orccdux cll isis, Andr

and much m re
Galland
d

unfaithful

s (hscrcdons arc urbanc, inspircd by dcc run , not uorahty I coPy

thc tl ird pagc of his N Fs: d iF a F%PPdr cla,cnF dc

wn a w hnes i m

` s n Jir un dcs d rnicrs

ccFrc Pr1nccsse, tlui, ne s drFcnddnF P s fc rcvoir, iF rcfu tfcIns

? crs dc sd md1s n

[Hc wCnt

cdy to thc chamb

that PrincCsS,Wl ,not

cxpccting to scc him a ain,had rccci cd in hcr bcd onc fthc l

vhcst scrVants of
his h usehold]Bu

ncn t,t cs tl ncbulous qci

black cook ofloatllsomc

ay,diSt rts:thc Ori~

8inal is lCss ccrcmonious than Galland and lcss greasy than Burt n (EffcctS of
dec rum in Gallan(l s measurcd prosc, cccroir d ns son Fir has a brutal"ng,)
asPect and f ul vith kitchen grease and griInc Each,in his

Ninety years aftcr Ant inc Galland s dcath,an alternate translator of thc^ JJ,rs
is b rn:Ed
ard

Lanc
Iis biograPhcrs nc cr fail to rePeat that hc is thc sOn of Dr

Thc Philus Lane,a Hcrcf rd Prcl)cndary,This gcncrativc datun1(and thC tCr1

F rm fh ly

cow thatit c okcs)may bC a

lblc

wc nccd.Thc Arabizcd Lane h ed nvc

studious ycars in Cairo, alln st exclusivcly among Moslcms,spcaking and listcnin

96 JORGE LuIs BORGEs

to heir

languagc,conforn1ing to their custon

s vith

the grcatest carc,and rcccivcd

ofthcm as an equal Yct ncithcr thc hi8h EgyPtian nights n r thc black and
PulCnt c c ith cardam m sccd nor frcqucnt htcrary discussions
vith tllc
D ct rs of thc La n r thc cncrablc mushn turban nor the mcals catcn
-ith his
by a

nngcrs luadc hi1n f r ct his British reticcnce, thc dchcatc ccntral sohtude of thc

crsion of thc` JJ,rs

n1asters of the carth, Conscqucntly,his cxcccdingly cruditc

(

r sCCms to bc)a lnere cncycloPcdia of c

asi

n The ori8inal is not Pr

is

fcSsi nally

bsccne; Ga and c rrccts occasional indchcacics bccausc hc l)chc cs thcrn t

C in

bad tastc Lanc sccks thc 1 ut and Pcrsccutcs thcm likc an inquisitor,
is Pr bity

makcs no pact vith

qtlPPlCmcntary

cncc: hc prefers an alarmcd ch rus of n tcs in a cramped

h mtl1mW thlll hkc J shd or r`oo nG P^ d of Fhe

olumc,wh

I,,osF rCPrehensjbfe sorr;Js PPrcss u rePuJndn cxPFdndri n;Ffcr , e rF codrsCJ0r

/
r nsFdF on;J musF ncccss

:y su`Pr ss rh Fher nccd Fc;HcrcdfFcr, sc cs? om ssions;

Hcre, hc

o o/r cs BLzJ ir,oF =indP o`ridr lor rdnxfdri n Mutilati

not cxcludc dcath somc tales are rcjectcd in thcir cntirct

PuriHed vith ut

dcst1 uction,

nd es

bccausc thc cann t bc

This responsible and total rePudiati

n docs n t strikc

mc as illogica
vhat I c ndcmn is thc Puritan subterfuge, Lane is a virtuoso of the

subterfuge, an undoubted precurs r of thc still 1110rc bizar1 c rcticcnccs of

Hollywood My n tes ftlrnish me with a Palr f Cxamplcs In night391,a shcrman
ffcrs a sh
is t ld

thc king ofl ngs, ` h

ishcs to know ifit is n alc Or n1alc, and

itis a hcrmaPhr ditc Lanc suCCcCds in tallling this inadn1issiblc colloquy by

translating that thc king asks`

hat sPccics thc sh in qucstion bcl ngs to, and thc

astutc shcrman rcPhcs that it is of a lalixcd sPCciCs, Thc talc of night217sPCaks

of a king ith tv
vi cs,
ho lay onc night vvith d c rst and thc f ll ing night

vith d c scc nd, and so thcy all vere haPPy Lanc acc unts f rd1cg
d fortunc

f this m narch by sayin8 that hC trcatcd his

vives
vith imPartiahty , . One
`

rcason for this

as

that hc dcstincd his

v rk

f r thc parlor tablc

ccntcr for

n crsation

Placi(l rcading and chastc c

Thc m st bliquc and flecting rcfcrcncc to carnal mattcrs is cnough to make

Lanc forgct his hon r in a Profusion of convolutions and occultations,Thcrc is n

/hcn ee f thc Pccuhar contact of this temPtati n,Lanc is of

othcr fault in hi1m,
an admial,le vcracity Hc h

no cc tkC,which is a Pos

not scck to bring out thc barbaric color of thc ^

forgct it and attcnuatc it likc Galland,who d
n t

vc a l :alltage

Hc does

Flrs like CaPtain Burt n, r to

mcsticatcd his Arabs s thc w uld

be irreParably ut f Placc in Paris Lanc is at great Pains to bC an authcntic

descendant f Hagar Galland

vas comPletely ignorant of all htcral Precision;
Lane justincs his intcrPretati n of cach Pr blematic vord Galland invokcd an in~

isiblc rnanuscriPt and a dead Maronitc;Lane furnishcs cditi ns and pagc numbcrs
Galland di(ln tb ther ab ut notcs;Lanc accumulatcs a cha s f clari6cati ns
hich,
in organizcd form,makc up a scParatC olume T bc diffcrcnt this is thc rulc thc
prccurs r irnp ses Lanc
vill f llov thc rulc hc nccds
nl to abstain fr m
abridging thc original

The bcautiful Ncwman~Arn ld cxchange(1861 1862)~m re memomblc than

vays of translating.
intcrlocut rs ~ extcnsi Cly argucd thc tvv genCral
Ne
lnan chamPioncd t c htcral m dc, the retention of all vcrbal singularitics
its t vo

Arnold,thc sevcre chn1ination of dctails that distract

r dctah1 Thc lattcr Procedure

may ProvidC the charms funif rn1ity and scri usness;thc f rmcr,c ntinuous small

 f T iOus^

@ f

6H

Ts

97

surpriscs, Both arc lcss imP rtant than the translat r and his literary habits, To

translatc thc sPirit is so cnormous and phantaslnal an intent that it mayvell bc

innocuous;to translatc the lettcr,a requircmcnt so eXtravagant that thcrc is n

risk

fits cvcr bcing attcmPtCd M rc serious than thcsc innnitc asPirati ns is thc rctcntion or suPPression of ccrtain Particularitics; m()rc scrious than thcsc PrCfCrcnccs
and oversights is thc m ememt of thc syntax Lanc s syntax is dclightful, as behts
thc rc ned Parl r table
Iis vocabulary is oRcn cxccsSiVCly fcsto nedith Latin

v rds,unaidcd by any artiscc of brcvity Hc is carclcss;

translatlon hc placcs thc adjcctivc roi,,

n thC PCning Page f his

nrjc in thc bcarded1n uth fat vclRh~ccntury

1 slcn
vhich is a kind f futuris1n. At ti1nes this lack

F scnsiti ity scrves hiln

vvcll,f r it allo vs hhn t includc vcry co 11nonPlace v rdsin a n ble ParagraPh,

Jth inv luntary good rcsults The m st rc varding cxamPle fSuch a c Peration
of hctcrogcnous vords1nust be: And in this Palacc is thc last information rcsPcct^
ving in cation luay be an thcr: By thc
ing lords c llcctcd in thc dust Thc f ll
Living One vho does not dic or havc to(hc,in thc namc of Hc to hon1glory and
ays fantastical
pcrmancncc bclong' In Burton- thc ccasional Prccurs r ofthc al

Mardr ~I wotlld bc su ic0 of saus1ingy Oriclltd a rmttla;in Lanc,mch

passagcs arc so scarCC that I must supposc thcIn to bc involuntary,in

thcr v rds,

8Cnulnc
Thc scandalous dccorun1of thc vcrsions by Galland and Lanc has givcn risc to
gcnrc of vitticisms that arc traditionally rcPcatCd I I ySClf ha c n t lcd
ledge that the t
translators did n t
to rcsPcct thiS traditi n, It is co 11non kno
hl l thcir ob1igati n to thc unft, unate man who witncsscd thc N htfP wcr,
a
holc

to thc imPrccatins of a thirtecnth-ccntury garbagc collcct r chcated by a dervish,

an(l to thc cust

ms of sodom Itis c mmon knovvlcdge that they disinfcctcd thc

Nights.
Thcir dctractors argue that this Process dcstroys or
n
cto ofthc

ounds the go d_hearted

c Tl,ousdnd Nifhts dnd d Jhr

nal They are in ror;T F,cB@
n of ancicnt storics to thc lo _br0 v or

is not(morally)ingenuous;it is an adaPtati
`

ribald tastcs f thc Cair middlc classcs ExcePt in thc excmPlary tales of the
sinc`ibc,d~ncI m c,fl,the indcccncies f rJ,c h usdnd dnd C,ne
,Fs havc nothing to do
-ith thc cedon1of thc paradisiacal state They arc sPcculati ns on the Part f thC
c(htor thcir ailu is a round of guffa vs,their hcr es are ncver more than portcrs,
bcggars, or cunuchs Thc ancient lovc storics of the rcPcrtory,thosc vhiCh rclatc
cases fron thc Dcscrt r thc cities of Arabia, arc not obsccnc,and neither is an
Pr ducti n

ofprc-Islan1ic litcraturc Thcy arc imPaSsioncd and sad,and

ne of thcir

favoritc themcs is dcath f rl c,thc death that an Pini n rcndcrcd by thc u` m s

declarcd no lcss h ly than that fa1nartyr vho bears itncss to thc faith

,If /c

aPPr c of this argumcnt,

vc may scc thc ti1ni(litics of Galland and Lane as thc
rcstoration of a Prilnal tcxt
I kn : f an ther defcnse, a bettcr one An e asion of thc Originars cr tic
PP rtunities is not an unPardonablc sin in thc sight of thc Lord vhcn thc Pril ary
aim is to emPhasizc thc at1nosPhcre of magic To o cr lllankind a ncw Dccdmcron
is a c mn crcial enterPrisC like sO n any others;t
ffCr an Ancicnt Marincr/ no v,

or a
BcIr
re,
u i
is a thing that `varrants Cntry int a higher celestial sPhcrc
Littlnann bscrvcs that Th Thousdnd dnd Onc
Jlrs is, ab c all, a rcpcrt ry of
marvcls The univcrsal imP siti n of this assumPtion n c cry Wcstern n1ind is

98 JORGE LuIs BORGEs

Galland s v rk;

let thcrc be no(Ioubt n that scorc Lcss f rtunatc than vc, thc

Arabs clai ut think littIc f thcriginal;t11cy are alrcady vcll acquaintedvith thc

men,1norcs,tahsmans,dcscrts,and dcmons that thc talcs rc eal

t us
In a passagc sonncwhcrc in his vvork,Rahcl Cansin s Ass ns swears hc can salutc

thc stars in fourtccn classical and modcrn languages Burton drcamcd in sc cntccn
languagcs and clairncd t have mastcrcd thirty nvc: scn1itic, Dra idian, Indo_
Eur Pean, Ed i Pic , , This vast
vealth d cs n t comPlCtC his dc6niti n: it is
mcrcly a trait that tallics
vith thc crs, all cqually cxccssiVC. l` nc was lcss
ulncrablc t thc frcqucnt gibcs in Ffud brds a8ainst lCarncd lucn vh arc caPablC of
saying absolutely nothing in sc cral languagcs,Burton vas a man vvho had a consid~

1T ?

:; 1I

'm

;il

:1;

B nd xer s (1853); rS nd` rr vc

of

R m c

c ndra dnd

eccdF,(1855); r,c kt,Rq ions CcnFr F EtltItlFOIidF V ic (1860l; e Ci gr rhc

s inrs(1861);Tflc H h nds gr rJlc:rdz (1869);On dn HcrmdPhr
om r c CdPe
J
d %rd r n (1866); crFe
m
Fh
B

r
ddx

r
u
(1870);IJfrimd
TJ,uF

(1875);% h G Jcl C^o sF`for co d(1883);rJ,eB rhe s ` rd(sr olumc,188+l;

r/,e% mcd

G rdcn Ch tJ,N9F2 ui~a

Po llum wc,lk C0 igncd tc,thc ames

by Lady Burton,along xllth thc PridP0 , r

PriclPus Thc writcr can bc dcduccd orll this
passion f r ge

rhc S

Porr J P Jrd s f Dlvc Poers on

catal guc thc Enghsh captain ith his

graPhy and for thc innumcrablc vays of bcing a rnan that are knO vn

to mankin(l,I will n

tdchmc his mem ry by comparing him t

Mc,l and,tllat

seclcn-

tary, bilingua18Cntleman vvho insnitcly asccnds and dcscends in t11c elcvators of

idcntical intcrnational h tcls, and
h Pays homagc to thc sight of a trunk

Burton,(lid as an A ha ,maclc thc Pi

magC to thc holy citics of Ambia;
icc beggcd thc Lord to dcny his bomcs and skin,his dol r us csh and blood,
t thc Flamcs f Vrath and Justlce;his l outh,dried out by the sdmt n,leR a kiss
n thc aer hth that is
vorshiPPed in thC Kaaba Thc ad cnturc is fam us thc
shghtcst rumor that an uncircumciscd man,a ndsrJn , vas profaning thc sanctuary

v uld ha c mcant ccrtain clcath Bef rc that,in the guisc of a dcrvish,he Practiccd
medicinc in Cairo~altcrnating it vith Prcstidigitation and magic s as to gain thc
his

trust of thc sick In 1858, hc c n11nandcd an expedition to thc sccrct sourccs of

discovcr LakC Tanganyika During that under~

taking hc was attackc(l by a high
cr;in1855,thc somalis thrust a javclin
thc Nilc, an ssion that lcd hhn t
thr ugh

his jaws(Bu
n was coming iom Harar,a oty in the intcH

r f Abyssinia

that vas f rbidden to Eur Peans),Ninc years latcr,hc cssaycd thc tcrril)lc h

sPi~

;1;

r1;C i

J
r
:

Il;1J

h:
iFih
:r:

:rT

:
f
:s
T|
lJ

r

:ii
~and wh
fmyh
t

f l : :i:; ::

l;

l:

:i : :ri{

:s T

r;f

I;!

rrl;l

1 F

sT

ShiP which I must always count among the hi8hcst hon urs

HE

@Ll s D

4 D O f

CF,Ts

99

iords and deeds,Burton could

mourncd his death in lnany stanzas.A man of

vell

take up thc boast f Almotanabi s Divdn:

The h rse,thc dcscrt,thc night kn
v mc,
Guest and s

v rd,PaPer

and Pcn

Itv l

be obscrved that,fr m his amatcur cannibal to his drca 1ing polyglot,I

thosc of Richard Burton s pcrsonac that,lArithout dilninishment
of fcrv r,
vc could ca lcgcndary My rcas n is clcar the Burton f thc Burton

ha c n tr ectCd

Icgcnd is thc translator of thc NiJhFs I havc somcti1nes suspccted that thc radical
n bct
CCn p etry and Pr sc hcs in thc cry diffcrcnt cxPcctati ns of
rcadcrs: P Ctry Prcsupposcs an intcnsity that is n t toleratcd in prosc, somcthing
distincti

sirnilar hapPcnsvith Burt n svork it has a prc rdaincd Prcstigc vithvhich n

thcr Arabist has c cr bccn ablc to comPctC

ThC attractions of thc f rbiddcn arc

rightfully his Thcrc vas a singlc cdition, li1nitcd t ne thousand coPics f r thc
th usand subscribers fthc Burton Club,
ith a legally l)indin8c n11nit ncnt nc cr

to rePrint (ThC Le nard C, sn thcrs rc-cdition

on ks givcn passagcs in drcadful
tastc, ,hosc chn1ination vill bc m urncd
tivc sclccti

by no ne ; Bcnnctt Ccrf s rcPrcsCnta_

cCCds f1
m this Pur cd tcxt.)

n~which PurP rts to bc unabodged~Pr

I
ill vcnturc a hyperbolc

t PcrusC Trl

Th us nd nd0nc j

translation is no lcss incrcdiblc than to rcad thclll in

vith exPlanatory notes by sinbad thc sail

llrs

tO sd

al.d

r,

ThC Pr blCms Burton rcsolvcd arc innumerablc, but a con

rduce tl cm to tla1 cc

in sir Richard

a Plain and litcral translation

lDalld

enient cti n can

his rePtltation all ahst;to 11ft:r

from Lanc as ostcnsibly as possible; and t interest ninctccnth-ccntury British

gcntlemcn in thc vrittcn crsion of thirtccnth-ccntury oral slclll talcs Thc nrst
f thcsc ahns vvas PcrhaPs incompatiblc vith thc third;thc sec nd led hi1n int a
scrious lapsc, hiCh I must no v discl sc,Hundrcds of couplcts and songs Occur in
thc i 1ffl s;Lanc(incaPablC

f falschood cxccpt` ith rcsPcct to thC Hcsh)translatcd

thcn PrcciSCly into a comfortablc Pr

sc

Burtonvas a poct:in1880he had privatcly

publishcd Tl,cK ddh H i bdu,an ev luti nist1 llaPso(ly that Lady Btlrton always

dccmcd hr suPc1 l rt FitzGcrald s Rub r,His ri

fail to ar usc Burton s indignati

al

s pros c soluti

n,and hc ptcd for a rcndering int

n did not

Enghsh crse

~a ProcCdurc that was unfortunate rll thc start since it contradictcd his0 vn rulc
ft tal Iitcralness. Iis ear vvas as grcatly offcndcd against as his sense of logic, for
it is not impossiblc that d1is quatrain is among thc bcst hc camc uP vvith:
A night whosc stars rchscd t run thci c ursc,
A night ofth sc vhiCh ncvcr sccm out vorn:

Likc Rcsurrcction_day,of loncs mc lcngth

T

hlm that watched and waitcd r thc morn2

And it is cntircly PossiblC that this nc is not thc

A sun n vand in kn ll f sand shc sh fed,

Clad in her cram
her r

-hucd chen isctte:

dc v shc gavc1nc drink,

sy chCCks qucncht rc she sct

0f hcr lips honcy

And vith

is

vorst

100

JORGE LuIs BORGEs

I ha c

alluded to the fundamcntal(liffcrcncc bct vccn thC riginal audicnce f

thc tales and Burton s club ofsubscribcrs Thc formcr Vcrc roguish,Pr nc to cxa:

gcration, illitcratc, inHnitely susPicious f thc Prcscnt and crcdulous of rcm tc

marvcls; thc lattcr vcrc the resPcctablc mcn of thc Wcst End,

vcll equipPcd for

(lisdain and cruditi n but not f r bclly laughs or tcrror Thc rst audience aPPrc~

vhalc (licd vhcn it hcard the man s cry; thc sccond, that
thcrc had cvcr becn1nen ho lcnt crcdcncc t any fatal caPacity ofsuch a cry Thc
ciatcd thc fact tl at thc

s marvcls ~undoubtedly adcquatc in Kordofan or B q,

hcrc thcy :ere

offcred up as truc
ran the risk of secn1ing rathcr thrcadba1 c in England (No ne

text

l Cquircs that tl c trutll bc lDlaLlsible Or instant

nd Co csPondence ofKdr

il rx

will lll gnant

ingCnious

n Cn/

ofthc

J%

of Totllet

kCCp his subscribcrs vith hiln,

thc manncrs and cust ms of Moslcm

a tcrritory Pre iously occupicd by Lanc, Clothing, c cryday customs,

rehgious Practiccs, architccturc, rcfcrcnccs to hist

ry r t thc Koran, gan cs,

arts, n1ythology~all had alrcady been cluci(latcd in thc incon

thrcc v lumcs Prcdictab
yhsdc

w leadc

dcmalld tllc mmet

Conrrcrim s or thc scvcrC prCcision of an acrostic,)T

Burton ab unded in cxPlanat ry notcs on

cnient precursor

n(wh SC rst
what was missing was thc er tic Bu

c rt msa hghly Persond

cotl d Cb thdst,f Bcngd)was mmPandy

hich he
caPablC f lling this gaP Arnong thc dclinqucnt dClCctations ovcr
hngcrcd, a good cxamPlc iS a ccrtain random n tc in thc scvcnth olumc
vhich
d e index wittily entitles cdPorcs i aJFdncoFiquer [meIancholy FKnch lct Thc
d1nbu JJl Rc i w accused hirl of riting for thc scvcr; thc nc cF P d Br1rdnn cti
dcclarcd that an unabridged translati nvas unacccPtablC and that Ed vard Lanc

vcrsion rcmaincd unsurPassCd f r any truly scri us usc, Lct us not vax too indig

nant over this obscurc thcory f thC scicntiRc and documcntary suPeri rity of
n Burt n
vas courting thcsc ani1nosities, Furthcrm rc, thc shghtly
arying ariati ns of physical lo c did n t cntircly consumc the attcntion of his

CxPurgati

con11nentary, vhich is cncycloPcdic and scditi us and of an interest that incrcascs

in inversc ProP rti n to i nccessity Thus Volumc six(which I ha c bc re me)

includcs sOmc thrcc hundred notes,among vhich arc the foll vving: a condemna~
n fj ls and a dc nse of c rPoral Pu shmcnt and nes;s mc Cxamplcs ofthc

Islan1ic rcsPcct for brcad; a lcgcnd ab ut the hairincss of Queen BClkis s le8s;an
cnumcration of thc f ur c lors that arc cmblcmatic of dcath;a the ry and Practicc

f Oricntal in8mtltu(lc;thc informauon that angcls Preftsr a PiCbald mount,Whilc

Djinns favor h rscs vith a bright l)ay coat;a synoPsis ofthc rnythology surrounding

thc sccrct Night of Po vcr r Night of Nights; a(lcnunciation of thc suPCr

ciahty

f Andrcv Lang; a diatribc against rule by dcm cracy; a census of thc namcs f
Moha 11ncd, on thc Earth, in the Fire, and in the Garden; a mention of the
A11,alckitc PcoPlc, fl ng ycars and large staturc;a note on thc Pri atC PartS f thc

M slcm,which br thc man cxtcnd f1 om thc navel to his knccs,and br thc :oman
Floln thc toP fthe hCad to thc tips of her t cs;a considcrati n ofthe4scl cl[r0aStCd

bccq f tl.c Argcnthc gaucho;a warlllng al9out tl e discom s of%qtlltation

vhcn thc stccd is human;an allusion to a grandiose Plan f r cross-brccding baboons

with w mcn and thus deri ing a sub~racc of g od Prolctarians At Ry,a man has
accumulatcd affections,ironics,obsccnitics,and c Pi us anccdotes;Burton unburdened hi1nself of them in his n tcs

THf T Ous^

D ^ril D @

JG/VTs

101

Thc basic Pr blCm rcmains: ho v to cntcrtain ninctccnth-ccntury gcntlcmcn

ccntury?Thc styhstic P Crty f thC fJ,rs

ith thc pulp hctions of thc thirtccnd
fd e
is vcll kno vn Burt n speaks somc vhcre f the dry and busincss-hkc tonc
Arab PrOsihers,in contrast to thc rhct rical luxuriancc of thc Pcrsians Littluann,
thc ninth translator, accuscs hilnsclf f having intcrP latCd
vords such as ds cd,
cgfcd, ns ered,in vc th usand Pagcs that kno fn ther f rmula than an invariablc s id Burton l vingly abounds in this tyPc of substituti
n Iis vocabulary is as
unParallclcd as his notcs Archaic

vords c exist vith slang, thc lingo of PrisOncrs

or sailors vith tcchnical tcrms Hc(l

cs n t shy a vay fron the glori us hybridiza~

tion of Enghsh ncither Morris s scandinavian rcpertory nor J hnson s Latin has

his blcssing, but rathcr dlc c ntact and rcvcrbcration of the tvv
f

rcignisms arc in Plcntiful suPPly

Ne l gisms and

c srr ro, inconsJtIu n cc, J, L,rcur, in fJt rid, bdJni

r, nd ,
zir Eath of e
ably the m Jusrc,
^hdtl
but their intersPCrsi n amounts to alond fskc ving ofthc
riginal A good skc ving,

since such
crbal~ and syntactical - Pranks beguilc thc occasionally cxhausting
Fdnfu ~ro rr c,Pundon

coursc of the^

Burton adn inisters then1carefully: rst hc translatcs gra cly

JJlFs

sulayman,Son f

Da id( n thc twain be Pcace!)

us ~hc rcduces

;thCn~oncc ths malc~sty is

Solom n Dax ldson A king who,br dle thcr

translators,is R ing of Samarcand in Pcrsia/ iS,f r Burt n, King f Samarcand in

Barbarian~land ; a mcrchant vh , f r thc thers, is ill-tcmPcrCd , is a man of

vrath Thatis n t all:Burt n revritcs in its entiret -

vith thc additi n f circu1
hmiliar t

stantial dctails and Physi

logical traits~thc initial and

nalstory He thus,in1885,

inaugurates a ProcCdurc wh sc pcrkction(or whoSC rcduCFi dd dbs1 rdum)wc w

no
consider in
ardrus An Enghshman is alvvays rnore tilneless than a Frcnchman

Burt n s hcter gcncOus stylC iS lCss antiquated than Mardrus s, rhich is noticcably

datcd

2 Doctor Mardrus

ardrus s dcstiny iS a Parad xical onc, T hi1n has bccn ascribcd thc n,ordF virtuc
f TJ,c T/, ustznd dnd On ` fflrs, a book of
adn1irablc lasci ity,
vhosc Purchascrs
crc Prc iously h dvinkcd by Galland s
good manncrs and Lanc s Puritan quahns, Iis prodigious litcralncss, thoroughly

dcmonstratcd by the inarguablc subtitlc

Literal and complcte translation of thc
Arabic tt xt, is"vc d,d ng
htll tllc h iRd idCa f writhg h Book gf Fhc
J,oL,s nd J\ ifflrs dnd On pC1JJlr Thc history of ths titlc is instructive;
vc should
rc ic v it bcf rc Procccding vith our invcstigation of

ardrus.
of bcing thc 1u st truthful translator

s grGoFd dnd incs

ucl1 s lfe d

Hdzti,dfxdnd,Pe

Prccious sron s dcs ibcs an arltllol gy titled

aIl wolds wl osc ue meani

lS%tl

ot

salld adwllturcs

l,tlt

vhich pcoPlc rcnamcd

a th usand nights An ther tenth~ccntury document,the

Pcning talc of thc scrics,the king s heartbrokcn ath that cvery

night hc` illved a virgin vhom hc vill ha c beheadcd at da vn, and thc rcs lution of Schchcrazadc, h diverts hh
vith1nar clous storics until a thousand ni8hts
FIflrisr,narratcs the

ha c revol

cd vcr the tw f thcn1and shc sh ws hi1n his s n This invcntion~

far suPcri rt thc futurc and anal

r
g us devices of Chauccr s Pious cavalcadc
Giovanni Boccaccio s cPiden ic~is said t bc Postcrior to the titlc,and
as dcvised

102

JORGE LuIs BORGEs

in thc m f i ing Bc that as may,the C

sguK f1000quicuy

v indisPcnsable night en ergc,

incrcased to 1001 Ho v did this additi nal and n
this proto Pe of c delh Mirand

la s Boo gfHF`Tl1
Js dnd HFso /OFhcrs,
clcodcd by QucvCdo and latcr Vok rc,Littmann suggcsts a contaminatlon of thc

Turksh phrasc bin bir,literally a thousand and onc/ but c t,,1n0nly uscd to mcan

rnany In carly 1840, Lanc ad anccd a morc bcautiful rcas

of e

en numbcrs Thc titlc

n;thc magical drcad

did n t cnd thcrc, Antoine

s ad cnturcs ccrtainl

Galland, in 1704, ehn inated thc Original s rcPctiti n and translatcd 1 Thc,usclnd
nd OI,c /lFs,a namc no v faluiliar in all the nati nsf EuroPc cxcCpt England,

vhich Prcfcrs Tflc

lr bidn j i rs In 1839,thc cdit r f thc Calcutta cdition, W,
J

H.M

llaghtcn,hacl tl

rtlpk

d alldatl

(:2!.

iF Fr F iFd u

fdi`d

This Kllc, joll thr0u sPclli d nc,t

ousdnd h s'nd One N ht

m
kcd
John P nc,in1882,b an publishng his Bo rhc Tflous nd hrs
~go un
nd Onc^ Jhr;Captain Burton,h1885,hs B 1grFhc h usdnd N hrs d N hr;
Boo gf h

J C Mardrus,h1899,his

i r des miFFe nuirs

une nu

r,

I turn to the Passage that made mc dc nitivcly doubt this last translator

cracity. It bclongs to the d ctrinal story f thc City f Brass, which in all o cr
ersions cxtcnds fron1thc end f night566dlrough Part of night578,l)ut vhich
Dottor Mard1 us has transPosCd( r what causc,hs GuaKlian Angd alonc knows)
to nights338-346,I shall n t insist on this Point; vc Inust not vastc Our constcrnation on this inc nccivable ref rm f an idcal calendar, Schcherazadc-Mardrus
rclatcs

Thc watcr ran through ur channclsv rkcd in thc chambcr s fl or with

charming mcanderings, and cach channcl had a bcd of a spccial color;
thc Hrst channcl had a bcd f pink PorPhyry; thC sccond f topaz, thc
third of cmcral(l, and thc fourth f turquoiSc; so that thc
vater :as
tintcd thc color f thc bcd, and bathcd by thc attcnuatcd light Hltcrcd
in tlamugh tllc l abo c,kp jcdcd nto tlac rr unding o Cc

thc marblc valls

all thc s

and

vcCtnCss of a scascapc

As all attempt at s11al ose in thc maIlncr d rJl

(and C Cn salutc)thiS description;as a

P rrrdir

literal and complctc

D@n n(9r ,F,I

at

cePt

vcrsion of a PassagC

c mP sCd in the thirteenth century, I rcPCat that it alarms mc uncndingly, ThC

reasOns arc multiPlc, A Schchcrazadc v ithout R/lardrus (lcscribcs by cnumcrating
Parts,n t by mutual reacti n,docs n t attcst to CirCumstantial details like that f
vater that takcs n thc col r fits bcd,d cs n t deHne thc quahty of hght ltcred

by silk,and d es not alludc t thc sal n dcs Aquarellistcs in thc na1illlage An thcr

small a charn1ing1ucandcrin8s

is n t

Arabic,it is very distinctly French, I<lo

n t kn
v ifthc f rcgoing

rcasons arc sufscient;thcy vvcrc not cnough for rnc,and

l had thc ind lcnt Plcasurc of c mparing the d rce Gcrman ersions by Wc
Hcnning, and Littmann, and thc t v English vcrsions by Lanc and sir Richard

Burt n In thcrll I con rmcd that thc riginal f Mardrus s tcn lincs vas this The
four(lrains ran into a fountain, hich vas of rnarble in vari us colors
,

Mardrus s intcrPolati ns are not uniform At tilllcs they are brazcnly anachronistic~as if suddenly the Fash da incidcnt and N archand s vvithdraval vcre being

(liscusscd For cxamPle:

kT f T

Thcy vcrc crlo king a drcan1city,

zOns dro

@Us^ D /yD OAJE

FGHTs

As far as thc gaze nxcd

`ncd by thc night could rcach,thc valc

103

nh ri_

f bronzcvas tcrraccd

uscs,and screnc gardens;

vvith thc cupolas of Palaccs,thc balconics of h

canals illun1inated b the m n ran in a thousand clcar circuits in thc

shado v fthc Peaks,vvhilc a vay in the distancc,a sca ofrnctal containcd

thc sk s rcflccted rcs in its c ld b

Or this passage,whosc Gallicism is n

lcss Public:

A lllagni ccnt carPct of glorious c l rs

and(lexterousvool oPcncd its

odorlcss o'crs in a lucado

vithout sap,and li cd all thc arti cial hfe
of its

crdant8r vCS

full of bi1

ds and ani1nals, surpriscd in thcir cxact

natural bcauty and thcir Prccisc lincs,

(HerC thC Arabic editi ns statc: To the sides wcrc carpcts, vith a varicty of birds

and bcasts cmbroidercd in rcd g ld and vhitc sd cr, butvith cycs of Pcarls and
rubics,
% cvcr saw thcm c uld not ccase to wondcr at thcm. )

Mardrus cannot ccasc to

onder at thc PovCrty of thc
Oricntal color of

fh
ll us nd dnd Onc
rs
With
a
stamina
w
thy
of
Cc0lB,&Mmc,l
c llcaps

on thc vizicrs, thc klsscs, thc Pahn trccs and the moons, Hc haPPcnS t rcad, in

night570:
ThCy arrivcd at a column f black stonc,in vhich a lnan vas buricd uP
to his armPits Hc had tv cnormous ings and f ur arms;t fo f vhich

crc hkc thc arms ofthc s ns f Adan ,and t v likc a li n s forcPavvs,

with ir n

daws Thc hair

n lus hca(l was likc a horsc

s tail,and hs eyes

crc hkc clubcrs,and hc had in his forchead a third eyc

thc c c f

a l

vhich vas likc

nx

He translatcs luxuriantl

Onc e ening the caravan camc to a colull

n of black stonc,t

vhich vas

chaincd a strange bei 1g, nly half of vhosc body could bc sccn,f r thc
othcr half as buricd in thc ground. The bust that emcrgcd fron1thc

carth sccmcd to bc somc monstrous sPavn

ri

ctcd dlcrc by thc forcc

of thc infcrnal Po vcrs Itvas black and as large as thc trunk of an ld,

f itS fr nds It had tvc cn rmous black

wings and ur han(ls, f whchtw wcrc hke thc dawcd Paws fa h n
A tuR
fc arsc bristlcs likc a vild ass s talc
h"DPcd

v dly ovcr its

rotting Paln trcc, striPpcd

frightful skull
its d

Bcncath its Orbital archcs rlamcd t v rcd PuPils,

hilc

ublc_h rncd f rchcad vas PiCrccd by a singlc cyc, hich oPcncd,

irnmobilc and xcd, sho ting out grccn sParks likc the gaze of a tiger
or a panthcr
some vhat latcr hc vrites:

lO4

JORGE LuIs BORGEs

Thc l)ronzc of thc va s, thc Hcry gcmstones of the cuP las, thc iv ry
tc aces,the canals and all the sca,as wcll as tlac shad
tovards

ws pr cdcd

the Wcst, lncrged harm niously bcncath thc n cturnal brcczc

and thc111agical rnoon,

lagical k a man()f thc thirtccntl)ccntury,must havc becn a cry Prccisc classi~

cati n,and not thc gallant doctor s11)CrC urbane adjcctive
l susPcct that the

Arabic languagc is incaPablc fa literal and co1 Plctc crsion of 1ardrus s Para_
1

graPh,and 1cithcr is Latin or thc sPanish of Migucl(lc Ccr antcs,

TFlc Book frhe ho sdnd dnd Onc N rs ab undsin tw l,l cedtlrcs:onc ll tll ely
rmal),rhyn1cd Pr sc;thC Othcr,rnoral Prcdications,Thc Hrst,rcta"1cd by Burton
and by L1ttmann, coincides vith thc narrator s moments of anirnation: PcoplC f
comcly asPcct, palaccs, gardcns, magical oPcrati ns, mcntions of thc )ivinity,
sunscts, battles, da vns, thc bcginnings and cndings of talcs ~1ardrus, Pcrhaps
mcrcihlly, mitsit Thc sccond requires two hcultics:that of n1ajestically combin11ncntsvid1out clnbarrassn cnt
ing abst1 act vords and that f offcring uP st ck c
Mardrus lacks both Fr n thc linc lllcluorably translated by La11c as And in this
f

Palacc iS thc last inf

rmation rcspccting lordS c llcctcd in the dust/ thC good ID

ct r

barcly cxtracts: Thcy passcd on,all of thcn1!Thcy had barcly thc timc t rcPosc
in thc shaclo of my towc , Thc angcl s conkssi n_ I am imPris nCd by P wcr,
11uandS it,t
hom
c nnncd by sPlcnd r,and PuniShCd f r as long as thc Etcrnal c

is, for p Iardrus s rcadcr,

I am chaincd hcrc by thc
Forcc and Glory bclong
rcc until thc cxtinction of thc ccnturics

In isiblc F

ill I1c is incapablc

Nor(locs sOrCCry havc in
ardrus a co-consPirat r ofg d
ithout sl irking He feigns to translatc, f r
f n1cnti ning thc suPcrnatural

examPlC

onc day whcn CaliPh Abdclmclik,hcahng tdl of cert n csscls f

antiquc copPcr
vh sC c ntcnts crc a strangc black sln kc-cloud
f diab hcal for 1,mar eled grcatly and sccmcd to place in(loubt the
rcahty of facts so Conunonly kno
`n, thc travcllcr Tahb ben~sahl had
tO Intcrvcnc

In this ParagraPh(hke thC Othcrs I11ave cited,it bclon8st

Brass,
vhich, in NIardrus,is Inadc f

S0C0n11uonly kno vn
tvv

the St ry fthC

City of

Posing Br nze), the dehbc1 atc candor of

and thc rathcr in1PlauSiblC d ubts f CahPh Abdchnchk arc
in

PCrs nal contril)uti ns by thc translator

Mardrus( ntinually strivcs t c mPlctC

thcvork ncglccted by thosc languid,

an nymus

Arabs,Hc adds Art Nou cau Passagcs, nc ol)sccnitics,bricf c mical

intcrludcs,circun1stantial dctails,sym1uctrics, ast quantitics f
isual(Dricntahsm
An cxamPlc aluong so many in night 573^ thc En1ir Musa bin Nusayr rdcrs his
blacksn`iths and carPcntCrs to construct a stron:laddCr of
d and iron Mardrus
(in hiS ni

ht344)rc rms

this dull el

is

dc

addin8tllat thc n1cn fthe camP :ent

ith knives and sch itars,and bound thcm

in search of dry branchcs,PcclCd t11c n

togcthcr ith turbans,l,clts, camcl roPes, leathcr cinchcs and tack, 11ntil thcy had
ith stoncs on
Vall,suPP rting it
built a tall laddcr that they proPped agaiI1st thc
both si(les,

In general,it can bc said that N ardrus does not translate thc bo k s

kT

E Tr|@us^ D

D O

rGHTs

105

vords but its scenes: a ccdom dcnicd to translat rs,but t lcrated in illustrat rs,

vh arc allovved to add thesc kinds f dctails , , , Id n t kn0 v if thcse sn1ihng

divcrsi ns arc what inftlsc thc Work with such a haPPy ak9thc a of a far tchcd
us hcRing of(hcti narics But to mc thc
PCrS nal yarn rathcr than f a labori

ardrus translatlon is thc most rcadablc of thc 1all~aRer Burton s incomPa-

crsion, hich is not truthful either (In Burton,thc falsiscati n is of another

rdcr It resides in thc gigantic cmPloy of a gaudy Enghsh,crarnrncd ith archaic

rable

and barbaric words.)

k ll ot

I would grcady dcplo

br Mardrus,br mFelD if any c

nstabtllary

thc forcgoing scrutiny, Mardrus is thc Only Arabist vhose

m
as
Pr
tcd
by
mcn oflctters, vith such unbridled success that n0 v cvcn
glory`
intcnt vcrc rcad int

thc Arabis know wh hc is Andro Gidc was among the rst t pra`c him,in

August1889;Ido n t think Cancela and CaPdevila vdl

t

bc the last, My ai1n is not

dcm hsh this adn iration,but to substantiate it, To cclebratc Mardrus s ndchty

is t lea e ut

thc s ul fD ardrus,to ignorc N1ardrus cntircly. It is his inndchty,

his happy and creativc in dehty,that l ust rnatter to us,

3 Enno Littn

ann

fIlFs,Gcrmany
Fathcrland t a famous Arabic cditi n of J,ci Jaousdnd d,,tf one
takC(vain)gl ry

in f ur vcrsions

by the librarian though Israchtc

(]usta

Can

Weil-

thc advcrsati c is fro 1 thc Cata1an Pagcs of a certain Encyclopcdia ~; by AIax

Hcnning, translator fthc K ran;by thc man f lcttcrs F hx Paul Grcvc; and by

Enno Littmann,dcciPhercr fthe EthioPic inscriptions in thc fortrcss of Axum Thc

Hrst f thcsc versions,in four volumcs(1839 1842),iS the m st PlCasurablc,as its

author~cxilcd om A ica and Asia by dysentcry-strivcs to maintain or substi

tute f r thc Oriental stylc,

is interpolations earn rny decPcst rcsPCct

intrudcrs at a gathering say, Wc do notvish

He hass mc

to bc like thc m rning, vhich disPcrseS

Of a gcncr us king,hc assurcs us, The Hre that burns For his gucsts
brings to 1ind the Infcrn and thc de 0f his bcnign hand is likc thc Delugc ; of
alI rc elries,

an ther

crc lil)cral as the sea.

he tells us that his hands

Thcsc nnc aP crypha

arc not unvorthy of Burt n or A/1ardrus, and dlc translator assigncd thcn to the
Parts in crsc, hCrC this graceful anilnation can bc an rsdFz or replaccmcnt for thc
ori inal

rhymcs,Whcrc thc pr sc is conccrned,I scc that hc translated it as is, vith

c tain justi cd omissions,cqodl ant

f1 om

hypocri and imm dcs .Burton

PraiSCd his work~ as hithful as a translation of a PoPular nature can be Not in

ain
as Doct r WcilJc vish though librarian ;in his languagc I think I pcrcci c
somcthing of the na r f ScriPturc.
Thc second versi n(1895 1897)disPenseS vith thc cnchantments of accuracy,
iith thosc ofstylc I am sPCakng ofthc Onc Pr
but also

Arabist, to Philipp Redarn

s t/I11v rs Fbi3 ioFhck

idcd by Hcnning,a LciP7ig

This is an cxPur8atCd crsion,

though thc pubhshcr clairns Othcr vise Thc stylc is d ggcd and rlat.Its l ost indis~
putablc virtuc luust bc its lcn th The cditi ns of B laq and Brcslau arc rCPrcsCntcd,

rd NiJ rs Henning,
along ith thc Z tcnbcrg manuscripts and Burton s suPP`cI
ord, supcrior t Hcnning, translat r f
translator of Sir Richard, is,
ord for
I

Aral)ic,wluch is mercly a consrmati n of Sll Richard

s Prill

acy over thc Arabs

106 JORGE LuIs BOR

GEs

n abound~ahn st dePrivcd
f their authority by the information that Burton viclded thc languagc of Chaucer,
In the b ok s PrcfacC and conclusion,praiscs of Burt
cqui alcnt t

mcdic al Arabic, A mcntion of Chauccr as one of thc s urces of

vould havc bccn m rc reasonable (An thCr is sir Thomas

Burt n s vocabular

s Rabd s,)
Thc third
crsi n, Grcvc

urquhart

s, dcri cs frolll Burton

s Enghsh and rcPcats it,

excluding only thc cncycloPedic notcs, Inscl-Verlag Pubhshed it bcf

Thc f urth(1923-1928)comes

to supPlant thC Prc

re thc var.

us onc and,likc it,runs

to six v lumcs. It is signcd by Enn Littmann, dcciphcrcr f thc n
numents of
Axum,catal gucr of the283Ethiol,lc manuscoP u lin JcruSdCm,c t0bttt r
t tl cz Fsc

r"syrioF i Though k d cs nc,t cnga~gc in Btlrton s indlllgcllt

i

itering,his translation is entirclv ank,Thc rn st incffablc bscenitics do n t givc

hm pause;hc rcnd sthcm hto s

pl id

German,on!

n1its

not a singlc
vord, n t evcn th sc that registcr- 100y rarcly
O dmcs~the
into Latin,He
Passagc
onc night to thc ncxt Hc ncglects or refuses all local color
fr

om

cxPrcSs instructions

n1thc PubhSher vere ncccssar to makc hiFn retain the namc of Allah and n

t and J l1PaPe,htn translates Arabic crse into

XVestcrn crsc Hc notcs ingcnuously that if thC ritual announccmcnt so-and-so

Pronounccd thcsc vcrscs wcrc foll wc(l by a paragmPh f Gcrman Pr se,his

readersv uld bc disconccrtcd Hc Providcs vhatc cr notcs arc ncccssar f0r a basic
understanding ofthc tcxt:twcnty or s PCr v lumc,all fthcm lac mc e is alwa s
luci(l,rca lablc,mcdi crc He bll ws(he tClls us)thC ver brcath f thc Arabic'If
sLlbsdttlte k vc la Gocl,uktx B

thc n cF

BIJrdnnic

cont ns n crrors,his translad n is thc best f all thosc

in circulati
n I hcar that thc Arabists agree;it1nattcrs not at all that a merc man
`edi

f lcttcrs~and he f thc lllcrcly Argcntine RePubhc_PrcfcrS t dissent

M rcasOn is this:the ersi ns bv Burt n and Mardrus,and cvcn by Galland,

n rhc I1 k gf d Fc/cIr V
hatc er thcir blc 1ishcs Or
bc c ncci cd f
mcrits,thcsc charactcr tic works PrcsuPPosC a rich(p or)Pr cCSs.In some way,
carl onl1

thc ahnost incxhausdblc Pr cCss f Enghsh is adumbratcd in Burt

n~John D nnc s

hard bsccnity, thc gigantic ocabularics of ShakesPcare and Cyril Tourncur,

inburnc s afsnit f r thc archaic, the crass crudition of the auth rs f sevcn~
tccnth-ccntury chapbooks, the cncr8y and imprccision, thc love
f tcmPcsts and
S

magic,InIardrus

s laughing Para8 aPhS,s F il,Inb0and La F ntainc,thc Il` nnctluin

sicr and the bdfFcFx russ s all Cocxist In Littlnann, vho, likc Washington,cannot
tell a he, thcrc is nothin8but the Pr bity of Gcrmany This is so little, s
cry
d

httle Thc c mmerce betwccn Gcrmany and the N hFs should ha c ProducCd S mcing m rc,
/hetller in PhiloSoPhy r in thc n vcl, Germany PosscSsCS a literaturc of thc

fantastic~rathcr,it posscsSCS OnFV a litcraturc of thc fantastic Thcre arc marvels

in the f\

hFs that I wotlld likc tO s(

:rcth ughtin

Gcrma n,AsI11c)rmtllatc

this dc rc,

I think of the rcpcrtory s dchbcratc vondcrs thc all~P

verful slaves of a lamP or

a rhg,Queen Lab who ansforms M slems hto birds,thc coPPcr b atman wkh
tahsrnans and formulac On his chcst-
from its collccti c naturc,

and ofth sc m re8cneral ncs that Pr ceed

from thc nccd to comPlete onc thousand and onc

CPiSodCS Oncc they had run ut of rnagic,the c pyists had to fall back

n hist r-

ical or pious n ticcs vh0Se inclusi n seems to attest to thc good faith of thc rcst

Thc rub that ascends intO sky and thc carhcst(lcscription of sumatra, dctails of

f T 0us^nJ D

,T

O f

GHTS

lO7

h sc food is thc justi cati n fthe L rd

thc court ofthc Abbasi(ls and silvcr angcls

in a si11glc volumc It is, na y, a Poctic 1ixturc; and I v uld

say the samc of ccrtain rcPctiti ns Is it not PortCntous that n t1ight 602 King
SchahrialD hcars his ovvn story fron thC quccn s liPs Like thc gcncral f1 amc ork,

all d vcll t gcthcr

a given tale ftcn c ntainsvithln itsclf othcr talcs of cqual lcngtll:stagcs vithn thc

,raiscd to thc po 'cr fa drcam A ckar and di{

stagc as in thc tragcdy of FfcImFc

cult linc fr m

Tennyson secms to dc ne thcn

Labori us ricnt i ry,sPhcre in sPhcrc,

1

o hcightcn furthcr thc astonishmcnt,thcsc ad cntiti us Hydra S heads can be ln re

concrcte than thc b

Schahriah,thc fantastical king of thc Islands of Chi11a and

dy

Hindustan reccivcs nc cs of Tarik ibn Ziyad,go crnor of Tangicrs and

the batdc of Guadalctc ,

ict r

in

Thc thrcsh ld is conft1sed vith the n irror, thc mask

hich is the truc i

vhich
hes bencath thc facc, n one kn
an and
`s any longcr

are hisidols And nonc f it lnattcrs;thc disOrdcr is as accePtablc and tri

invcntions of a da

Chancc11

a KaFka~d

ial as thc

drcam

hycd at syn

mct1

lcs,C0ntrasts, c onS

what mu1ta man~

if hc Organi'cd and intcnsi cd this l)lay, rcmade it in linc ith thc

Gcrmanic distortion, the

in,`ich

9F of Gcrn anyP

`nJ,

Notes
I alludc to 1ark Anthony,invokcd by Caesar s aPostr phc: on thc AlPs/It is
rcP rtCd,thou(lidst

cat strange nesh/which somc did dic t

thesc lincs, I think I ghmPsc s

me in crted renccti

lo k

n,

In

n ofthc` l gical rnyth

of thc bas isk,a scrpcnt` hosc gaze is fatal,Phny(^Jdru'd`ffisFpr

,Book Eight,

Paragraph33)tclls`Is n d1ing of thc posthurnous aPtitudcs of this Phidian,

but the c Illunction of thc t
ideas of sccing(m r(1r)and dying(il,or, yed1

1eP jm ri[scc NaPles and dicl~1nust havc innucnccd shakcsPcarc

P
he gaze ofthe basdisk as P is nous;thc Di
inity howCvcr,can kll vith
I

PurC SPlCndor r Purc radiati n of 9 nn ,Tl)c dircct sight of(jod is int

ablc M scs

c0 Crs11is facc on Mount I rcb,

r hc vas

lcr_

af1 aid t l
k

G d ;Hakin1,thc prophct of Khorasan,uscd a four~fold

cil fhitc silk in
rdcr n tt bhnd11)cn s cyes Cf als Isaia116;5,and 1 Kings 19:13

Also mcm rablc is this variatlon on thc then1cs of Abuhncca dc R

JorgC NIanriquc

Wherc is the wight who Pc

sind;and thcrc thc tyrant PlayCdP

nda and

1thc Past/Hind lan(l and

PlC(li

Rcfcrenccs
A

11ong thc olun1es c 11sultcd,I must cnumcrate:

r un pCuirs, c nFcs dr bcs

cs Jlf

``e
J,e Trl
s nd
rr

traduits Par Galland,Paris,s,d.

dnd0ne N s,comm n

nsFdrion~fr m c rdhc,

cd rJ,t,ir bidn i hrs n crrdinmcnF 1n

E W LanC Lt,ndol ,1839,

108 JORGE LuIS BORGEs

oFFher, usdnd rs dnd d hF H Pfd1n dnd
F,Burt n,London(?)nd v lS VI,VH,VHI

The Boo

n Jhrs

rrlc Hr

gfR f BlIrr n,New

Fd on

[e ivrc d s

H t omP`erc(sic)

Jri

Dr,J

ns` 0n,

rcr

mchard

`tr

nd III,dbh ed scFcc on~f,om r mo s r d`rr n,

York,1932

fe^ ui s er( n Nuir rrdtiucFion F

r JrcIF

cr comP` rc d Fcxrc dr

bc,Par lc

C,Mardrus,Palis,1906

Tduscnd vnd c1n Ndc F

Hus dem r b scJ, n bcrtragcn on A/1ax Hcnning LeiPzig,

1897
D

c rzo,l`un cn ustfcn T

u db

v ri, dhr

uscndundein`chrcn j cJl

r
dcr,l rdbisch n rJrrcxr d r CdFcuFr

s39 bertragcn von Enn Li luann Lcip 8, 1928

sOg61-s0 61

T J111e11 aJ| fi e : F ;l|; r ;

CritiCis m` and "nguistics a" consider Whether trans|ation can reconc"e the differenGes that separate |an9uages and cu|tures. The obstac|es to trans|ation are du|y

noted`judged either insurmountab|e or negotiab e/and trans ation methods are

formu|ated /ith precisiOn Opinions are shaped by discip"nary trends and vary
ktfide|y` ranging bet /een the extremes of ph osophica| skepticism and practica|

optimism
The skeptica| extre| e in Ang|o-American ana|ytica| phHOsophy is occupied by

Wi"ard an Orman Quine s

cOnce t of radica|trans}ation/

Or the trans atiOn of

the |anguage of a hitherto untouched peop|e` which he nrst exp}ored

n the }ate

1950s(BrovAler1959 148 Quine1960).Quine questions the empirica|foundations

indetern inaCy that cannot be

of trans|atillg by pointing to a basic semantic
reso|ved even in the presence Of an environ| enta| \\stirnu|us (BrOwer1959 172).
since he cOuches his argunnents |n an in aginary ethnographica| encounter betxveen
\native

a\\inguist /ho is\\

/estern and even\\Eng"sh-bred and a

/ho speaks
a\\jung|e |anguage

bid,

154` 167)` Quine s anti foundationa"sm Carries |arger

O|ogica|and geopo"tica| His discourse`hollveVer/adheres

"mp"cations`both
to
the abstraction anthro
of ana|ytica| ph"osophy`and these ilnnp"cations are not pursued`
treated instead as the purvielv of other discip ines,
Qu

ne ackno/edges that trans|ating does in fact occur on the basis of\\ana|yt-

ica| hypotheses`

derived frorn segmentations of foreign utterances l/vhich are

equated th XA/ords and hrases in the trans|ating |anguage (ibid.

165)

And

mars` and manua|s

"nguists
re|y onthat
them none
to produce
effective
dictionaries`
gran
guarantee a cOrre|ation
St"1 he argues
of these
trans|ating
too s can

l12

194os~1950s

meaning The \cOnceptua|schemes that shape interpretations

of the data may divide the native fron the "nguist (ibid 154_155` 167), These
betl//een st" u"and

schemes rnay be not on y lllutuaHy uninte"igib|e`but incommensurab|e` |"<e|y to use

different standards to eva|uate trans|ations, Quine

S doubt of metaphysica| grounds

/here n meaning
s seen

for |anguage |eads to more praglnaatic vieNtJs of trans|ation

as conventiona1 sociaHy circumsCribed` and the foreign teXt is rexVritten according

pvq
to the terms and va|ues of the receiv" g cu|ture
st ta|k f n eaning/ he

observes` requires tacit reference to a home |anguage in much the lltlay that ta|k
of truth invo|ves tacit reference to one

s o /n

system of the

/or|d (ibid 171)

Continenta| ph"osOphica| traditions` notab|y hermeneutics and eXistentia|

phenomeno|ogy` continue to be conscious of the "nguistic and cu|tura

that impede trans ation, In 1946` a decade before Qu

differences

ne begins to de"ver his

cha"enging papers at Anlerican universities` pv artin Heideqger s essay

The
AnaXirnander FragIlnent sets out a po /erfu| understanding of hOxrv competing

conceptua| schemes cOmp"cate mOdern trans|atiOns of anCient Greek ph"osophy,

The versions of c|assica| scho|ars are questionab|e` Heidegger ar9ues` because they

assimi|ate Anaxirnander to

ater metaphysica| traditions /hich fo"ow P|ato or

AristOt|e.These trans|ations carry phHOsophica|assumptions that are either idea"st

or positivist/ giV

ng the Greek text a re"gious or sCienti c cast

Heidegger s ant metaphysica|approach to anguage`un

a practica| so|ution that is distinct|y "terary

ike Quine s`COmes

with

Reviving Sch|eier| acher s notion of

trans|ation as br" ging the domestic reader tO the foreign text` Heidegger reconn-

mends a \\poetizing strategy that does \ viO|ence to everyday |anguage by re|ying

on archaisms`
/hiCh he submits to etymo|ogica| interpretations (Heidegger1975
19),The etymolOgies are motivated by an exacting nde"ty`designed to demonstrate
a kinshi bet /een

German and c|assica| Greek cu ture

But they a|so inscribe

Anaxirnander with a modern` pecu"ar|y Heideggerian out|ook.

hen {iterary criticism addresses the issue of trans|atab"ity` it emphasizes the

possib

ity of reproducing a foreign "terary text in another |anguage

/hich is

"
sedimented
with different|iterary sty|es`genres`and traditions,V|adirnir NabOkov

sees natiOna| "teratures as sites of internationa| innuence and aff"ation

nonethe|ess deve|o in nationaHy distinct

/hich

lmasterpieces
`ays` produCing unique

idea| version` u|t"

that demand frOm the translator an

ate|y unattainab|e
(Nabokov1941 161),In the1955essay that appears here` NabokOv describes the
Comp"cated resonances and a"usions of A|eXsandr Pushkin

s pOelln ELl9el,e@/,eg`n

so as to rat ona|ize his ohAyn sCho|ar|y version of it c|ose to the Russian` devoid of

Ang|o-American poetic diction` and heav"y annotated FOr Nabokov` paraphrastic

versions that\\cOnform to the notions and prejudices of a given pub ic

\ev"
of trans|ation (Nabokov 1941

the \ /orst

160)

va|ues Of a9iven pub"c`even if an e"te minority

ant a "tera| trans|atiOn by a scho|ar

cOnstitute

Yet he too riv"eges the

an academic readership lA/ho might

/ho can cOmbine native pronciency in the

foreign |anguage` histOrica| scho|arship in the foreign "terature` and detaHed

commentary on the forma| features of the foreign text,

/riter
Nabokov s vieXAls on trans|ation are very much those of a Russian mi9r
c investment in
"Ving in the United states after1940, He nurtures a deep` nOsta|g

1940s-1950s

l13

the Russian |anguage and in canonica| /orks of Russian "terature and disdains the
homOgenizing tendencies of Arnerican consu|mer Cu|ture, Fe / Eng"sh-|anguage
iterary trans|ators at the time fo"o / NabokOV s uncom ronnising examp|e, The
dom|nant trend favors just the sOrt of\\poetica

|anguage he detests`free versions

that seek to produce poetic effects in the trans|ating |anguage` usua"y dep|oying
standard usage and canon ca sty|es,
In 1958` a fe/years after Nabokov s essay appears`the American poet` critic
and trans|ator Dud|ey Fitts critiCizes it precise|y in these terms` asserting that in
poetry trans|ation \^/e need sOmething at once less ambitious and more audacious

anOther poem

(F itts1959
34) The poem`moreoVer`has to be a part|cu|ar kind`

possessing immense nuency`written in the most fami iar{anguage

current AmeriCan

Eng"sh /ith some sOcia"y acceptab|e co"oquia"sms. As a trans|atOr of c|assiCa|

and Lat n American "teratures` Fitts inc"nes toward adaptation` achiev"

9notab|e

Neverthe|ess/ he is a /are

a
that his trans|ations of ancient Greek oetry n ight be anachrOnistic` risking

(F itts1956 xV"i)
spurious atnnosphere of monotheisn by XA/ritin9\God for\Zeus
success lvith his modernizing Versions of AristOphanes

The opt mistic eXtreme in trans|ation theory during these deCades is OcCupied
by|inguistiC ana|ysis LinguistiCs addresses the issue of trans|atabHity by ana|yzing
specinc trans|ation prob|ems and descr bing the methods that trans|ators have deve
oped to so|ve them

The optimism derives tO sOme extent from a theory of|anguage

/hich in turn is Conceived a|ong

that is cOmmunicative`not Constitutive`of rneaning`

empiricist|ines as referentia| Chaim Rabin s essay The Linguistics of Trans|ation

inVo|Ves tllVo distinCt faCtOrs`a meaning`

opens vslith the assertion that trans|ation

or reference to some s"ce of rea"ty` and the difference between txlvo |anguages in
referring to that rea"ty

(Rabin1958 123), But Heidegger and Quine lmight ask

xtlhich vers on

of rea"ty
^/i|| be used to measure the success of the trans|ation/ the
adequacy of its reference?
Eugene Nida` draxn/ing on research fron the American Bib|e Society` considers
the prob|ena of trans|ating bet /een different rea"ties. He argues that so|utions need

s acquisitiOn of sufncient
cu|tura|
to be ethno|ogica
` based on the trans|atOr

inforn ation
since\ it is inConCei ab|e to a Nqaya Indian that any |ace shou|d not
have vegetatiOn un|ess
t has been c|eared for a maize-ne|d` Nida conc udes that
to estab"sh

the Bib|e trans|ator must trans|ate\desert as an abandoned p|ace

the cu tura|equiva|ent of the desert Of Pa|estine (Nida1945 197) H ere trans|ation is paraphrase,It l/vorks to reduCe|inguistiC and cu|tura|differences to a shared
referent Yet the referent is c|ear y

a cOre of meaning cOnstructed by the trans|ator

and
/eighted toward the receiving Cu|ture so as to be comprehensib|e there.

The signal achievement of Roman JakObsOn/s vvide{y cited1959essay(re rinted

here) is to haVe introduced a senniot|c re

ection on trans|atab"ity,JakobsOn ques-

tions empiricist semantics by conceiving of meaning` not as a reference to rea"ty`

but as a re|atiOn to a potentia"y end|ess chain of signs He describes trans|ation as

/hiCh \invo|Ves tvi/o equiVa|ent messages in t /o different

a rOcess of recoding
codes, JakObson underestirnates the interpretive nature of trans|ation`the fact that
recoding is an active re /ording that doesn t sirnp|y transn it the foreign message`

but transforms it. st"1 he is mindfu| of the differences among cu|tura| discourses/

l14

194os~1950s

grammatica| categories carry a high semantic "mport

especia"y poetry` ltlhere
and xvhich therefore requires trans|ation that is a \ creative transposition

into a

different systern of signs.

The most innuentia| /ork of trans|ation studies in this period is first pub"shed

in 1958 by the Canadian "nguists Jean-Pau| Vinay and Jean Darbe{net, By

approaching French_Eng"sh trans|ation fronn the ne|d f cOmparative sty"stics`they
are ab|e to provide a theoretica|basis for a variety of trans|ation methods current|y

in use, As a resu|t` they produce a textbook that has been a stap|e in trans|ator
training programs for Over four decades. Their descriptions of trans|ation methods

inVo|Ve some reduction of "nguistic and cu|tura| differences to empiricist seman

Equiva|ence of messages`

u|tinnate|y re"es upon ah identity of

situations` Where the term \\s tuations indicates an unde6ned

rea"ty/ But they

tiCs

they\^/rite`

nk of meaning as a cu|tura|construCtion and to

a|so encourage the trans|ator to th

see a c|ose cOnnection betxA/een "ngu stic prOcedures and

meta"nguistic informa
tion` name|y the current state of|iteratu re`science`po"tics etc,of both|anguage
Con

munities ( inay and Darbe|net1995

The enormous practica| and

42)

edagogica| va|ue Of Vinay and Darbe|net

s xvork

overcame any ph"osophica} qua ms about trans|atab"ity~and distracted attention

a /ay

from their conserVatiVe presGriptions about |anguage use in trans|ation

The

extract re rinted here is relmarkab|e both for lts careful methodo|ogica| description
and for its critiG sms Of trans}ation in the g|oba| po"tica| ecOnomy

This period c|oses /ith Reuben Bro /er s antho|ogy (1959)` lA/hich he|pfu"y
gathers together the main trends in commentary on trans|ation There` notWithstanding great cOnceptua|and methodo|ogica differences`
inguists` |iterary critiCs`

and hi|osophers join in a remarkab|e unity of interest in trans ation as a prob|em

of{anguage and cu ture,And they are joined by trans|ators`both academics in those
ne|ds and riters in Var ous genres`who present sOphisticated discussions of transation and their Own projects

/a|6ry Larbaud/s\ invOcation of st.Jerome(1946)`the patron saint of sensefor-sense trans|ation` llnust be ranked among the most accomp"shed of trans|ators
cOmmentaries

Larbaud s text is|earned but"terary/effo essly conjuring up a

ractitioners from Quinti"an tO A|eXander Fraser Tyt|er to

a ry, Larbaud views trans|ation through Aristote"an categories of poetics

range Of theorists and

Pau

and rhetoric, Yet his cOncerns are modernist` inC|uding the recOnamendation that

foreign air despite the rotestations of\ pu rists`

/hose

trans|ations be given a

vernacu|ar nationa|ism he judges \more dangerous to the essence of cu ture than the

most nerce|y boorish ignorance (Larbaud1946 164`my trans|ation).FOr Larbaud`

on|y an approach to trans|ation that combines theory and history can Cha"enge the
misunderstanding that greets the trans|ator

s
/ork

in the present,

Further reading
Gentz|er1993`Hjort1990`Ke||y1979`LarOse1989`Ma mkj
1991` sturrock1991` enuti 1995

r1993`Robinson

Chapter lo

VIadimir NahokO

PROBLEMS OF TRANSLATION
@A/fGfA/IN ENGLISH

cf

i1

r T

s translation rcads smo d 1y In othcr v rds,the rc ic /cr of thc translati n,

ho ncithcr has,nor vould be ablc to havc, ithout spccial study,any kn0 vlcdgc
so

vhats c cr ofthc Original,Praises as rcadable an imitation only bccause the drudgc

r thc rhymster has substituted casy Platitudes f r thc brcathtaking intricacies of the

tCXt RCadablc, indccd!A sch olboy sl) ner is lcss fa m ckery in rcgard to thc

ancicnt mastcrPiCcC than its comluercial intcrPrctati

n or poctization
Rhymc
rhymcs with crimc, whcn Homer r HdmFer arc rhymed The term ee tlans
lati n sn)acks of knavcrv and t rann It is
hcn thc translator scts Out to render

~n
thc sPirit

t the tcxtual scnsc~that hc begins to traducc his author Thc clumsi

est htcral translation is a th

F r thc last H c

usand tilnes1n re uscful than thc prctticst ParaPhrasc

ycars r so I havc bccn engagcd,on and f1in translating and

annotating Pushkln s OneJ n In thc c ursc of this vork l havc lcarncd s mc hcts
and c mct ccrtain c nclusions. First,thc faCts

Thc n cl

is c

nccrncd ss`ith thc a hctions, affccti ns and fortuncs f thrcc

young n cn~0ncgin,thc bittcr lcan f P, Lenski,the temPeramental rnin r Poet,

and Pushkin,thcir fricnd__and fthree young ladics~Tatiana,(Dlga,and Pushhn

N use Its c ents takc Placc bct vccn thc cnd f1819and thc sPring of1825 Thc

sccne shRs
m thc caPital t thc c untl yside(midway between OP chka and
Moscow),and daencc t N1oscov and back t Pctcrsburg Therc is a dcschPti n f
1955

116

VLADIMIR NABOKOV

a youn:rakc s dayin t0 vn;rural landscaPcs and rural librarics;a drcan and a ducl;
vari us fcsti itics i11c u11try and city;and a
aricty of romantic,satirical and bibli
graphic digrcssions that lcnd ndcrful lcPth and c lor to thc thi11g
Onegin hilllsclf is,

ne Chdde Har ld,

ll

f course,a litcrary Phcnomen n,not a local r hist rical

f Byron s r Iuaunt (1812), :h sc carly youth

thc her

ad bCenl misspcnt ll1maddcst whim,

who has m ping ts, who is bid to l atb

hiS Prescnt statc by a wea ncss

hich sPHngs iolu all

he n1Cets,

is rcal1y nly a

relativc, not the dircct Prot typc, of C)ncgin, The lattcr is less
a N usco itc in
Ha1
ld s cl ak than a dcscendant of n1an
fantastic Frenchmen such as Chatcau~

bh d s RcnJ, ll w aw c of cxisdng only tllrc,tlgh a

Pushkn sPeakS of Oncgi

ch ndria

nations)

r nd scnrimcnF d

cIlntJI,

s sPlCen or chondria (thc Enghsh hyPo and thc Russian

r /ldndrcz rcPrCsent a neat divisio11 f hnguistic labor on thc Part ft

of a malady tl c 11sc ol whch sccms hgh dme tc,nncl To this search

Russian critics aPPhcd d1Cmsclvcs ssith c mn1cndablc zcal,accun1ulating cluling the

last nc11undrcd

and thrt cars onc ofthe n10st somniferous1nasscs of C0rnl,lcnts

knovvn to ci izcd man, Evcn a sPecial tCrm for C)l`egin s sickness has becn

invcntcd(OngJjnsFl=cD);and thousands of Pagcs ha e bccn dcvotcd t hi1 asa tyPe

fs methin8 r othCr Modern s vict critics standing on a to cr ol soaPb xes Pr ~

vidcd a hundrcd years ago by Bchnsl ,Hcrzcn,and luany othcrs,diagn scd Dnegin s
sickncss as the rcsult of Tzarist dcspot ln Thus a charactcr b rr wcd on books
but br antly rccomP scd by a grcat poet to vhon1hfc and lil)rary xxcrC onc,Placcd
vithil) a brilhantly reconstruCted cnvironmcnt, and Playcd :ith by
by that poet
hi1u in a succcssion f comPositi nal Patterns _lyrical in1Pcrs nations,tomfoolcrics

of gcnius,literary Parodics,styhzed cPistlcs,and s

First

on~is trcated bv Russian com~

cal Phcn lucnon tyPical f Alcxander the

s rcgilnc:alas,this tcndcncy to gcnerahze and
ul ari7c the uniquc fancy ofan

mcntators as a sociological and hist

individual genius has als its ad ocatcs i11this c untry,

Actuall thcrc has ncvcr bccn an thing espccially local or tilnc-signincant in

hyPochondria,rnisanthropy,cnnui,thc blucs, rschmcrz,ctc By1820,cnnui vas

Ic

a scasOncd litcrary chcho of charactcrizauonvhich Pushkh1coul(lt

vith at11is
leisurc.Frcnch Hction of thc cightccnd ccntury is f11ll f young charactcrs suffcring
frona thc sP1Ccn.It vas a convcnie11t devicc to kcep onc
gavc it a nc thrill;Ren

s hero on the111

vc,Byr0n

d lphc,and thci1 co-su"Crers rcccivcd a transfusion of

,

dcm nt)l d
cn On in is a Russian novclin ve^c Pushhn workcd atit fl m Ma 1823to
october 1831 Tl`c rst comPIctc Cditi n aPPcarCd in thc sPring of1833 in st
Petersburg; thcre is a
vell-prcser cd sPccirnen f this cditi n at the Houghton
Library,Harvard university Onggin has cight chapters and consists of5,551 hnes,
all fvhich, cxccpt a song of eightccn unrhymcd lincs(in trochaic tri1nctcr), are

tramctcr,rhymcd,Thc m n body f thc work contallls,aPart f1 om tw

frecly rhymcd cpistlcs, 366 stanzas, cach of rourteen hnes,
vith a xcd rhymc

f(d
cv
wCls
hclicatc
the
minine
rhymcs
the cons nants
PattCrn:ababccccid
in iamhc tc

the lnascuhnc ncs) Its rCsCmblancc to thc s nnct is obvious, Its octct C0nsists of
an clc iac quatrain and oft vo c uplcts,its sestct of a Closed quatrain and a c uPlCt

This hyPcrborcan frcak is far rcmo

cd froll

the Petrarchan pattcrn,but is distinctly

rclatcd t NIalhcrbe s and surrc s variatlons

The tetramctric,or anacreontic,

fCJ

IN ENGLIsH

117

sonnct vas introduced in Francc by sc volc

dc s nte-Marthc in1579;and it was ncc tried by ShakcsPeare(s nnCt CXLV:

ith a rhymc scheme 1nakc-hatc~sake:

liPs that L
c s0 Vn hand did lnakc/

Th sc

statc Comc sweet-doom greet; Cnd day cnd away,Thrcw you

ThC On in
stanza
vould bc tcchnically an Enghsh anacrcOntic s nnct had not thc second
quatrain consistcd of t vo couPlets instcad of bcing closed r aItcrnatc,Thc no clty

f Pushkin s frcak s nnct is that its6rst t vel c lincs includc the grcatcst ariation
in rhymc scquCnce PossiblC
vithin a thrce-quatrain framc altcrnate, PairCd, and
cl scd,

H vvcvcr,it is rcally fron)thc Frcnch,n

t fr n

thc Enghsh,that Pushkin

dcrivcd thc idca f r this nc v kind of stanza, Hc kncv his Malherbe

vcll - and

Mahcrbc had c mPoSed sc cral sonnc (scc, r cxamPlc,q Rdbef,P jnr ,sur un
Fi r

dc` urs, 163Ol h tc amctcr,witll four rhymcs h tl,c tct and ymmct1 lcal
c

quatrains(thC first altcrnatcly rhymcd,thc second closcd),but of coursc Malhcrbc

scstet vas thc Classical onc, ncvcr chnchcd vith a couPlet in thc Enghsh fashion

Wc ha c to l k clsc vhcrc fr Pushkin s third quatrain and for his cPigra 1Fnatic
couPlCt ^namely in Frcnch light versc f thc sc cnteenth and eightcenth ccntury
Ill onc of GKssct

s EPfrr r

cAu P

Bo JJednr,/s

rO thC O

n sc et exactly

reprcscnted by the lincs

Mais P

u1

quoi donner au lllyst re,

Pourqu i rcProchCr au hazard

De cc Pr mPt et triste dopart
La causc troP invol ntaircP

Oui,vous scricz cncorc nous

ous oticz ous n mc;v us
Si
Theorctically sPcaking,it is not imPossiblC that a c mPlctC OngJin stanza rnay

bc f und cmbcddcd s mc
hcrc in thc cndlcss EPiStlCs f th sc Pcri viggcd borcs,
just as its scqucncc frhymcsis f und in La Fontainc s ConF s(c.g. Jic is /
al

48-61)

d in Pusllkn s wn eely rhymcd RusJdn i

udil,iFd,composed h his youth(sCc

thc last scction of Canto Thrcc, m zd ordd

Chernon,or) In thiS Pushkinian Pscud

-s nnct

@nniJ,,

Joddmj to s zdJ mn

rdz

no

thc opcning quatrain,vvith its br hant

altcrnatc rhymcs,and thc closing couPlct, vith its cpigram1uatic chck,arc in

rCatcr

cvidcncc than the intcrmcdiate Parts, as if e vere being sho vn Hrst thc pattern
on one sidc ofan in1rllobilc sPherc hich v uld then start to rc ol c,blurring thc
c lors,and Prcscntly vould comc to a stoP,rcvCahng clcarly again a smallcr pattern
on its opPositc sidc.

As alrcady said, thcrc are in (9ng in m rc than 300 stanzas of this kind Wc

havc m rco cr fragmcnts oft 0additi nal chaPtcrs and numcrous stanzas canCeled
by Pushkin, s mc f then sParkhng vvith morc riginahty and bcauty than any in
thc Cant s fr n1 xshich hc cxcluded them bef re Pubhcation All this matter, as

vcll as Pushkin s
vn co1InCntarics,the variants, ePigraPhs, dcdications,and so
ford1,must bc of coursc translatcd t ,in aPPendiccs and notcs

118

LADIMIR

NABOKOV

II

Russian P etry is affccted by thc

foll

ving six charactcristics f languagc and

Pr Sody;

The numl)cr frhymes,botl)masculinc and kminine(ie,,singlc and d ublc),

is inc n

f the rarc and

Parably grcater than in Enghsh and lcads to thc cult
thc rich As in French,thc c nsonn d clPP is bhgatory in mascuhne rhymcs
and acsthcticall

valucd h mininc oncs hisis lar rcmo cd rn

rhymc,Ech
s Poor

t11c Englis11

n,a gcntccl PauPer

hosC attelnPts t shinc rcsult
n1crcl)' in d ggcrcI garishncss, For if in Russian and Frcnch, thc fc 1inine
relati

rhy1nc is a glamor us lady fricnd,hcr En8hsh counterPart is cithcr an old1naid

or a drunkcn huss

fr n1Linacrick

mattcr the length fa` ord in Russian it has but onc strcss;therc is nc cr
a sccondar accent or t vo acccnts as Occurs in Enghsh~csPccially Amcrican
E11ghsh,

3
4

Pol s llabic vords arc c nsidcrabl m rc frequcnt than in En lish

All syllables are fully Pronounccd;therc arc no chsions and slurs as therc arc
in English crsc
Invcrsion,or tuore cxactI)Pyrrhichizati n f trochaic v r(ls~so c mn1onlV
mct vith in En:hsh iambics(csPCcially in the casc oft vo~syllablc =ords ending
in-cr or ing is rarc in Russian
crsc only a fc`vt Vo-syllable prcPositions

and thc trochaic comPonCnts of comP und rds lcnd then

6

sel cs t

shilts

of strcss.

Russian Poems comPc,sed il

iambic tt ramcter contalll a largcl numb f

m dulatcd hncs than of rcgular oncs, .h e thc rcvcrse is truc in1 c ard t

Enghsh Pocms

By rcgular Iine I mcan an iambic linc in xx`hich thc n

etrical bcat coincidcs in

cach foot witln tllc nattlral strcss of thc w d:g c`oud`css c mcs nd dr1ys cs
(Byr n)

By luodulated l"1c I111ean an ian11)ic linc il1 vhich at lcast nc n1ctrical

acccnt falls On thc unstrcsscd syllablc ofa PolySy"abic

in

rcasonablc

and

v rd(such

as the third syllable

ord unstresscd in sPecch(suc11as

) r on alm nOsyllabic

of,

tbc/,

ctc,). In Russian Prosody such modulati ns are tcrn cd

hal acccnts, and

b th

in Russian and Enghsh Poetry a tctran etric iambic linc n1a havc one such hal
accent n the srst,sccond,or third f t,or t 9 hal acccnts in thc Hrst and third,
or in adjacent et Here are sOmc cxaml)lcs(tllC Roman ngure dcsignates the ft,ot

vhcrc thc half~acccnt occurs),

Make thc delightcd sPirit glow(shCIlCy);

My apprchcnsions c mc in crowds(V rdsw rth);
and cnchantmcnts drcar(Milt n);

Offo s

Bcyond Participation lic(VV

IH

I kn a

I+II
II+IH

rds vorth);

Do paint thc uead ws with dclight(ShakesPea

c);
rcasonablc w

man(PoPC);

And on that 1nf rgottcn shore(B tton11y);

Whcn iciclcs hang lDy thc wall(shakCsPCarc);

o fG

I+IIl

IN ENGLIsH

119

Orin thc chambe f thc sca(Blake);

An inc

mmu t,lc

slccP( v rdsw rdal

vith charactcristic 3, the

It is ilnPortant to mark that, Pr bably in conjunction
hal accent in the third foot ccurs threc Or f ur tilncs1 orC f1 cqucntly in Russian
iambic tctramctcrs than in Enghsh ncs,and that thc1 cgular linc is rnorc than t
`icc

ra r,If,llc)r hst cc,WC eXamine B/on s cPPd,Scott s TJlc tlJr

rh kc,
Kcats s rJlc r

dr and TcnnFon sJ /lr mori m,wc

nd
that tl c
sdin

PCrccntage of rcgular lines therc is around65,as against nly sOme 25in O q in

Thcrc is,h
vc cr,0nC Enghsh Poet vh sc rll dulations,if not as rich in quantity
and aricty as Pushkn s,arc at lcast an aPPr ach t that richness I refcr to Andrc v
Mar cll, It is instrucu c t comPare Byron s snip snap m notonics such as
Onc shadc thc morc onc ra thc lcss

Had halfimP red thc namdcss grace

Which va cs

in c cr ra cn tress

Or soR hghtCns

,er her hce

with any fthc hncs addresscd by N1arvcll

To His C y Mistrcss

And you should if you PlcaSC rcfuse,

Till thc convcrsion of the Jcws
My vcgctablc l vc should gr0v

aStCr than cmPircs and m

rc slo v,

~f ur lincs inhich thcrc arc six hal acccnts against Byron s single onc
It is among such mclodics that nc should seek one sm dcl vhcn translating

Pushkn in crsc

III

makc a statcmcnt for vhich I am rcad t incur thc rath of Russian

Alcxandr
scrgcyC ich Pushkin(1799 1837),the nati nal poct of Russia,
Patri

vas as much a Pr duct f Frcnch literature as of Russian culturc;andvhat haPPcned

t bc addcd to this n1ixturc,
vas individual genius
vhich is ncithcr Russian nor
Frcnch, but uni ersal and di ine In regard to Russian influcncc, Zhuko ski and
BatyuShko
erc the i11ncdiate Predcccess rs of Pushkin harm ny and PrcciSi n
_ this vas Vhat hc lcarned om bod1, th ugh c cn his b yish verscs vcrc more
I shall n0 v
ts

vi id

and vigorous than thosc of his y ung tcachcrs,Pushkin s Frcnch vvas as nucnt

as that of any highly culturcd gcntlcman of his day. Gallicisms in

assirnilation Populate his p

imvadhg a Jhnthc R cky Moul tons C tII~F rri, ss m d

drF irs,drFmJiisscmcnr,fo

arious stagcs of

vith the gay hardincss of luccrn and dandch n

ctry
m tIr,dm r rcr

dVs ,rrdn oI

are llly a kw-my h

F rmes,

c mpriscs

about nincty cxpressions that Pushkn as vcll as his PrCdcccss rs and contcmPorariCs

transposcd from Frcmch int melodious Russian, Of spccial imP rtancc is b1z
bizdrr r e

WhiCh Pushkin rcndcrc(l as srr

f Oncgin s naturc Thc d uccs

nn,,srr

nnosF

rrc,

Whcn alludin8to the oddity

cJ,in,arcs f Frcnch clcgics arc as closc to the s`

tlki

120

LADIMIR

mccJ,rr and sF

NABOKOV

d sFniV

veet delusi

ns

mccJar

n of Pushkin as thcy arc t

Pushkn s sumrdchniV dubrovr and P

sh uld

and
of eighteenth-ccntury Enghsh pocts Thc s mbres boc fes arc

Pc

the dchci us rc cric

darks me gro cs, Thc Enghsh translat r

also lnakc up his rnind ho v to render such signi cant n uns and their dcri

atives as Fos

in Pushkin s idi m l translatc r

sk

as

which constandy recur

heart-achc r anguish in thc sense f

lc,IaJoisse,,rof,,n sF rJdnfucuIl and

qfd lJl

ss
o

Kca s wakchl angtllsll %mnosF With i atllcctivc roilln,is am ng Pu k1n s

ill rccall that languish is uscd as a n un by
favorite vords Thc good translator

Ehzabcthan P cts(C g,Samucl IDanicrs rche c1ny languisl` ),and in this sense is
to

vhat PalC
anguish

adjccti

iS to

dark

Blakc s hcr

languishcd hcad takcs carc f thc

c,and thc languid rnoon of Keats is niccly(luPhcatcd by Pushkin

fund At some Point r mnosF (langu r)gradCS into n (m

sF mndv

n ucur),S

R luxury

`Fc F
vith Enghsh Pocts
f the senses, slumbcrous tcndcrncss Pushkin as acquaintcd
on1y thr u h thcir Frcnch m dc1s or French crsions; the Enghsh translat r f
( ng
,a,
vhilc scckng an idiolla in thc Gallic diction of PoPe and Byron, or in thc
romantic ocabulary of Kcats,rnust constandy rcfcr t the Frcnch Pocts
In l s early youth,Pushkin s literary tastc was formcd by thc samc riters and

his1nanual vas
the samc Cours dc ir JrclFurc that formed Lamartinc and stcndhal

thc

-/c

cou C u dc ir rdru ,dnci nne cr illod rnc by Jean Frangois LaharPc,in

ritc authors
s fa

sixtcen volumcs, 1799- 1805, To the cnd of his days, Pushkin

vcre Boilcau,Bossuet,Cornc lc,F nel n,Lafontainc,Moh rc,Pascal,Racine,and

/

ltairc In relati n to his c ntemporaries, hc f und Lamartinc mclodious but

monotonous, I ugo giftcd but on thc hole sec nd-rate;hevelc n cd thc lasciv_
ious ersc of young Musset, and rightly dcsPiscd : rangcr, In OngJin one nds

c /lrondd1n

( ari us

r
Passagcs in ChaPtcr One)

cchocs n t nly of Voltairc

Millev yc sE/

y in passagcs rclated to Lc

P Jsics

s(esPCcia

roFiqucs, Grcssct s

kl),btlt dso of Parny

crr~v r , Ch0nicr s melancholy n1clodics and

d Pcri P rcs~frdnfdis,Su

f a host

as Baf,Gcndl Bcrmard,Bcrnis,Bcrun,cht.ulicu,

Colar(lcau, Delax lgnc, Dclillc, Desb rdcs Valm re,

Dcspo cs, Dorc t, Ducis,

Gilbcrt, Lattaignant, Lebrun, Lc Brun, Lcgou o, Lcn crrc, L onard, Mal l trc,
Piron,Jcan-BaPtistc Rousscau,and othcrs
As to Gcrman and Enghsh,hc hardly had any In 1821,translating Byron into
gcntlcman s Frcnch for his o vn private usc,hc rendcrs thevavc that rol1s bclo v

the Athcnian s gra c (beginning of thC Gi url as cc` or qui rouF sur Fd fr ve
d

FJl n

Hc rcad shakcspcarc in Guizot s and Arned c Pichot s revision of

Lctourneur s edition (Paris, 1821) and Byr n in Pichot s and Eus bc dc sallc s
vas singularly dear to
vcr ons(Paris, 1819-21). Byr n s com1nand of thc clich

Russian poe as cchoing thc min r and m or French Poc y on whch thcy hacl

bccn brought uP
It vould havc been a
at and dry businessindeed,ifthc crbal texturc of On fin
Vhcn,rn rc

vcrc rcduccd t thcsc PattCrns in fadcd silks But a lniraclc ccurrcd

vent the
digious imPact f Frcnch,thc Russian Poets rnadc certain insPircd selecti ns and
Pr
matchcd thc old and thc nc v in certain cnchantingly individual vayS,Frcnch stock
epithcts, in thcir Russian mctamorPhosiS9 brcathe and blo m ancvv, so dChCatcly
than a hundrcd and HRy years ago, thc Russian litcrary languagc under

d es

Pushkin lnanipulatc then as hc disP sCs thcrll at strategic Points of his1ncanharmonics Incidcntally,this d cs not lightcn our task,

ingR l

@ EG

IN ENGLIsH

121

ThC PCrson vho dcsircs to turn a litcrary masterPiecc int anothcr languagc, has
only one duty t Perforrll, and this is t rcproducc
vith absolutc cxactitudc the

vholc tcxt, and n d ing l)ut thc tcxt Thc tcrm litcral translation is tautological
sincc anything but that is not truly a tramslation but an in1itation, an adaPtation

r a Parody
Thc Problcm, then, is a choicc betvecn rhymc and rcas n can a translation

hilc rcndcring vith absolutc ndchty the vh lc tcxt,and nothing but thc text,kccP
thc f rm f thc riginal, its rhythm and its rhymcP To thc artist
vhom Practicc

vithn tlle li1nits f onc languagc,his o

n,has c nvinced that rnattcr and manner
are onc,it comcs as a shock to disco cr that a vork of art can prcscnt itsclf t thc

v uld l)c translat r as sPhtint forn and contcnt,and that thc qucstion ofrendering
nc but n t thc Othcr may arisc at a . Actuallyvhat haPPcns is still a monist s
dchght: shorn of its Pri1nary verbal cxistcnce,the original tcxt

vill n t bc ablc to
soar and to sing;but it can be very niccly disscctcd and1uounted,and scicnti
cally

studicd in all its Organic details s here is thc s nnct,and thcrc is thc sonnetccr

ardcnt adn1ircr stdl h Ping that by somc n1iraClc of ingcnuity hc vill bc ablc to
render e cry shadc and shecn f the riginal and s mch
kccp intact its sPecial
Pattern in anothcr t

ngue

Lct rnc statc at oncc that in rcgard to merc mctcr thcrc is n

Thc iambic mcasurc is Perkct|

illing

t lnuch tr uble

to be c mbincd with hteral accuracy for

the curi us rcason that Enghsh Pr sc laPsCS quitc naturally int

an iambic rhythm

etnson l as a dcli tM csS wami tllC udcnt ag t thc da d tralls

fcrring onc s Pr SC into blank crsc by dint of P hshing and Pruning;and thc beauty
uched
fthc thing is that stc cns n s discussion ofthc rhythn1ic traPs and Pitfalls is c
in PurC iambic vcrsc vith such Precision and ccon my f(licti n that rcadcrs, or
at lcast thc sirnPlCr rcadcrs, arc not a varc of thc didactic trick

NCwsPaPcrs uSC blank cr as commotlly Mon cur Jourd n uscd Pr sc I

havc just strctchcd my hand t0 vard a prostrate PaPcr,and reading at randorn l hnd
Dcbatc On Eur pcan Army intcrruPtcd:thC Asscmbly
F rcign

Afhirs c mnnittcc by a votc

Oftvcnty four to tvventy has dccidcd

To recommcnd whcn thc Asscmbl

Con emcs this aftcrn on
That it adoPt thc res
T

luti n

Put ff the dcbate indesnitely

This,in effcct,would kill thc trcaty

Thc Nc vY rk Yankccs arcn t conccding

Thc American Lcaguc nag t clc cland
But thc Hrst seed fd ubt
Is gro ving

in thc n)inds of thc dcfcnding chamPi ns

Ncbraska oty P1
ud ofjai
Str msburg,Ncbraska(AsS

atcd

Prcss).

Thcy c1nighty Proud hCrc of thc city jall,

I

122

VLADIMIR NABOKOV
A buildin8that providcs both for incarccrat1on

And entertainment Thc brick structurc houscs

The p hce stati n and the jall The scc nd sto1 v
Has opcn sidcs and is uscd as a band stand

V
O,,qgin has bccn n1istranslatcd int luany languagcs,I havc chcckcd nly the French

and Enghsh vcrsi ns, and sola,c fthc

rhymcd Gcrman ncs, Thc thrcc complcte

Gern1an c ncoctions I havc sccn arc thc orst of thc l t Ofthcsc Lil,Pcrt S(1840)

which changes Tatiana int

Mo z

Johanna, and scubc1

tang,are bcncatll colltemPt;btIt Boclcn

cdt

s (1873) 'ith its Max-und-

s flu Prt,d t(18 )has bCell

so much Praiscd by Gcrman critlcs that it is ncccssary to

t

varn the reader that it,

, dcspitc a n rc laudable attemPt at undCrstanding if not exPression, bristlcs

vith incrcdiblc blundcrs and ridiculous intcrPolati ns, Incidcntally, at this P

int,

it should be n tcd that Russians tlacmsclves arc responsiblc for thc t vo greatcst
insults that ha c been hurlcd at Pushkin
:sky)
C schayko

s mastcrPiece ~ thc vilc Chayk vski

PCra and the cqually vile illustrations by RcPin

novcl
0negin hrcd bctter in Frcnch~nan1ely in Turgcnev and Viard

hich

dec rate

n1ost editi ns fthc

s hirly cxact
d
Revue
N
FJ ,a re,Paris 1863) It v uld ha c bccn a rcally good
ProsC vCrsion(in
translation had Viardot rcahzcd ho v much Pushkin rehed n thc Russian cquivat

lent f thc st ck ePithets f French P ctr), and had l)c actcd accordingly As it is,

Dupont s Pr se crsion(1847), `vhilC cra /ling vith crrors f a tcxtual naturc, is

n

orc idiornatic

Thcrc arc four Enghsh comPlctC versions unfo1 tunatcly aVa"ablc t collcgc
u<lcllts L,fe
c On uinc,t1 andatcd by LictIt,-Col,sPaldhg(Matmillan,L n(l n
1881);ELlf

n,t1 anslatcd by BaLDcttt,Dctltsch in hc9/orks Of 1/cxdndcr Ptlsh n,

Onq

sclectcd and cd ed b

Abraham Yarmohnsk(Rand

mH usc,Ncw York1936);

uc,Lond n,Jan 1936to

enc
On
n,translatc l by
Jan 1938,and Thc Pushkin Press,Lo11(lon1937);

D
thea Prall Radin and Gc rge Z Pat
ick(uni f calin)rnia Prcss,Berkdcy
1937)
All f ur arc in mctcr and rhymc; all arc the rcsult of carncst cff rt and
f
an incrcdiblc amount of lncntal labor; all c ntain hcrc and thcrc httlc gcms of
ingenuity; and all are grotesquc travesties of their 1n dcl, rendcrcd in drcadful
versc,teclnii1g with rnistranslati ns T11e lcast ofendcr is tlle blur,mattcr hct
Coloncl;thc vorst is Profcss r Elton, ho combincs a kind ofirrcsP nSiblC crbal
e

Onq'n,translated by Olh Ekon(Tll

s
onjc Rc

fchcity vith the mst exubcrant vulgarity and thc funnicst ho vlers

Onc f thc main trublcs

vith , uld~bc translators is their ignorancc (Dnly

sheer unacquainta11cc `vith Russian life in thc t vcntics of thc last centurv can
onc cXPlain,f r instancc, thcir pcrsistcntly translating cf revn d by
lagc instcad
b)

f c untry scat/

and sk

k r

l)y to galloP instcad of t dri c,

nVonc vh
vishcs

to attcmPt a translation of@nq in sh uld acquirC Cxact inf rmation in rcgard to a

nulllbcr of rclcvant subjccts, such as thc Fablcs f Krilo ,

B ron s v rks,

P etS f thc cightccnth ccntury,Rousscau sL

c,Pushkin

@urcF` H
`oi

Frcnch

s bi graPhy,

oA/f J/V IN ENGLIsH

123

banking gamcs, Russian songs relatcd to di ination, Russian n1ihtary ranks f the
tirne as comparcd to Wcstcrn Europcan and Amcrican nes,thc diffcrcncc bct veen
cranbcrry and lingcnbcrry, thc rulcs of the Enghsh Pist

l ducl as uscd in Russia,

and the Russian languagc.

I
vare
analyzc thc oPCning quatrain f stanza XXXIX in ChaPter Four,

vhich dcscribcs Oncgin s life in thc su 11ncr of1820 n his c untr cstate situatcd
somc thrcc hundrcd 111cs vvcSt of M sc0V:

T illustratc some of thc sPccial subtlctics that Pushkin s translators sh uld be a

of, I proPosC t

Progolki,chton c,s n glubokoy,

Lcsn ya tcn ,zhurchk;1n c struy,
Poro bcl
nki chcrn ~oko

Mladoy i Sv zhiy Potzcl y

In the nrst line,

progulki,chtcn c,s n81ubok y

(which Turgene _Viard t tl anslatc(l corrcttly as d Promcn d ,Fd F r1 e,un sor,,mC9'

cc tllc
uror ),Pr u i cannot be relld dl,lr c ob ous wdkF
nd d s
c

Russian term includcs thc additional idea of riding for cxcrcisc or Plcasure I did

not care for promcnadcs and scttled f r ramblcs since one can ramblc about n
h rseback

reading/ and thCn comcs a

t, Thc next v rd mcans

not only deep slccp but also s und slccp (hCncc thc

as vcll as on f

tcaser:fFtIb@ ov son mcans

n)and ofcourse imPhes slccP by night (Dnc

is tcmPted t use slumber,

vhichv uld niccly ccho in an thcr key the allitera~
tons of the text( uF
F1jb mmt lCs slumbcr),but f tllcsc clcgancics thc

double epithet in the French translati

translator shoukl bc varc Thc lnost dircct rcndcring of thc linc sccms to bc

rambIcs,and rcading,and sound slccp, , ,I

In thc ncxt line

lcsnaya ten`zhurchan c struy

r, in better concord the sylvan shade (and I

c nfcss t ha c t yed with(Byr n s) thc umbragc fthc woo(l );and n wc mcs

Vhich I nally rcndcrcd as thc

an thcr (hfscult : the catch in zrhurc cIn c sF't
,

bubbhng ofthc streams, is that s rui(n n1inati c Plural)has t v 1nCanings its ordin~

ary onc is thc ld scnsc of thc En8hsh strca

dcsignating nt bodics f vatcr
fesn r rcn is thc f rest s shadc,

1s

but rathcr hmbs of watcI

,thc shaRs of a running river(for cxtalnplc as uscd by Kyd

in Corneha ()beautious T ber vith thinc casic strcams that glidc

, or by
Annc Bradstrcet in ContcmPlations : a Ri erl where gliding rcams ctc),whilC

124

LADIMIR

NABOKOV

the other mcaning is an attemPt on Pushkin s part to cxpress thc Frcnch

on Fcs

vatcrs;for it should bc clcar to Pushkin s translator that thc linc

thc sylvan shadc,the l)ubbhng ofthC strcams

shadc,thc Purhng
d
rcgccts an idyl1ic idcal dcar to thc Arca(lian PoCts Tbc
untlcss

can
l)C
found
togcthcr
in
c
and thc vatcr,
u cr`cs bois/
`es rvissc
d
cigbtfa orcd by `PJcs
Fcl cLim` n
Praising the grccn rctreats that vcrc thcOrctically

s bois, f
centh~ccntury French and Enghsh pocts Antoine Bertin s Fc s

`cnce cf
mur 2urC dc F ntl ( fJfic CY`r)or E aristc Parny s dans l PaisSCur du bois au doux
c) C0pi l commonl,laces of this l lnd
11it des ruisscaux (Fi qfn,cI rd
( r

as an ld Enghsh rhymstcr luight ha c putit thc grcCn~ vood

rdlcts )dehbCratcly

l,l

ve have nov translated thc

Witll tllc assistancc of thcsc `c
n1inor French Poets,

rst

`o lincs

f the stanza Its cntirc srst quatrain runs

Rambles,and rcadiI1g,and s und slccP,

the sylvan shadc,thc bubbhng of dac strcams;
son cti uCS a vhitc~skinncd(lark~cvcd

gir

young and frcsh kiss,

Por bclvanki chcrno-oko
Mladoy i svCzhiy Potzcluy
The trans1ator is confiontcd hc1

n rnasks an auto-

c b somcthi

`g quitc sPCcial Push

biograPhical allusion undcr thc(hsguisc of a litcral translati n fr In Andr Ch nicr,

vhon1,h
vcvcr,hc docs n t rncntion in any aPpcndcd notc I an1against stressing

vorks; and such emPhasis

thc human intcrest angle in thc discussion of litcrary

v uld l)c csPccially incongru us in thc case of Pushki11 s no cl 'herc a st h/cd,

and thus fantastic,Pushkln is onc of thc lnain charactcrs
b

Hovcvcr,thcrc is little doubt that ur author camc unagcd in thc Prcsent stanza,
rneans f a dcvicc vhich in1825vvas unique in thc annals of htcrary art,his() vn

cxpcricncc:namely a briefintri:uC hC vas ha ing that sult11ner on11is cstatc in thc

hom
Provincc f Pskov vith Olga Kalashnikov,a rneek,dchcatc-looki11g Sla e girl,
vay
to
a
sccond
demesne
of
his,
in
he made Pregnant and evcntually bundlcd a

c
snd,in
a
f1
agmcnt
datcd
incc If ve n turn to Andr Ch nicr,
an thcr Pr

1789and pubhshed by Latouchc as Pirrc 1TJ, a clc PdraJc din (hnCs 5-8)
.Il a dans sa PaisiblC Ct saintc sohtudc,

Dul isir,du son11ncil,ct les bois,ct l tudc,

Lc banquct dCS an1is,ct quelquef is,lcs s
Lc baiscr jcunc ct flais d

irs,

unc blanchc aux cux no1rs

`hat
Nonc of the translators of Pushkn,Enghsh,GCrman or Frcnch,havc noticcd
rst

ery
f
scvcral Russian studcnts f Pushkn disco crcd indePendently (a diSc
^fd,
in Pu5h in
d Lcns
oi` dnr'usk9v cF
Published,I think,by Sa chcnko~
`
rst hnes f our
Vn,jroyoJ Fircrurt`rc,notc,P 362,Leningrad1926),that
thc tw
o a mCtaPhrasC f Chonicr s hncs
stanza XXXIX a1 c a paraphrasc,and thc ncxt

0/vfGJlA IN ENGLIsH

Chonicr s curious PrcOccuPati n with thc whitt ncss of a woman

examPlc, EF ic YxfD and P hkn

125

ss n(sCC, r

i on ofhls own ia y ung mis css,ftlsc to

a marvclous rnask,thc disguisc of a Personal cmoti n;for it vill bc n tcd that

as gcncrally ratlacr carcful ab ut thc idcntiscati n of his s urccs,
our author, vh
f rn

n0 vhcrc re cals his direct b rr ing hcrc, as if by rcferring to the literary origin

of these lines hc n1ight impingc uPon thc m

stcr

of his Ovvn romance

Enghsh translators, vvho verc c mPletcly unavvarc of all thc imp cations and

e discusscd in comncction vith this stanza, ha c had a good dcal of

niccties I ha

troublc vith it, sPalding strcsscs the hygicnic sidc

f the evcnt

the unconta 1inated klss

of a young dark_eyed country lnaid;

N1iss Radin pr duccs thc drcadfu
a kiss at tin1cs iom s

mc R"rn1 dcn

dark~cycd,vith l)right and y uthR 11o ks;

N

iss Dcutsch,aPParcntly n t rcahzing that Pushkin is alluding to Oncgin s carnal

vith thc incrcdibl c

rclations vvith his scrf girls, comcs uP

and if a black-eycd girl PcrllaittCd

somctimes a kiss as frcsh as shc;

and Pr

fess

r Elton, vho in such cascs can al vayS bc(lcpcndcd uPon f r gr tesquc

ncubinc

tritcncss and bad gran11nar,rcvcrscs thc act and pcroxidcs thc c

at dmcs a icsh young kiss best wing
uP nS mc blond and dark-cycd luai(1,

Pushkin s linc is,by thc~by,an exccllcnt illustration of vhat I mean b

ahsn ,hterahty,litcral interPrctati n I take litcrahsn1to mcan

litcr~

absolute accurac

If such accurac somethnes rcsults in thc strangC allcgoric sccnc suggcstcd by thc

PhraSc thc lcttcr has killcd thc sPirit/ only one rcason can bc imagincd:thcrc rnust
havc l)ccn sOmcthing vron8cithCr vith thc riginal lettcr rvith thc riginal spirit,
vith absolutc
s conccrn Pusl kin has litcrally(iC

and this is not rcally a translator

accuracy)rCndcrcd Ch nicr s

unc b nch

by
, n and thc En ish translator

should rcincarnatc hcrc both Pushkin and Ch nicr It vould bc falsc litcrahsrn t
nder be dn d runc b/dnc cl as a white onc ~or, ill worse,%whitc kmal

and it uld be ambigu us to say

r-hccd, Thc accuratc lncaning is a vhitc

vhitc-skinncd girl, `vith dark cycs

skinned female, certainly young, hencc a
and, prcsumably, dark hair cnhancing l)yc ntrast thc lu 1in us fairncss f unPig
;

mcntcd skin
An thcr good cxamplc f a particularl

Chaptcr Onc
I rcc llcct thc sea bef rc a storn

oh

`I en

ied

untranslatable

stanza is XXXHI in

LADIMIR

126

NABOKOV

thc va cs that ran in turbulcnt succcssion

vn at hcr fcct vith l vc!
to lic d
Ya P mnyu

m rc

Prcd gr

z yu:

kak a zavid al oln m

bcgoshchiIn l)orn y chercd yu

s lyuko yu lcch k ey n g nl!

Russian rcadcrs disccrn in thc

riginal here tvvo sets of bcaudfully onomatopocic

shchiial bJrnq
vvhich1 cndcrs thc turbulent rush ofthe sur and

s k
thc
liquid
lisP
of
the wa cs(lying in ad rati n at the lady s%et
9u`

Vh s c Cr the rec llectcd ket bcl ngcd t (thirteen~ycar-old Marie Rae ski
alhterati ns

bc

rl

c i,,P
f Tatar
fni
r what is n10rc1ikely~desPitc R/1aric s own mCm0irs~Countcss Ehsc
Vor ntzo ,Pushkn s mistrcss in Odessa,or,most likdy,a rctl osPcCti e co1nbi

Paddling ncar Taganr g,or hcr fathcr s godchild,a young d n2ed

ori in,

cs come flom
nadon of re ectcd ladics),the only rek ant htt herc is that thcsc wa

r
r
ucher

rcfc
r
to

ondc
Po1
La nt nc thr ugh Bogdanovich,
l uV a on s
rs s

enFr ousse er d 1Inc t,gd`cd cur chdqLJc` F son rou's cn icnF bd1scr`es PJcds de

rc d

i,,our

lJcan dC la F

ntainc

es m urs

dc P"che cr dc C1 Pidon,

1669)and

`dm
f this by IPPoht Bogdano ich, in his S vcct Psychc
t a cl sc paraPhraSC

(Dusr, n , 1783- 1799) vhich in Enghsh should rcad thc vavcs that PursuC hCr
j

lc jcalously to%ll humbly at hcr

ct,

Without introducing various changcs,thcrc is no possil)ihty vhatsocvcr to n1akc

Pushkin sf ur lines an altcrnatcly

rhymed tctramctric quatrain in Enghsh,c cn

if only rnascuhnc rhymcs bc uscd The kcy

vords arc

co F cF,sccz,srorIla,cnricd, yCs,

rcn,Furbu
nF,stIcc s"0n,Fic,

cr,fo
;alld to tllcse ck n nc,ta nglc addiuc,n mn

bc madc vithout bctrayal For instancc,if vc try to end the nrst line in bcf re
-

fr c FF cr rh

sh rc t

scd b ( llowed a crtldC c amkmmt)~alld

the end f

the third linc (r/lc S

mcthing

r thC r me

d s rh F sFOrm Fhc shorc), this

one concession xlrould inv lvc usin a numbcr of thcr changcs comPlctely brcakng
uP the riginal scnsc and all its litcrary associations In othcr vords,thc translat r
sh uld

constantly bcar in n1ind not

nly the essential pattcrn of thc text but als

hth`vhich that pattcrn is inter/o cn Nor can anything bc added

f r the sake frhymc r1ncter Onc thinks ofs mc ofthose task Problcms in chcss
vings
thc l) rr

tourncys to thC c mP siti n fvhich sPecial rcstrictivc rulcs arc aPPhcd, such as
thc suPulati n that nly ccrtain Pieces luay bc uscd,In thc1narvelous ccon my of
an Ong ir,stanza,thc usablc picccs arc likc visc stricdy lin1itcd in numbcr and lond:

mav be shiRcd ar und b thc translator but n additional Incn ma bc uscd

for padding or lling uP thc gaps that imPair a uniquc solution,
the

VII
To translatc an OngJ1n stanza does not lncan to rig uP fourtccn lincs vith altcrnatc
bea and a x to thcm sc cnjin e rhymcs s rting with plc u l vc kisu d vc,

Grantcd that rhymes can bc found, thcy sh uld be raiscd to thc lc el fO q n S

harm nies but if thc lnascuhnc nes1nay bc1nade to takc carc f thcmsclves,vhat

O rJ=

rv IN ENGLIsH

hcn Pushkin rl yn1es de

shall :cd ab ut thc fcn)ininc rhyn1csP
Jclc yi

( hCrc

arc youP), thc effect is cvocative and euPh

ni us,

127

i(maidCns) :itb
l)ut

vhcn Byron

rhymcs maidcns =ith gay dcns/ the1 Csult is burlcsquc E cn such sPht rhyn cs

in OngJin as thC instrumental f Childe Harold and thc instrumcntal of ice

(Gdrof tFor,,~so`Vom),rctain

thcir a nian gra ity and havc nothing in con11non With

such m nstrOsities in Byr n as ncv skin and

P uskin (a
of C unt Musin-Pushkh1,a bin ll lnal branch of thc fan1ily),
s

hcrc arc thrcc c nclusi ns I ha

9J,eJin in r11yIllc 2 It is PoSsiblc t

diSt rti n

ofthc namc

c ar1 ivcd at 1. lt is in1Possil)lC t

translatc

dcscribc in a scrics of f otn tes thc modula-

tions and rhylncs of the tcxt as vcll as all its assOciations and other sPccial featurcs,
3 It is PossiblC t
f

translatc Ong
n vith] casonablc accuracy l)y subStituting for thc

urtccn rhymcd tetramctcr lincs of cach stanza fourtecn unrhynlcd lines

f varying

lcngtll, om iambic dimchtcr to iamhc per1tamet

Thcse c nclusions can bc8cncrahzcd I

notcs,footnotcs rcaching uP likc skyScraPcrs t
leavc nly thc glea n f ne tcxtual liI1c bct

vant translati ns id1 copi us foott11ct P f thiS r that Page so as t

y and ctCrnity.I :ant

``een comn1cnta
such footn tcs and thc abs lutely litcral scnsc, id1n cmasculation and n padding
_ I

ant such scnsc and such n tcs f r all thc P etry in othcr tongucs that still

languishcs in PoCtical ersi ns,l)cgrirncd and bcshmed by rhyluC And

hcn
c ngfin is rcady,it v l cithcr c nfor 1cxactly to my
ision or not aPPear at a

my
,

Note
Cp PoPc
Th m son
sPring/

SOund slccP by night study and casc, in sohtudc/ or JamcS

etirelncnt, rural quict, fricndshiP, b ks, in Thc scas ns

s
s

Chapter ll

Jean Paul

`inay and
Jean arhelnet

A M ETHODOLOGY FOR
TRANSLATION
TJ/a s
ed

by Jua ,Sa9er a

d .J. a e`

T FIRsI THE DIFFERENT n1cth

less, l)ut thc can bc c ndcnscd

ds r ProcCdurcs sccI

to bc Count

to just seven, caCh one corrcsP ndh1g to a

highcr degrec of c mPlexity In practicc, thc ma bc uscd cithcr on their

vn or

combined

ith ne r

morc ofthc thcrs

Direct and ob1ique transIation

Gcncrally sPcaking,translators can cho

sc Ir n1t vo

luedlods f translating,namcly

dircct, r litcral translation and bljquc translati n,In son1c translati n tasks it rna
bc possible to tI ansp sc thc sOurcc language n cssagc clclllcnt by clcment into tI1c
targct languagc, bccausc it is bascd on cither(i)Para Cl categorics, in vhich casc
vve can sPcak f Structural Parallchsn1, or( )on Parallcl c nccPts,
vhich arc the
rcsult f mctahnguistic ParallChsms But translators may also n
ticc gaps, or

1acunac

, in thc targct lan:uagc (TL) vvhich must be

llcd by corrcsponding

clemcnts, so that thc crall imPrcSSi n is thc samc for thc t vo mcssagcs,
It may,ho vc er,als haPpen that,bccausc f structural or rnctahnguistic dircrenccs, ccrtain styhstic cccts cannot bc transPosed int thc TL vithout upsctting
the syntactic ordcr, r cvcln thc lcxis In this case it is understood that n1

mcthods havc t l)c uscd vhich at Hrst lllaV look unusual but

rc conaPlcx

vhich nc crthelcss
can pcrn1it tI anslators a strict c ntr l o cr the rchabihty of their
v rk: thesc
vhich foll

S,thC
Pr cCdurcs are called obhquc translation1uethods.In thc listing
srst thrcc pr ccdures arc dircct and thc othcrs arc

1958/1995

bhquc

A METHODOLOGY FOR TRANsLATION

129

PrOcedure1:Borrov"ng
To ovcrcomc a lacuna,usually a mctahnguistic onc(cg a ne tcchnical Pr ccsS
a11unkno vn c ncePt),b rr
ving is thc sin1PlCSt f all translati n rncth ds It v uld
not even mcrit discussion in this contcxt if translat

rs did not ccasionall nced to

usc it in order t crcatc a styhstic effcct F r instancc, in ordcr t

intr ducc

thc

ur f the s urcc languagc (sL) culturc into a translati n, f rcign tcrms luay

bc uscd,c g such Russian vords as roul)lcs

and aParatchik , d lla1 s
, datchas

and Party fr rn Arnerican Enghsh, Icxican SPanish f d names

tcquila and

tort las , and s

n In a story vith a tyPical Enghsh setti11g, an cxpression such

fla

as

thc coroner sPokc

is Pr bably

bcttcr translated into Frcnch by borro

Enghsh tcrm cor ncF,rathcr d1an

lcnt title fr

to nda m K r

n1a1nongst the French magistrature, cg

Somc ell-cstabhshcd,1nainly

/ing thc

lcss satis ing eqt lva

e cor I,cr`rir`cI

Pcnr Fc

oldcr b rro vi11gs arc sovidcly uscd that t11ey

are no lon cr considcred as such and havc bccomc a Part of the rcsPccti

c TL

n s me examplcs of Frcnch borr

vings fl on1 0ther languages arc tz`c

rds as mcnu , carburctor`

r dinfoFe
PdqucboF occl0u Ctc,In Enghsh such
lcxic

hangar , chic and cxprcssions likc

j
d

u , cnl`nt

terriblc

and rendcz-v us

arc no longcr considcrcd to bc borro :ings Translators are particularly intcrcsted

in thc ncwcr borro i11gs,e cn Pcrs nal oncs It n1ust bc rcmcmbcrcd that n any
b rr vvings

cntcr a languagc through translati n,just like semantic borro vings or

hux amis,wh se

phhlls tlanslat rs must carchlly av id

The dccision to borr

v a
local c

sI~lyx

ord or cxprcssion for introducing an clcment f

ur is a lnattcr of style and conscquendy f the lncssage

PrOccdure2:Calque
A calque is a sPecial ki11d of borr
fo1

ving` hereby a languagc borr0 vs an cxPreSsi n

rn f an thcr,but thcn translatcs htc1 ally cach ofits clen cnts Thc rcsultis cithcr

a lexical calque, as in the nrst cxamPlc,bel

vh st

thc syntactic structurc of thc TL,

f, i c a calqucvhich rcsPccts
a ne n1odc f exPres~

intr ducing

slon;or
ii

a structural calque,as in thc scc nd cxamPlc,bCl vv, vhiCh intr duces a nc v

construcuon int thc languagc,cg
n
is ^Frcnch cdFquc
Co11,plimcI1ts of thC scas n!

c mlDlimcnts dc la salsonl

scicncc- cti n

sciencc-sction

xed calqueshich, aRer a pcri d of tilllc,

mc an intcgral Part f the language Thcsc too, likc b rr
vings, may have
undcr8 nc a SCmantic change, turning thclll into faux an1is Translators arc morc
Asvith borroxxings, thcrc arc n1any

bec

intcrested in nc v calqucs vhich Can scrvc to ll a lacuna, 7ith ut having to usc an

actual borrowing(cf, c n n,iqucme

la1 uagc)

FJ

In such c cs it may be P

izOFc`a Frcnch calque takcI on1thc

ral le

to crcatc a neW lc>ci

l ft

Gcrnlan
rm using

130 JEAN~PAUL VINAY AND JEAN DARBELNET

Greek r Latin roots or usc con crsion(cf,
v uld

a
id a vk vard calqucs,such as

r nc/,c F u
th rapic

t s ;Bal|194 257f)This
sr

n Fis

occuPati nncllc

Banquc Pour lc C n11ncrcc ct le

D d PPcmcnt

s0 rce

ccuPati nal thcraPy

Bank for C mm ce and
Dcvel Pmcnt

lcs quatre Grands

thc f ur great Po
CrS

lc Prcn icr Franqais

Thc French Prcmlcr

Matrimon is a nRy sfty

Lc rnariagc cst unc assOciation

cinquantc~cinquantc.
(

association

SN ulc`' s

r r i s,Odober

1955)
l

hon11nc dans la ruc

thc man in thc street

(R
uc dcS Dcux/lr ndes,

nstCad f hommc dc la ruc

l

May1955)

or le Frangais moycn

compagnon dc routc
( e
nde,M cla1956)
La PluPart dCs grandcs d

fcll v-tra

ns

cisi

cllcr

M m r dc sions garang the

sur lc Prochc~Oricnt ont oto

prises un rll mcnt o sir

Ncar-East vvcre taken vhen

Winston Churchill affcctait dc

chair ccupicd b France on thc

considorcr con1111e vidc

chaise

la

dc la Francc sur la sc ne

intcrnationale
(

Churchill PrCtCndcd that the

intcrnational sccnc vas cmPty
[instCad
%uteuil

f:

la

Placc or le

c lrondc,Malch1956)

PrOcedurc3:LiteraI translation
Litcral,or v rd

f r vord,translati

n is thc dircct transfcr of a SL tcxt into a gra

matically and idi matically aPProPriatC TL tCxt in which thc translators

task is

hn1itcd to bserving the adhcrcncc tO the linguistic scrvitudcs fthc TL,

I leR my sPcctaclcs n tllc tablc
d xx

nsta1rs

Wherc arc y uP
This train arri cs at uni n

at tcn

station

J laiss mcs ltlncttcs sur la tablc

cn bas

Otl tes_ usP

Cc train arrivc la garc Centralc
10heures

In princiPlC,a literal translation is a unique soluti

plctc in itself It is rnOst c

nvhich is reversiblc and com~

11non vhcn translating bet veen t vo languages of thc

samc hmily(e g bCtwcen Frcnch and Ralian),and evcn morc so when tlaey
also sharc thc samc culturc,If htcral transIations arisc bet

veen French and English,

it is because co 11non metahnguistic conccpts also rcvcal phySical c

cxistencc,ic

Peri ds f bilinguahsln, vith thc c nscious or unconscious illlitation ls hich attachcs

to a ccrtain intcllcctual r Pohtical Prcstigc,and such likc Thcy can also bc justiscd

A i

ETHODOLOGY FOR TRANsLATION

131

by a certain convergcncc ofth u8ht and soluetin1es of structurc, vhich arc ccrtainly

Present am ng thc Eur PCan langua CS(cf,thc crcation of thc dchnitc artic c,thc
concePts of culture and civilization),and vvhich ha c m tivatcd intcrcsting rcscarch

in Gencral semantics.
In the Prcccding methods, translation d es n t inVolve any spccial styhstic
ProcCdurcs. If this vvcrc al vays thc casc then our prcsent study v uld lack justiscation and translati nvould lack an intellectual challengc since it vvould bc rcduced

to an unambiguous transfer fr m SL to TL Thc cxploration ofthc P

ssibility of

translating scicnti c tcxts by maChinc,as Pr P sCd by the luany research grouPs in

uni ersitics aitd industry in all maj r countries,is largcly based on thc cxistence of

ught Proccsscs
,hich, as xl'oukl bc cxPcctcd, are Particularly frcqucnt in thc docu ncntation
Parallel Passagcs in sL and TL tcxts, CorrcsPondir1g to Para1lCl th
rcqui1

cd in scicnce and tcchnol 8y ThC suitability ofsuch tcxts f r aut n1atic transrccogniscd as carly as1955by L.ockc and Bo th,(For currcnt asscsslllCnts

lati n vas

of thc sc

Pc f apPhcati nsf rnachinc translation scc Hutchns and Son)crs 1992,

Sager 1994)

If,aRcr trying thc srst thrcc pr ccdurcs,translators regard a litcral transIati n

unacccPtablC9thcy must turn to thc mcthods of obhquc translation By unaccePtablc vc mcan that thc mcssagc,

vhen translatcd litcrally

givcs another1ncaning,or
1ng,or

11

has no111cal

iii

is st1 ucturally in

possible, r

vithin thc mctahnguistic exPeridocs not havc a corrcsPondi11g exPressi n

encc ofthc TL, or

has a c rrcsp nding cxPrcssion,but n t vvithin the same rcgister

dah thcsC idcas,c n der

the follo ing cxamPlcs:

Hc lookcd at the lnap

He looked thc picturc f hcalth

Il rcgarda la carte,
Il Paraissait l irnagc dc la sant

Il avait

Vhilevc

a1r en PlCinc f

rme

clan translatc thc hrst sentencc litcrally,this is imPossible for thc sccond,

isl)t d so f r an cxPressivc rcason(c

unlcss xx=e

8 in rdcr t charactcrisc an
Enghshn1an lsh d es n t spcak
ery8ood convcrsational Frcnch) ThC rst cxamPlc
Pair is lcss sPcci

c,sincc c r

is

lcss sPecillc than map But thisin no

ay rcndcrs

thc dcm nstration in ahd

If translat rs ocr s n ething sirnilar to thc sec nd
PorF
t

ir c I,i 9C

LIn cf,orme

,this indicatcs that thcy ha e ai1ned at an cquivalencc f thc

vo n cssagcs, somcthing thcir neutral

cnablcs thcl lt

cxamPlc,ab vC,cg
sg

sition outsidc both thc TL and thc sL

do Equi alence f rllcssagcs ultirnatcly rehcs upon an idcntity of

situations,al1d it is this alone that allo 's us to statc that the TL may rctah1ccrtai11
charactcri tics f reahtv that arc unkno vn t
If therc crc conccPtual dicti

na1 ics vith

the sL
bilingual signiHcrs,translat rs voukl

only necd t look uP thc aPPr Priatc translation under thc cntry corrcsPonding to
thc situation idcnti cd by the SL mcssagc But such dicti narics d n t exist and

132

JEAN-PAUL

INAY

AND JEAN DARBELNET

thcreforc translat rs start off vithv rds r units of translati n,t

vhich thcy aPPly

Particular procedures ith thc intcntion f con cying thc dcsircd mcssagc, Sincc
thc positioning of avord vvithin an uttcrancc has an c"cct n its rncaning,it rnay
wcll arisc d1at thc s lution results in a grouPing of words that is s

hr i m thc

original starting point that no dictionary could givc it,CIivcn the innnitc number
combinations ofsigniHers al ne,it is undcrstandablc that dictionaries cann

t Pro ide

translators vith rcadv~lnadc soluti ns to all their Pr blcms.Only translat rs can bc

a

arc of thc totahty of thc mcssagc,

vhich dctermines thcir clccisions, In thc Hnal

analysis,it is the rnessage alonc,a rcflccuon f thc situation,that a1l

vhcther t v texts arc adcquate alternati cs

s ust0judgc

PrOcedure4:Transposition
Thc mcth d called transPosition invo1vcs rcPlacing onc
vord Class
vith anothcr

vithout changing thc mcaning of dlc mcssagc Beside being a sPccial translati n
Pr ccdurc,transPosition can also bc aPPhcd vithin a language, For cxamPle: d

ith
dnnonc qu j`rcyic,,dr
,can bc rc-cxPreSsed by transP sing a subordinatc crb

nn nc son rcF ur In c ntrast to thc srst cxprcssion, vhichvc

a noun,thus:
Jr

call thc basc cxPrCSSion, vc rcfcr to the sec nd one as thc transP scd Cxprcssion
In translation thcre are tvo distinct tyPes f transposition:(i)obhgatory transposi-

tion,and(ii) Ptional transPositi n,

Thc llowing cxample h to be anslatt d htcrally(ProcCdure3),but must

als

be transPoscd(Procedure4)
D ss n

lcvcr,

As soon as hc gets/got up

As soon as hc gcts up, ,

D s son le er
D s qu il

sC l

In d)is examPle,the Enghsh allo vs no ch icc bct vccn thC t vo f rrlls,thc basc f

rm

bc1ng1hc only one PossiblC Invcrscly,ho vc Cr, Vhen translating back into Frcnch,
vvc havc thc choicc bct vccn applying a calquc r a transPosition, bccausc French
Pern its either c nstruction
In contrast,thc t vo follo vin8Phrascs

APr ::s qu
APrt

il scra rcvcnu.

s son retour

can both bc transP sCd

er hc comcs baCk,
ARcr his rcturn
AJllit

Fron1a styhstic P int of

ie thc basc and thc transposcd cxpression d
sar y

n t ncccs-

havc thc samc valuc. Translat rs must, thcrcf rc, ch sc to Carry out a

transPosition if thc translati

n thus obtained sts bcttcr into thc uttcrancc,or allo vs

a particular nuancc of style to be retained Indccd,the transPoscd f rm is gcner~

a m rc litcrar

in charactcr,

A SPecial and equcntly used casc f transPositi n is that of intcrchangc

A fdETHODOLOGY FOR TRANsLATION

133

PrOccdurc5:Modulation
M dulation is a ariation of thc f rm of thc mcssagc, btaincd by a changc in thc
P int f viC /

This changc can bc justi cd vhcn,alth ugh a litcral,or cvcn trans-

P sed, translati n rcsults in a grarnlnatically correct uttcrancc, it is considered

unsuitablc,unidi matic or awkward in thc TL

As vith transPositi n, vc distin8uish bCt
ccn frce or optional rn dulations and
th sc

that arc sxcd or bhgat ry. A classical cxamplc of an obhgatory modula~

The timc whcn, ,which must bc translated as e It,oI,,enr o
, , , Thc tyPc ofrn dulati n vvhich turns a ncgative sL cxPrCssion into a Positi C
TL CxPrcssion is morc oftcn than n t oPtional, cvcn th ugh this is closcly linkCd

ith the structure of cach language,cg

tlon is thc Phrasc,

It is n t dif cult t sh

Il cst facilc dc d m ntrcr

Thc diffcrcncc bct veen nXcd and flcc m dulati n is Onc of degrcc In thc casc f

sxcd m dulation, translators vith a good kn vvledgc of both languagcs frccly usc
d,as thcy vill bc avarc of thc frcqucncy of usc,thc vcrall acccPtancC,
and the c nsrmation pr idcd by a dictionary or gra 1rnar of thc prcferrcd
this Fncth

cxPrCsSlon

Cases of cc m dulati n arc single instances not yet xcd and sancti ncd by
v cach tirnc This,h
vcvCr,
is not vhat quah cs it as oPtional;
/hcn carricd out as it should bc,thc rcsulting
usage, so that thc Pr ccdurc must bc carricd out ane

translation sh uld crrcsP nd PCrfcctly t the situation indicatcd by thc sL,To i

us-

tratC this P int,it can bc said that thc result f a frec ln dulati n sh uld lead t
s luti

n that rnakcs thc rcadcr cxclai1n, Yes,that s exactly vhat y u v uld say

Frcc modulati n thus tcnds t0 vards a uniquc solution,a solution vhich rcsts upon
an habitual train of thought and hich is necessary rathcr than pti na1.It is thcrc~
f

rc c idcnt that bct

veen xed m dulati n and frcc modulation thcrc is but a

diffcrcncc of degrec, and that as s on as a frcc m dulation is uscd Rcn cnou h,

r is

felt t

ffcr thc Only S luti n(this uSually rcsults fron)thc study of bihngual

texts, from discussi ns at a bilingual confcrcncc, or from a famous translation

which d ms rccogmti n duct its litcrary mC t),it may become hxed.Howc cr,
a frce m dulation d es n t actuall bcc mc xcd until it is rcfcrrcd to in dicti n~
arics and grarl 1nars and is rcgularly taught, A passa8cn t using such a m dulation
would thcn be c nsidered inaccuratc and r ccted In his M A thcsis,G.Pannct n,

from
vh m
vc havc b rr
ved thc tcrm modulation, c rrcctly
rcsults of a systcmatic apphcation of transPosition and modulati

anticiPatCd tl c

La transPositi n corrcsPondrait en traducti n unc quati n du Pren1ier

dcgro, la modulati n unc
quati n du sccond dcgr , chacunc transf

rmant oquation cn idcntito, toutcs dcux crcctuant la ros

luti n

aPProPrlcc

(PannCton1946)

134 uEAN~PAUL

INAY

AND JEAN DARBELNET

Proccdure6:Equivalcncc
Wc ha c rcpcatcdly strcssCd that one and thc samc situation can be rcndcrcd by
t Vo tcXts using con1PlCtCly diffcrcnt styhstic and structural lncth
ds,In such cascs
vc arc deahng ith thc n1cth d

vhich Produccs cquivalCnt tcxts Thc Classical

cxamplc of cquj alcncc is givcn by thc rcacti n ofan amatcur V110accidcntally hits
his Hngcr vith a hammcr: if11e vcrc Frcnch lus cry of Pain

0uld l)c transcribed

:ere Enghd9 this xl:

(Duch!
as Aie!

stril

uld bC intc1 I)reted as

An ther
, but if he
ng casc of cquivalcnccs arc thc luany on matopocia of anin1al sounds,e8

cocor1co

c ck-a~d
dlc-d

n11aou

n11ao`v

11i~han

hcchav

m re oRen

Thcsc siImPlC Cxa uPlcs illustrate a particular katurc of cquivalenccs

d)an n t thcv arc f a svntaglnatic naturc,and afloct thc vholc f the lY,cssagc, As

a rcsult, most cquivalcnccs arc Hxcd, and bel

idi ms,chch

ng to a Phrascological rcPcrt

c of
s,pr
crbs,non inal or adjccti al Phrascs,ctc, In gcncral,Pro crbs
i1

arc pcrf ct exallll)lcS of Cquivalcnccs,cg

Il Pleut

scaux/dcs cordcs,

It is raining cats and d gs

Likc a bullin a china sh P

Commc un chicn dans unjcu dc

Too1nany cooks sPoil the br th

Dcux l)atr 11s font chavircr la

quillcs

barquc
Thc n1eth d f crcating cqui alcnces is also frcquently aPPhed t

exan11Dle,

idi ms,

For

and as likc as t v PCas cann t bc translatcd

by n cans of a calquc. Yct this is exactly vhat happens amongst lncmbc1 s f so~
T talk thr ugh onc

s hat

callcd bilingual populations, vvho ha c PcrmanCnt contact vith t v languagcs but

ncvcr bccomc fully acquaintcd vith cithcr It haPPcns,nc erthclcss, that s ln c f
thcsc calqucs actually bccon1c accePtcd by thc Ot11er languagc, csPecially if thcy
rclate to a nc v cld vhich is likclv to bcc mc cstab shcd in the countr

ofthc TL

For cxamplc,in Canadian Frcnch the idi m

t talk thr ugh one s hat has acquircd

thc Cquivalent P r`c'a FrcI ers scD,,cF,

But the rcsP nSil ihty ofintr ducing such
calqucs into a Pcrfcctly rganiscd languagc
should l1 t fa uPon thC sh uldcrs f
`C
translators
nlY vritcrs can takc such liberties, and thcy alonc sh uld takc crcdit
r blamc f r succcss or failurc In translati n it is advisablc to usc traditional f rllls
fCxP1 cSsion,bccausc thc accusauon of uHng Gallicis11as,Anghcisn1s,Gcrmanisms,
HisPanisms, ctc, 1 al ays bc prcscnt vhcn a transIator attcn1Pts t int1 oducc a
nc v

calquc

Procedure7:Adaptation
it is11scd

thosc cascs xlihere d)c tyPC of situati n bcing rcfc1 cd to by t11c sL messagc
1

With this sc cnth meth d `e rcach the cxtrcme linlit f translation

A i

ETHODOLOGY FOR TRANSLATION

135

unkn
vn in thc TL culturc In such cascs translators havc t crcatc a nc situation

re,bc dcscribcd
as a SPecial knd f cqui alencc,a situational equivalencc.Lct us takc thc cxamplc
f an Enghsh fathcr h : uld think n thing of kissing his daughtcr on d1c mouth,
that can bc considcrcd as bcing cquivalcnt AdaPtation can,thcref

somcthing vvhich is normal in that culturc but

htcral rcndcring int

Frcnch Translating,

vhichv uld not bc acceptablc in a

Hc kisscd his dau8htCr n thc mouth

mbI dss sd FfC sLJr f b uchc ,wotlld in (lucc hto tllc TL an clcment which
is not Prcscntin thc SL, vhcre thc situati n may bc that of a lo ing fathcr rcturning

by
h mc

and grceting his daughtcr a cr a long journcy.The French rcndering v uld

bc a spccial kind of vcrtranslation /\m rc aPPr PriatC translati nv ould be,

scrr r ndr menF sd

ed ns s s br r`ul lcss, fc ursc,the anslat r wi cs t achieve
a chcap cffcct AdaPtations are Particularly frequent in thc translati n fb k and
nllll titles e g

Tr is

hommcs et un coumn Thrcc mcn and a baby,[hlml

Lc grand Mcaulncs
The Wandcrcr,[book tidel

Thc1ncthod of adaPtati n isvcll kn0 vn amongst silnultanc us interPrctcrs:thcrc

is thc st ry of an intcrprctcr vho,having adaPtcd crickct into Tour clc Francc

in a contcxt rcfcrring to a Particularly PoPular sP
rt,vvas Put on thC SP t vhCn thc
Frcnch dclcgatc thcn thankcd the sPeaker f r having rcfcrrcd t such a tyPically
Frcnch sPrt ThC intcrPrCtCr thcn had t rcvcrsc thc adaptation and sPcak f crickct
t

his Enghsh chcnt

Thc rcfusal t makc an adaPtati n is invariabl

vithin a translati n
detcctcd

bccausc it affccts n t nly thc syntactic structurc,but also thc(lcvcloPmcnt

fidcas

and h
v thcy are rePrcsentedithin the ParagraPh E Cn though translat rs luay

Producc a PcrfCctly correct text vithout adaptation,thc absence f adaPtati n rnay

still be n ticcable by an indc nable t ne,somcthing that d cs n t sOund quitc right
This is unfortunatcly the imPrcssion

en nly t o often by texts Pul)hshed by inter_

national organi'ations,
vh sc mcmbcrs, cithcr t11r ugh ign rancc r bccausc fa
n1istakcn insistencc On litcralncss, (lcmand translations vvhich arc largcly based n

calqucs Thc rcsult rnay thcn turn ut to bc purc gibbcrish vhich has n namc in
any languagc,but hich Rcn Etien 1)lc quitc rightIy refcrrcd to as s bir czFFuraricluc
w1 ch is nly Pardy rcndered by thc cquivalCnt Mid_Adandc jaI gon Translations
,

cannot bc Produccd si1nply by crcatin8structural or1nctalinguistic calqucs,All the

vcrc carricd out

vith thc i1nPhcit knox,lcdgc of thc
grcat litcrary translations
mcthods descHbcd in this chapter, as Gi(lc s prchcc t his translatl n of Hd,,aF r
clearly sho /s Onc cannot hclP v ndCring,h
vc cr,if thc rcasOn tl e Amcricans
refuscd to takc the Lcaguc of Nati ns scriously
as not bccausc1nany fd1eir d cu_
ments vcre un-1nodulatcd and un-adaPted renderings of original Frcnch tcxts,just

as the sdl,ir dt dnFitlu has its r ts in ill-digcstcd translations of Anglo_Arnerican

originals Hcrc, ,c touch uPon an cxtrcmcly scrious ProblCn1,

vhich, unfortunatcly, lack of spacc PrCvCnts us from discussing furthcr, that

f intellectual,
cultural,and linguistic changes, hich o cr tilnc can be effcctcd by innportant documcnts,school textbooks,j urnals, lm dial gucs,ctc,,written by anslat rs wh
arc eithcr unablc t r vho darc n t enture into thcv rld of obhque translations
At a tirnchcn exccssivc ccntrahzati n and lack f rcsPcct f r cultural diffcrcnces

136 uEAN-PAUL VINAY AND JEAN DARBELNET

arc dri ing intcrnational organizations into adoPting vorking lan uagcs sui gcneris
r vriting

docun1cnts vhich arc then hastily translated by o

cr orkcd and unaP

bc
concerncd
about
thc prosPcct that
PrCciatcd translators,thcrc is good reason t
:
four~nfths f thc v rld
l havc to livc nn thi11g but translati ns,their intellect
f

.s

bcing starvcd by a diet of hnguistic paP

ApPlication ofthc seven n1ethods

Thcse scven lucthods are aPPhed to differcnt degrccs at thc thrcc Planes

is r , and

o`
cr

f cxPrcs-

rr
ving

sion,i,e lcxis,syntactic structure,and rncssage,For exan1PlC,b

lllay occur

arc Frcnch lcxical l) rr

~

ings om Enghsh;borr wing also occurs at thc lcvel f the l cssagc, cg OK

and fivc d0Ck This rangc of Possibihdcs is lustratcd h)Table11 1,whcrc cad)
at thc lexical lcvcl~ bu``dozer

, r

ProcCdurc is exemPhscd f r each PlanC f Cxprcssion.

rable 11 1: summary of thc scvcn translation I,rocedurcs(mcth ds in incrcasing ol dcr()f

dimcul
)

[ xis

1Borrowing
2 Calquc

al

scim fcrion

E: Fusclage

la n1odc

F Jconcnn"q1`emenr

ItlFcfj

Fdibfe

Normal sch l

(CE)
F encrc

Transl

lresskl~tlc

F:B ffd z

3Llte1

srrucr1!res

Bon

clcc

E ink

Cf

oyage

Ct, ,P`jJ, cnrs1 c sd s n

G vcn or Gcncral

4Transpo u

Firc

Takc it or1ea

re c sur`d
fe

Thc book is n the

e it

@e hc '~ P
What tirnc is it?

tablc

Ft

Llr

;Fxr
From

d mhon

w dqnm

ll :

As jmbcr becomcs

Nos1noklng

naorc ,aluable

5ModLllation

Peu Pr?

o
E

6Eqm dcn

shallo

nJ

D nncz Vn PC
sd

dc lo

d i

LikC a bull in a china sl oP H ll w triumPh

E,Us: chow

c & u m 6

E,uK: (Md)
Tca

7 aptatlm

C ml,/e

N
acancics

Givc a Pint )f~our

blood

c C 1f1
}

rc

Eil tlr, iJ

n cf G

c'c

E,UK Crickct

E,Us: Bascball

Bc%rc you could say

Jack R t,lnson

US Hi!

A METHODOLOGY FOR TRANSLATION

137

Itis obvious that sc eral ofthesc mcthods can be uscd

`ithin thc samc scntcnCc,

ns comc undcr a holc c 11)lcx of 11ethods s d1at it is

(hfscult to distinguish thc 1; c,g,, the t1 anslation of

vCight by PrcsscPapcr
and that s mc translati

T
\
l r rTdW)1f
1

samc tirnc a transPositi n, a modulation, and an cquivalcncc, It is a transposition

VH atc is tra ft,m1cd hto a n mhal exPless0n;a modu

/ct Paint Prcncz ardc
lation l)ccausc a statcn1cnt is convcrted into a
arning(cf

la Pcinturc, though Pcinturc frafchc see 1s to bc gait ing ground ii1 Frenchbcct

usc tllc a ccJ :C

sPeaking countrics);and hnally,it is an cquivalcncc since it is the situation that has

been translatcd, rathcr than thc actual grammatical structurc,

Chapter 12

ROman JakOhs n

ON LINGuIsTIC AsPECTs
OF TRANsLATION

CCORDING To BERTRAND RussELL,

1100nC Can u11(]c1 stand

the v rd chcese unIess hc has a110nhnguistic acquaintance vith chccsc, 1I
h
vevcr,
vc f ll
v Russcll s fundan1cntal PrccePt and Place our
emPhasis uPon

tl

F:

fl1 :c11 W:f

:a r
vvords and kn0 v in
vhat contcxts cach of thcn1ma bc uscd

1959

11

l1

0N LINGUJsTlC AsPECTS OF TRANsLATION

139

any box irrespcctivc of c ntents,Finally,d cs a vv rd si1nPly name the thing in question,or d esitimPly a n1eaning such as ffering,salc,prohibition, r rnalcdicti nP
(P0nting atjtually m mCan male&ction;hs()mc culttlrcs,Particul ly in Aflica,k
is an o 1inous
F r

gesture)

us, both as hnguists and as ordinary

vord~uscrs, thc mcaning of any

hnguistic sign is its translation into son1c furthcr,altcrnativc sign,cspccially a sign

in v11ich itis rnorc fully dcvelopcd/ as Pcircc,thc deepcst inquircr into thc csscncc

of signs, insistcntly statcd.2 Thc tcrm

bachcl r may bC convertcd into a more

CxPhcit dcsignation, unlnarricd man/

vhcnc cr highcr exphcitncss is required
Wc disth)guish th1 ce
ays f intcrprcting a vcrbal sign it n ay bc translatcd int
thcr signs ofthc samc la11guage,into anothcr language,or int
anothcr,n n crbal
systcm of symbols,

11csc thrce kinds f translation arc to be diffcrcntl labclcd:

Intrahngual trans1ation or re ordiIaJ is an intcrPrctation of erbal signs by

mcans of odlcr signs of thc samc languagc,

Interhn8ual translati n or Fr

nsF rion PrtDP

r is an intcrPrctati n of

erbal signs

by111eans f somc Othcr langua:e

3

Intcrsclyniotic translati n or Fr nsr121 r

i n is an intcrPrCtation of crbal signs

by means f signs fn nvcrbal sign s stcms

The intrahngual translati n ofa v rd uses eithcr an thcr,rnore or lcss synonylllous,

v rd or resorts to a Circu111ocuti n Yct syn nymy, as a 1 ulc, is n t con

Plete

cquivalence f r cxamplc
cvery cchbatc is a bachel r, but ) t ever bachcl r is
a cehbatc, A Vord or a11idi matic P11rasC-
0rd,bricny a( de-unit of thc11ighest
lcvcl,rnay bc fully intcrPrcted only by n

eans of an cquivalent c mbinati n ofc dc~

units,ic.,a mcssagc rcfcrring to ths c dc~unit evcr bachcl r is an unmarricd

man, and c cry unmarried man is a bachclor,
or e cry cchbate is bound110tt

marry,and c cryonC :h is bound n tt marr is a cchbatc

Likc visc, on thc le el

f intcrlin8ual translati n, thcrc is rdinaril n

full

equivalence betv` een code-units,vvhilc lncssa8cs may sCrvc as adcquatc intcrPrcta-

tions of ahcn c dc~units or messagcs, Thc Enghsh

vord
chccsc Cannot bc

comPlCtCly identi cd vith its standard Russian hcteronyln

cbIp bCCause cottage
chccsc is a chccsc but n t a cbIp, Russians say p Hec cblpy TBopo y
bring
cheese and lsicl c ttage cheesc In standard Russian,thc food nadc of PrcssCd curds

is called cbIp only if fcrlucnt is uscd

lXI

tutcs11

st frcqucntly,11
/evcr, translation fr m nc language into an d1er substi~

essagcs inne languagc n t for scParate c de_units but f r entirc111cssagcs

in somc othcr languagc, such a translati n is a rcPortCd sPCCch; tlac translator

rec dcs and transn1its a mcssagc receivcd from an thcr sourcc Thus translati n
inv l cs t
o cquivalcnt111cssages in t vo diffcrcnt c dcs
Equi alencc in diEcrcnce is thc cardinal Pr blcm oF anguagc and thc l)i tal
conccrn of hnguistics.Like any rccCi Cr of erbal rncssagcs,thc linguist acts as their
interPreter p` linguistic spccilncn may bc intcrPrcted by thc scicncc of language

ithout a translation of its signs int thcr signs f thc sa nc systcn or int signs
of an ther systcm Any comparison oft
o languagcs implics an cxan1inati n oftheir
mutual translatability; vi(lcsPread practicc of intcrhn8ual c mn unication,Particularly translating activitics,rnust be kcPt undCr c nstant scrutiI1y by linguistic scicncc

140

ROMAN JAKOBsON

It is dihcult

to o ercstirnate thc urgent need f r and thc thc rctical and Practical

signi cancc of diffcrcntial bilingual(lictionarics

ith carcful comparati c dcsniti n

of all dac corrcsPonding units in thcir intcntion and cxtcnsiom L

kc visc differcn~
tial bilingual gran11nars sh uld dc nc vhat uni es and :hat differentiates he t
'

languagcs in thcir sclccti n and dclin itati n of gran matical c nccPts

n abound vith intricacics,and from

Both the Practice and the thcOry oftranslati

tilnc t

tirnc attcmPts are rnade to sever thc Gordian kn tby Pr claiIning the dogma

f untranslatability

R/lr E cryman, thc natural logician/ vividly imagincd by B

ving bit of rcasOning Facts arc

unhkc t spcakers vhosc languagc background Pr vidcs for unhkc f rmulati n()f

3 In the nrst ears of thc Russian revoluti n thcrc vvcrc fanatic

thcm,

isionar1cs

vh argucd in S
ict Pcri dicals f r a radiCal re ision of traditional languagc and

Particularly for thc vvccding ut of such n1islcading cxPrcssions as sunrisc or

L Whorf,is suPPosCd t

ha c arri cd at thc f

ll

sunsct Yct wc sull c tllis Pt ,lcm c imag y withotlt imPlying a r ecd n f

vc can casily transf rm our Customary talk ab ut the
Copernican doctrinc, and

rising and sctting sun into a Picturc of the earth

s rotation shnPly bccausc any sign

is translatable into a sign in vhich it aPPcars to us rnorc fully dcveloPcd and Precise

A faculty of spcaking a givcn languagc imPhcs a faculty f talking about this

languagc.such a rnetahnguistic oPerati n pcrn1its revision and rcdcHnition of thc

v cabulary used Thc c mplcmcnta1 lty of both lcvcls~objcct languagc and luctalanguagc
vas br ught out by Nicls B hr allvcll-de ncd cxperin1cntal cvidcncc
must bc cxPrCssCd in rdinary language, in vhich the practical usc f cvcry v rd

n
stands in complcmcntary relation to attcmPts of its strict dcHniti

All c gniti c exPCricncc and its classi cation is convcyablC in any cxisting

languagc, Whcncvcr thcrc is dcscicncy, tcrminology may bc quahscd and amPhed by loan~ v rds rl an-translati ns,ncologislns or scmantic shifts,and nnally,
by circun11 cutions Thusin thc nc vb rn litcrary languagc ofthc N rthcast Sibcrian

Chukchccs,
jron/

scrcv is rcndcrcd as rotating nail,

chalk

as

vriting

soap/

atch

as

stcel

as hard iron,

halnlncring

tin as thin

hcart E cn sccn)ingly

contradictory circu 11ocutlons, likc` clcctrical horsc~car (3JICKTpII ecKa KoHKa),

tllc Hr Russian namc oftllc h clcss btrcct c ,or ng camsllll, 0 n P rd r),
the K ryak tcrn1for thc airplanc, sin Ply dCsignate the clcctrical analoguc of1he
and the ying anal guc of thc stcamer and do not imPcdc con11nunica
tion,just as thcre is n semantic noisc and disturbancc in thc d ublc Oxymor n
~ c ld bee and-Pork h t(l g
h rsc~car

No lack f

gra 1rnatical

devicc in the languagc translatcd intO1nakcs impossiblc

n f the cntirc conccptual inf rmation contained in thc Origina1,

r
c uncd ns and,
arc now suPplCmcnted by a ncw conncCti e

a htcral translati
The traditi nal

_ and/or ~which was discusscd a fcw ycars ago in thc witty book Fcdcr

os Ho ond/ r s n F n 5Of thts r co ull c,lls,ody thc

lattcr ccurs in onc of thc sam yCd languagcs,6 Despitc thcsc (lifFcrenccs in thc
in cnt ry ofco uncti ns,all thrcc
arietics of mcssagcs observed in kderal pr sc
may bc distinctly translatcd b th into traditi nal Enghsh and int this sam ycd
languagc Federal prOsc 1)John and Pcter,2)John r Petcr,3)John and/or Pctcr
F

tl

me Tra donal Enghsh 3)John and Pctcr r one of thcm will c mc

Pctcr b th will c mc,2)J hn and/ r Pctcr,onc of thcm

vill c mc.
will c

Samoycd:John and/ r

0N LINGU ISTIC AsPECTs OF TRANsLATION

141

If somc grammatical catcgory is absent in a gi cn languagc,its rncaning may be

rms likc C)ld Russian6pa a

translatcd into this languagc by lexical mcans Dual f

arc translatcd vvith thc hclP of the numcra

vo br thcrs It is m rc dificult to

remaln thhl to dle ori nal when wc anslate hto a languagc pro dccl with a
certain grammatical category from a languagc dc oid of such a category. Whcn

translating thc Enghsh scntcncc shc has br thcrs into a lan8uage vhich discrirninatcs dual and plural, vc arc compcllcd cither to makc Our
vn choicc bet vccn t Vo

statcmcnts Shc has t vo brothcrs ~ she has morc than t

vo

to lca c thc dcci_

sion to thc listcncr and say: ShC has eithcr tvvo or lnorc than t vo brothcrs
in translatin8 fr m

Again

a languagc
vithout gra 11natical numbcr into Enghsh one is

bhgcd tO sclcct onc ofthe t

possibilitics~ brothcr r br thcrs or to confront

thc rcccivcr of this rncssagc ith a txs o-choicc situation: shc has eithcr one or more

than one br thcr

As Boas ncatly obser cd,thc gra 11natical pattcrn f a languagc(as pPoSCd to
its lcxical st ck)dctcr 1illcs th

in thc gi en languagc:

sc asPccts of Cach cxpcriencc that rnust bc cxPrcssCd

We ha e

t ch
se betveen

these asPCcts,and onc Or thc

othcr lnust bc chosen /In order to translate accurately thc Enghsh scntcncc I hircd
vorkcr/ a Russian nccds suPPlcmentary information, vvhcthcr this acti n
a

vas

complctcd or n t and vhethcr the v rker vas a rylan or a voman,becausc hc lllust

n1akc his choicc bet /een a
HaH IMa and bctveen

erb

ofC mPlcti Cr noncompletive asPect

a rnascuhne and fen1ininc noun

pa6oTH lKa

HaH

JI Or

or pa6oTH y

IfI ask t11c uttcrcr fthe Enghsh scntcncc vhcthcr thc vorkcr vas rnalc or fcmale,

my qucstion ltlay bC judged rclc ant r indiscrect,whereas in thc Russian er on

f this scntcncc an ans vcr to this question is obhgatory, (Dn thc Othcr hand, vhatcvcr thc choicc of Russian gra 11natical f rms t translatc thc quotcd Enghsh

Cr to thc qucstion fvhcther I hired r

mcssagc,thc translation vill gi e n ans

havc hircd thc rkcr, or vvhether hc/shc vas an indc nite r dc nitc v rker

a
r thc ), BCcausc thc inf rmation rcquircd by thc Enghsh and Russian gramC
matical Pattcrn is unhkc,
ve face quitc diffcrent sets of t v ~ch0iCC situati ns;
thcref rc a chain f translati ns of onc and thc same isolatcd scntcncc

om English

into Russian and icc vcrsa could cntircly dcPrive such a mcssagc of its initial
contcnt The Gencva linguist S Karccvsk uscd t c mParC such a gradual loss vith
a circular serics of unfa rablc currcncy transactions But cvidcntly the richer the
context of a mcssage,the smaller the loss f inf rmation
Languages differ csscntially in -hat thcy musr con cy and notin vhat thcy nlcl
con
n

cy Each vcrb

quCSti ns, as f

f a gi en

languagc imPcrati Cly raiscs a sct of speci c ycs-or~

r instancc: is the narratcd cvcnt conccivcd

vith or /ithout

refcrencc to its completionP Is the narratcd c ent PreSented as Pri rt thc sPcech
c cnt

or notP Naturally the attention of nati c sPeakers and hstencrs

Vill bc
de

Constantly focuscd n such itcms as arc compulsory in thCir vcrbal c

In its cogniti c function,languagc is rninin a y

pattcrn because thc dc

niti n

dcPcmdcnt n thc gran matical

of our exPeriCnce stands in c mPlcmCntary rclation

to mctahn uistic oPcrations~thc c gnitive lcvel of languagc n t only adn its but
dircctly rcquires rec ding interPretation, ie, translati n Any assumPti n f in~
c iblc Or untranslatablc cogniti c data v uld bc a contradiction in tcrn s, But in
jest,in drcams,in magic,bricHy,in what onc wotlld call c
cryday vcrbal mythology

and in poetry abo c all,thc gra 11uatical catc8oricS carry a high scmantic imPort

142

ROMAN JAKOBSON

In thcse conditions,thc qucstion of translation bcc mes lnuCb n1 rc cntangled and

controvcrsia1,

Evcn such a catcgory as grammatical gcnder,often citcd as n1crely f rmal,Plays

a great r le in thc myth logical attitudes f a sPccch c 1111unity, In Russian the
Rmlllll c camot dt

signatc a m cl,e on,nclr the m

Cuhc sPe0 aRm

waF

f PCrs m ng r mc taPh 0cally interPleting inanimatc nouns aK PromPtCd by

thcir gender, A tcst in thc ~1osc Psychol gical Institutc (1915) sho
cd that

Russians,Pr nc to Pels the wcCkdays,consistently rePrCsentcd Monday,

I ucsday, and Thursday as malcs and
cdncsday, Friday, and saturday as fcmalcs,

ith ut rcahzin that this dist1 ibution vas duC to thc mascuhnc:cndCr of thc irst

thrce namcs( oHeIle bH ,TopH

thcrs(cpc

,L1cTBCp )as against thc fen1ininc8ender

f thc
a, tH a,cy66o a),ThC hct that thc w rd%r FI idav is masculine in

lk traditi ns f

vhich differ in thcir Friday ritual The 9idcsPrCad

Russian suPCrstitlo1 that a fallen kni%Presages a male gucst and a%llcn f`)rk a

male onc is dctc1 n1i11ed b tllc masculi11c gcn(lcr of HOx knifc and thc kminine

hel^c day is l11ascuh11e

of B
Ka fork"in Russian Im slavic and thcr languagcs

and night fen i11ine,day is rcPrcsCnted by Pocts as thC l ver f night The Russian
'as bafHcd as to vhy si11had becn dcpicted as a =oman by Gcrman
Painter Rcpin

somc slavic lan:uagcs and fcmininc in others is rcHcctcd in thc f

the c rrcsPonding PeoPles,

sin is mininc in Gcrman(dic sJndc),but mascu

hnc in Russian(p Cx) Likewisc a Russian child,while reading a translation of

artists:hc d not rcalize that

b usly a w man(RuSsian

Gcrman tdcs, as astoun(lcd to nnd that Death,

cMcpTb, m,),was Picttl d all old mm(German dcr%d,masc)

9ssFcr

lft,,

thc titlc of a bo k ofP clns by Boris Pasternak,is quitC natural in Russian, vhcrc

ct J sCf
life is mi11inc M3Hb,but Was cno11gh to rc(lucc to dcspair thc Czcch P

Hora in his atten1Pt to translatc thcse PoCms,since in Czcch this n un is rnasculinc

ivor

hat`Vas thc initial qucsti n vhich ar sc in slavic litcraturc at its

cry bcgin~

ningP Curi usly()nough, thc translator s(hmculty in prcscrving thc symbohsrn of

gcndcrs,and thc cogniti c irrelcvancc fd1is difsculty,appcars to l)c the rnain topic
f thc earhcst sla ic riginal vvork, d1c Preface to thc rst translation of thc

dnJ ri1 , 111adc in thc carly860 sl)yt1 e foundcr of slavic lcttcrs and liturgy,
adlant S
Constantinc thc )h sophcr,and rcccntly restorcd and intcrPrCtCd by A.

(]rcck, vhcn translated into anothcr languagc,cann t alvays bc rePr ducCd idcn~

jc

tically,and that haPPens to CaCh languagc being translated,

Mascuhnc nouns as @tart river

thc Slaic aPoStlC statcs

in G ck,arc kmhllle in
another languagc as pbKa and3Bb3 a in sla ic According to Vanlant s conuncntary, d is divergence effaces the symbohc idcnti cati n f thc ri ers vith dem ns
and f thc stars
vit11 angels in thc slavic translation of t
of Matthc v s VCrsCs
(7:25and2 9) But t this Poctic obstacle,saint Constantine rcsolutcly
sCs thc
m d

o t

Star

PP

PrCcCPt f Dionysius thc Arcopagitc,xs`h0Called f r chief attenti n to the cognitive

valt cs(c JIb pca lyMy)and n tt tllc orcls thcmsekes,

ln Petry,
crbal equations bcc mc a constructivc PrinciPle f thc text
syntactic and m rphological catcgories, roots, and afHxcs, Ph nCmcs and their

comP ncnts(disti11ctivc fcaturcs) in

sh rt,any constituents of thc

crbal codc~

arc confrontcd,juxtaPoSCd,brou8ht into c ntiguous relati n acc rding to thc Prin~

vn autonon ous signi cation
ciPlC f Sinlilarity and coptrast and carry thcir

oN LINGU IsTIC AsPECTS OF TRANSLATION

Phoncn1ic si1u

arit

143

is scnscd as semantic1 clationshiP Thc Pun, r to usc a morc

cruclitc,and PcrhaPs rnore PrCcisc tcrm_ paronomasia,rcigns o er Poetic art,and

vhcthcr its rulc is absolute r lirnitcd,Poetry by dchniti n is untranslatal)lc Only

on10nc poctic
crcati e transPositi n is PoSSiblc:cithcr intrahmgual transPoSition
shaPe int another,or intcrhngual transPositi n- lu onc languagc into anothcr,
r6na y interscn1iotic transPosition~ frolm nc systcn1 f signs into an thcr,c,g,

iom verbal art into music,dancc,0ncma,or p

If veverc

nting

to translate int Enghsh thc traditional f rmula rrdtlurrorc,

r dir r

vc V0ukl dcprivc the Itahan rhy

ing ePigram of
all its Paron mastic :aluc Hencc a cognitivc attitudcvould c mPel us t changc
as thc translat r is a bctraycr,

this aPh risn into a n orc cXPhcit Statcmcnt and to ans vcr thc qucstions translat r
of vhat n cssagcsP bctraycr f vhat valucs/

Notes
1

Bcrtrand Russcll,

L gical Positivislll,

RC u

dr1ondFc de P 1FosoPhic, Iv

rn crn

(1950),18;cf,p.3
2

Cf John Dcwcy, Pel1 cc s Thcory of Lin8uistic Signs,Th ught,and RIeaning,

Bcnjamin Lcc XVh

J,o n F fPlai
soP,xLIII(1946),91

rf, nJudJe, TJ 1 r, dnd Re

1956),P235

(Cambridgc, Mass,

Nicls Bohr, 0n thc Notions f Causahty and ComPlcn enta0ty, DidFecrjcd,I

JamCs R N astcrsOn and Vendcll Brooks PhilhPs,ft

(1948), 317f
d rd`Pros

(Chal)el Hill,

NC,1948),P40f
6

Cf Knut Bcr land, Flll ugosk og almcn k tt,n aP,

r sPr dcnsk P,xv(1949),374f

Franz Boas, Languagc/

Andr Vaillant, Lc Pr facc

s rcs,XXIV(1948),5f

Gncr

Fo y(B St

dc`H,,rJlr
r angChaire

N k J sskr

n, 1938),Pp 132f

vieux-slavc/ R
rlId s
`ue dcs

s0 61-s0961

:| l

::T :

j
i

Ji

Ie%I ls

1 ::jr f;

cating the foreign text by estab"shing a re|ationship of ident|ty or ana|ogy x/Vith it,

uniVersa|s of
In 1963 Georges N ounin argues that equiva|ence is based on
|anguage and cu|ture` questioning the notions of re|ativity that in preVious decades

made trans ation seem impossib e.At the same time`the|iterature on equiva|ence
is fundamentaHy normative` ainning to proVide not on|y ana|ytica|too|s to describe
trans|ations` but a|so standards to eva|uate them, The universa| is then shaped to
a |ocal situation.
Theorists tend to assume that the foreign teXt is a fair y stab e object`possessing

invariants` capab|e of reduction to precise|y denned units` |eve|s/ and categories of

|anguage and textua"ty Equiva|ence is subnnitted to|exica|/grammatiCa1and sty
istiC ana|ysis

it is estab"shed on the basis of text type and sOcia| function. By the

end of the1970s`sO many typo|ogies of equiva|ence have been dev sed that erner

l<o"er can offer a nuanced summary of the Ossib"ities EquiVa|ence` he xAlrites`

may be

\cOnnotative`
denOtat ve` depending on an \ invariance of cOntent

depending on simi|arities of register` dia|ect` and sty|e

\\text-normative` based on

pragmatic` ensuring colmprehensiusage norms for particu|ar teXt types and

b"ity in the receiving cu ture(KOHer1979 186-91 KOHer1989 99 104),
\

The mOst fanni"ar theoretica| lmove in this period is to dra / an o position

betlveen trans|ating that cu|t|vates pra9rnatic equiVa|ence` draXA/ing on terms that
are immediate|y inteHigib|e to the receptor` and trans|ating that is formaHy equi a|ent/designed to approx rnate the|inguistiC and cu|tura|features of the foreign teXt

ted1964book(eXcerpted be|o /)`Eugene Nida distinguishes bet

/een

dynannic and
fornna Varieties of \\correspondence` |ater rep|acing the ter|
In h s lt/ide|yc

148

196os-1970s

dynan

(Nida and Taber1969)

/ith functiona|
The year1977sees the nrst
appearance of sirn"ar oppositions from Peter Ne/mark ( \communicat ve and

\se anantic
)and Ju"ane H Ouse(\\covert and\\overt ), HOuse s distinction contains
ic

the added re nement of cOnsidering hokNl nnuCh the foreign teXt depends on its
o /n

cu|ture for inteHigib"ity If the signincance

f a foreign teXt is pecu"ar|y
indigenous` it requires a trans|ation that is overt or noticeab|e through its re"ance

on supp|ennentary information`

/hether in the form of eXpansions` insertions Or

annotations,
These Varying sets of terms derive frolln traditiona|dichotomies bet

/een\

sense-

for-sense and
/ord trans|ating
/hich date back to ant quity`to C cero
^/ord-for

and HOrace` Jerome and Augustine

But nokA/they are informed by the ascendancy

and sheer pro"feration of "nguistiCs-oriented ap

roaches in trans|ation research,

The b|nary oppositions are basicaHy synonymous` despite the Variations among the
terms They are not quite ident ca|` ho /ever` since each air emphasizes d fferent

trans|ation a"ms and effects, Pragmatic equiva|ence cOmmunicates the foreign teXt
according to va|ues so fami|iar in the receiving

angua9e and cu|ture as to conCea|

the very faGt of trans|ation, FOrma| eq uiva|ence` in cOntrast` adheres so c|ose|y to

the "nguist c and cu tu ra| va|ues of the foreign text as to revea| the trans|ation to

be a trans|atiOn,

Trans|ation theories that priv"ege equiva|ence must inevitab|y come to terms

/ith the existence of

\shifts

betxAleen the foreign and trans|ated texts` deViations

that can occur at such "nguistic |eVe|s as grapho|ogy` phono|ogy` 9rammar` and
|exis

J,C Catford s deta"ed account must\\assume some degree of forma|corres-

pondence sO that shifts can be detected as \departures (Catford 1965 73` 76),
Yet he nnaHy quest ons this assumption by conc|uding that\\trans|ation equ va|ence
does not entire|y matCh forma| corres

ondence

(ibid

82),

Instead of raising fundamenta|doubts about the pOssib"ity of equiva|ence`shifts

are used to recommend trans|ating that is pragrnatic` funGtiona|` comnnunicatiVe

hen Anton Po ovic asserts that\ shifts do not occur because the trans|ator xArishes
to\change a wOrk` but because he striVes to reproduce it as faithfu"y as possib|e`
he hasin mind is \functiona` lAlith the trans|ator|ocating
\\suitab|e equiva|ents in the m"ieu Of his time and society
(POpOvic197o

the kind of\ faithfu|ness

80`82)

Jirf Levy carries out eXperiments shoWing that pragmatic trans ation inVo
Ves

gradua|semantic
shifting
a
as trans|ators choose from a number of pOss b|e so|u-

tions (LeVy 1967 1176) Nnodern trans|ators` he asserts` intuitive|y app|y the
minimaX strategy` ch00sing the so|ution
Which promises a maximum of effect
\

/ith a nninimum of effort -short of vio|ating the

"nguistic
standl179-80), E|sewhere
LevyOrisaesthetiG
critica|of
the

resu|ts in an experiment designed tO study the |anguage of

average and
bad
\changing
trans|atiOns` he nds that shifts NA/ork to genera"ze and c|arify mean
ng`
ards of a particu|ar readership(ibid

the sty|e Of a "terary

act

/ork into a dry and uninspiring description of things and

(LeVy1965 78-80).
atharina Reiss (1971) resents a sOphisticated typo|ogy that disp|ays the

Ons
I

|ogica| tensions among the reigning cOncepts in the "terature. As she argues in the
essay reprinted here`the
functiona"y equiva|ent trans|ation needs to be based on

1960s-1970s

deta"ed senaantic` syntactic` and pragmatic ana|ysis

a

149

of the fOreign teXt, But

the pragrnatic ana|ysis a|\^/ays risks reVising any preVious account of meaning
because it redennes the object of ana ysis,The pragmatic trans|ator doesn/t simp|y
ana|yze the|inguistic and cu|tura|features of the foreign text`but reverba"zes thenn

according to the Va|ues Of a different |anguage and cu|ture` often app|ying /hat

HOuse caHs a
n|ter to aid the receptor s comprehensiOn of the differences.

The functiona"sm in so many trans|ation theories at this time casts doubt

on e|aborate typo|o9ies of equiva|ence by suggesting that they are mere|y cOnstructions` idea| schemes not rea"zed in actua|trans|ations Or` more precise|y`the idea|

becomes ossib|e on|y wt/ithin a narro / range of texts in speCi c institutiona|

situations` inc|uding trans|ator training programs Reiss` |i|(e sO many of her Con

informative texts

tennporaries` deve|Ops her theory xklhi|e training trans|ators of

VVith of6cia|documents` scho|ar|y artic|es`operation manua|s`and nevt/s reports` it

is assumed` the trans ator can choose "nguistic forllns that correspond direct|y to

communicative functions` securing equiva|ence on the basis of reference to rea|

objects/persons`and events,Trans|ator training`moreover`creates a demand for

ana|ytica| too|s that can be used to generate trans|ation strategies and so|ut

ons

in the c assroom,
In the case of|iterary texts`the functiona"st trend u|tir

ate|y disp|aces equiva-

|ence as a centra| cOncept in trans|ation research by directing attention to the

receptOr. During the 1970s` Itamar Even-Zohar and GideOn Toury set out from
the assumption that "terary trans

ations are facts of the target system In often

/ in |ater rev sed versions` they theorize "tera

po|ysystelm of interre|ated forms and canons that constitute \\nornas

cited essays that are reprinted be|o

ture as a

cOnstraining the trans|ator s choiGes and strategies,

Even-ZOhar imagines the body of trans|ated "terature as a systen in its OXVn

right` eX

sting
n varying re|ationships /ith ori9ina| compositions, Both Occupy

periphera|` and both perin "terary systelnns` \^/hether

or

\\positions

centra

fornn "terary \ functions`

llt/hether

\innovative

or
conserVatory/

A nainor

"terature_
in re|ation
to 1onger
rich|y
deVe|oped |iterary
traditiOns
-may
assignlninor
trans|ation
a centra|
ro|eand
in more
spurrin9
innovation,
In a major
|iterature`trans|ation may be ass

gned a peri hera|ro|e`conservative y adhering to norms

rejected by origina Writing

Toury sho /s hollv the target orientation transforms the concept of equiva|ence.
The \

adequacy of a trans|ation to the source text becomes an unprOductive "ne

of enquiry` not on|y beCause shifts ah^/ays Occur` but because any determinatiOn Of
adequacy` even the identincati n f a source text and a trans|ation` invo|ves the
a

p"cation of a target norm. HenCe` TOury seeks to describe and exp|ain the

\\acceptab"ity

of the trans|at|on in the rcceiving cu|ture`the

shifts const tute a type of equiva

^/ays in\^/hich various

ence that renects target norms at a Certain

historica moment
Po|ysysten theory proves to be a decisive adVance in trans|ation research,The

iterature on equiva|ence formu|ates "nguistic and textua| |

prescribes a specinC trans|at

ode|s and often

on praCtiCe (pragrnatic` functiona` communicative).

The target orientation` in contrast`focuses On actua|trans|ations and subn

its the|

150

196os-1970s

to deta"ed description and eXp|anation. It insp

res research projects that invo|Ve

A pioneering study of nineteenth-century

French trans|ations is cOnducted by Lieven D hu|st` JOso Lambert` and |<atrin

substantia| cOrpora of trans|ated teXts

Van Bragt

The eXpansion Of trans|ation research in the 1960s and 197os coincides w th

an increased a /areness that it represents an emerging acadennic discip"ne. Ear|y
theorists "ke Catford fee| that trans|ation studies do not deserve the institutiona|
autonomy of |inguistics beCause they are a site` not of theorizing abOut |an9uage`
but of app|ying inguistic theories.
Vhen Nida and |ater Wo|fran W i|ss ca" their

theoretica| \^/orks a
science of trans|at on` they are giving the topic a schO|ar{y
coherence and |egitimacy that it has so far |acked (lA/Hss 1977/ 1982),
In the |n

uentia|paper inc|uded here(1972)`James Ho|mes drav s up a disci-

p"nary map for trans|ation studies` dist nguishing

pure research-oriented areas
of theory and description frolm \ app"ed areas "ke training and criticism, The
\app"ed
and

\pure
distinction bet /een

mode

points to his adoption of a scientinc

` not so muCh from "nguistics as frolm the physica| sciences. FOr HOlmes`

theoretica| conce ts deriVed from empirica| description` much "ke scienti

shou|d a"m

to exp|ain and predict

c |a /s`

/hat trans|ating and trans|ations are and

/iH be. The drive to estab"sh a distinct disCip"ne |eaVes unans/ered the ques
/hether the trans|ation scho|ar /i|| need to re|y on other cOnceptua|
tions of

materia s`what they might be`and what discip"nes might furnish them.The new
discip"nar ty a|so creates an epistemo|o9ica} hierarchy

the kno /edge assigned

the greatest Va|ue is produced by theoretica| and descriptiVe studies of trans|ation

products` functions` and prOcesses`

/hereas app ied studies are seen as yie|d n9

data for the theorist

Ho|mes s vision is shared by target-oriented theorists "ke Even-ZOhar and

TOury`for /hom Russian FOrma"sm is| ore usefu|than functiona|"nguistics.Their

/Ork responds to his ca" for empirica| data and the search for probab"istic |a
of trans ation

/s

N Onethe|ess` trans|ation theory re mains a heterogeneous ne|d

throughout this period. It encOmpasses both "nguists "ke Catford` xA/hose study is

underwritten by Ha|idayan ana|ytica|concepts`and the ec ectic Levy`wh

synthe~

sizes psycho"nguistics` semantics` structura anthropo|ogy` "terary critiCislm` and

game theory
George steiner s ma9isteria|1975study

fFe

Babe COntinuous y in pr nt for

more than txA/o decades` is undoubted|y the most Wide|y knOwn /ork in trans|ation
theory since the Second WOr|d
Var It opposes modern "nguistics /ith a "terary
and ph"osOphica| approach
hereas "nguistiCs-oriented theorists de ne trans|a-

tion as functiona{cOmmunication`Steiner returns tO German ROmanticism and the

hermeneutic tradition tO vie /trans|ating as an interpretation of the foreign text
that is at once profound|y sympathetic and vio|ent`exp|oitiVe and ethica"y restorative

For ste ner` |anguage is not instrulmenta| in comnnunicating meaning` but

COnstitutive in recOnstructing it And it is the individua"stic as ects of |anguage`

\

the rivacies of indiv dua| usage` that resist interpretation and escape the uniVer-

sa"zing cOncepts of "nguistics (steiner 1975 205) Deepen ng sch|eiermacher/s

recOmmendation that German trans|ators signa|the foreignness of the foreign text`

1960s-1970s

151

great trans|ation | ust Carry /ith it the most preCise sense

Steiner argues that
0ssib e of the resistant`of the barriers intact at the heart of understanding

(ibid.

378)
Linguists |ike Rllounin and Catford assume that universa|s bridge }inguistiG and
cu|tura|differences.
Trans|ation equiva|ence` Catford asserts` \ocGurS
/hen a SL
Esource- anguage]and a TL Etarget-|anguage]text or itella are re

atab|e to(at|east

\substance
some of) the same features of substance`

/here
can signify a re|atiVe|y nxed range of|inguistic features/|eVe|s and Gategor
innn

te series of cu tura|situations(Catford1965

be|o/

es`as

^/eH as a potentiaHy

50).Yet Ste" er`as the excerpt

makes c|ear` is a|so prone to universa"zing |nsofar as his theory of the

\\hermeneutic motion

threatens to transcend the specinc hlst r|ca| moments that

innect every trans|ation, Steiner s discussions of trans|ated texts either fOcus on the

theoretica| cOncept he v,/ants tO H|ustrate or ana|yze and eva|uate a trans|ator

hand"ng of sty istic features, H is forte is "terary criticism as the appreciation of

persona| sty|e/
/hich resu|ts in suggestive readings of noted trans|ations` es

eciaHy

by poets and ph"osophers. H istorica| situations` hohAyever` recede behind the innOVative performances that occur in them
For Henri n/leschonnic` the Ger| an traditiOn |eads in a different direction

he

mounts a critique of natura"zing trans|ation for mystifying its appropriation of the

The Current proposition` he /rites` \ accOrding to

foreign teXt,
/hich a trans|ation shou|d not give the innpression of being trans|ated`
naasks a process of

annexation ere" the trans|ated text

transposes the so-ca"ed do lninant
/|

(N esChonnic 1973 308` my trans"|usion

of
transparency
L"<e Nietzsche and oss|er before hin
/are of the
` N1eschonnic |s acute|y a

310).

ideo1ogy under the \

|ation)
\

irnperia"sm

of any trans|ating that

tends to forget its history

(ibid.

He argues for a more theoreticaHy sophisticated trans|ation practice that questions

the nnain tendency in this periOd toxtlards the pragrnatic` the functiona|` the cOmmun|catiVe.

Further reading
Fa/cett1997`Gentz|er1993`

Hatim1998` Hermans1995and1999` KeHy1979`

Ladmira| 1986` Lambert1995` Larose1989` NOrd 1997` Pym 1995and 1997a`
SneH-H Ornby1988and 1990

Chapter 13

Eugene Nida

PRINCIPLES OF
CORRESPONDENCE

sF

:r

ii1'

;F&T

:f;;riFc

arrangcd in phrascs and scntcnces,it stands to rcas n that there can bc n

abs lutc

corrcsPondCncc betxx=ccn languagcs,Hcncc thcrc can bc no fully cxact translations

Thc total impact of a translati n may bc rcas nably cl sc to thc original, l)ut thcrc

can bc no idcntity in detail C nstance B VVcst (1932

problcm

VVhocvcr takcs uPon hirnsclf t

it,hc n1ust Pay not

344) clcarly statcs thc

translatc c ntraCts a dcbt; t dischargc

ith thc san1c moncy,but thc san1c sum

C)nc must n t imtl~ginc

that the l,r cCSS0f translation can avoid a certah1(lcgrcc of intcrPretation l)y thc

translator,In hct,as D G Rossctti stated in1874(Fang1953), A translation

rcmains I crhaPs thc m st dircct f

rm ofc mmcntary

Different tyPes of translations

No statcmcnt of thc PrinciPlcs f corrcsP ndcncc in translating can bc c n Pletc

ith ut rccognizing thc many diffcrcnt tyPcs of translati ns (HCrbcrt p. PhilhPs

1959) Traditionally,we ha c tcndcd t d1ink in terms of cc Or ParaPhraStic trans
lati ns as contI astcd vith cl sc r litcral

ncs Actually,thcrc are n any n1orc g1 adcs

f translating than thcsc cxtrcmes imply, Thcrc a1 c, for cxan PlC,Such ultrahtcral
translations as interhncars;
h c thers in olvc highly concordant relati nshiPs,e g
the same s urcc languagc
vord is al vays translatcd by
nc ~ and nly nc ~
rCcePt r^languagc xx ord Still thcrs111ay bc quitc(lc oid f artiscial rcstrictions in

1964

154
f

EuGENE NIDA

rm, but ne crthclcss may bc ovcrtraditional and e cn archaizing, some translans ai1n at cry cl sC f rmal and scmantic corrcspondcnce, but are gcncr usly

ti

suPPhCdvith
inf rn1ati n

n tcs and c

mmentary Many arC not so rnuch conccrncd vith giving

as vvith crcating in thc rcadcr somcthing of thc san

vas
c m d as

con cyed by thc original

Diffcrcnces in translati ns can gcncrally be accountcd for by three basic factors

(1)thC naturc of thc mcssagc, (2)thc purp sc or purPoses of thc

xy,of thc tl anslator,alad(3)the type f atKhcn
~ cssagcs di cr Prilnardy in thc dcgrcc to vhich content r form is the don1i~
nant considcration, Ofc urse, the c ntcnt of a mcssagc can nc cr bc comPlctcly
in translating

author and,by P

al)s tt dom the rm,and form is nothng aPdt fl mc ntcnt;but in s me

mcssages the contcnt is of prilnary considcration, and in othcrs the f rnl must be

a highcr Pri rity For cxamPlc,in the scrm n n thc Mount,dcsPitc ccrtain
i1nPortant styhstic quahtics,the imPortance of the message far cxcccds C0nsidera~

gi cn

tlons of form.0n thc other hand,s mc ofthe acr stic PoCms fthc Old Tcstamcnt
are obviously dcsigned to t a vcry strict formal strait jacket But cvcn thc contents

f a mcssagc may di er videly in aPPhcability to the rcccPtor~languagc audicncc

For examPle,the f lk talc ofthc Baur Indians of Boh ia,ab ut a giant vvho lcd thc
anilllals in a symbohc dancc,is intcrcsting to an Enghsh-sPcaking audicncc,but to
thcn) it has n t thc same rcle ancc as thc scrm n on thc Mount, And c en the
Baur Indians thcmscl cs rccognizc thc Scrmon on thc N1ount as morc signi cant

than their hvoritc ho it-haPPcncd St ry, At thC samc timc, of c urse, the

Sermon m

thc D ount has grcatcr rclc

ancc to thcsc Indians than have some Passa8cs

in Lc iticus,
In P Ctry thCrc is ob iously a grcatcr f cus of attcntion uP nf rmal clcn1cnts

than nc n rmally Hnds in PrOsC

N t that contcnt is ncccssarily sacri6ccd in trans~

lation ofa pocn1,butthe c ntcnt is ncccssarily c

Only rarcly can ne rePrducc b th

nst1 ictcd

int ccrtain f rn1al rnolds

c ntcnt and forl l in a translati

in gcncral thc f rm is usually sacriHccd f r the sakc

n, and hcncc

fthc contcnt On thc Othcr

hand,a lyric poerll translatcd as prose is not an adcquatc cqui alcnt f the original

Though it may rcProducc thc c nceptual c ntent, it falls far sh rt f rePr ducing
thc cn10ti nal intcnsity and a r H
vever,the translating ofsomc tyPcs of Poctry

by Prosc may bc dictatcd by hnportant cultural considerations, For cxa1nPlc,

Homcr s cPic P Ctry rcProduccd in Enghsh Poctic f

and quccr~ vith

r1usually

sccms t us antiquc

thing fthc livchncss and sp ntancity charactcristic of H

m cr s

stylc Onc rcason is that vc arc not accustomcd to ha ing storics told to usin P Ctic

rm In our Wcstern EuroPcan tradition such cpics are relatcd in Pr SC F r d s

reason E V F icu ch sc Pr sC rathcr than Poctry as the1n rc aPProPriatc lucdium
by vvhich to rcndcr Thc Ihad and The Odysscy
f

The Particular PurPoseS f thc translator arc also imp rtant fact rs in(lictating
rl as PurPoSes

thC tyPc of translati n (Df coursc, it is assumcd that thc translat

gcncrally sirnilar to, or at lcast comPatiblC

vith, th sc of thc riginal auth

this is not ncccssarily so For cxamplc,a san Blas st

amusing his audience,but an cthnographcr

ry

r,but

tellcr is intcrcsted only in

vho scts about translating such storics

may bC rnuch lnorc conccrncd in gi ing his audicncc an insightint

san Blas PcrSOn~

ahty structure since,h

vcvCr,thc purPoscs of thC translat r arc thc prhnary ones

PRINCIPLEs OF CORREsPONDENCE
t

bc considcrcd in studying thc tyPcs of translati

155

n
vhich result, thc princiPal

PurPosCS that undcrhc the ch icc f onc r anothcr vay to rcndCr a particular

mcssagc arc imPortant

ThC Pri1nary PurPose f thc translat r1nay bc informad n as to both c ntcnt
and form Onc intcndcd typc ofrcsPonSC t
suCh an inf rmati e tyPe of translation
is largcly cognitivc,cg, an cthn graphcr s translation of tcxts frorll informants,or

a philosoPhCr s translati n of Heideggcr A largcly informati e translation may,

the othcr hand, be designed t chcit an emotional rcsponse of Pleasurc fron1thc

rcadcr r listcner
A translator s Purposcs 1ay invol c much morc an in rmation Hc may, r
CxamPle, vant t suggest a Particular tyPc of beha iour by lneans of a translati n,

Undcr such circumstanccs hc is hkcly to ai1n at full intclligibility,and to rnakc ccrtain

mhora ustmCl tS

h dcta

tllat tl

ader may un(lCrqtand tllc hll iml

licad

ns

of the n essagc f r his ovn circumstanccs. In such a situation a translator is not

contcnt to havc rcccPtorS say, This is intclligiblc to us Rathcr,he is lookng for

some such resPonse t s, This is meaningftll for us In tcrms of B lc translating,
the Pe Ple n1ight undcrstand a Phrase such as t changc Omc s llaind ab ut sin as
mcaning rcPcntancC But if thc indi8cnous vay oftalking about rcPcntancc is spit
on thc gr und in fr nt fr as in shilluk,1 sP kcn in thc sudan,thc translator vill
ob iously m at thc morc mcaninghl idlom.On a simi1ar basis, whitc as snow
may bc rcndcred as
vhitc as cgrct fcathcrs/ ifthC Pc Ple of thC reccPt r languagc
ith sn
v but sPcak f anything cry hitC by this Phrasc
arc not acquaintcd

A still greatcr degree of adaptati n is likely to occur in a translati

n vhich has

an imPcrativc PurPosC Here thc translator feels constraincd not rnerely to suggcst
aP sSiblc linc f bcha ior,but to makc such an action cxPhcit and c

mPclling.Hc

is not contcnt to translatc in such a vay that thc pcoplc arc likely to undcrstand;
rathcr,hc insists that the translati n1nust bc so clear that no nc can Possibly rnis-

understand
In addition to the diffcrcnt tyPcs of n1cssagcs and thc divcrsc PurP
lat rs, nc

sCs of trans~

luust also C nsidcr thc extent to vhiCh ProsPccti C audiences differ both

in dccoding ability and in PotCntial intcrcst,

Dccoding ability in any language in

ol cs at lcast f

ur Principal lc cls

(1)thC

caPacity f childrcn,
hosc cabulary and cultural cxpcriencc are lilnited;(2)the

capacity of nc = litcratcs, v ho Can dccodc oral mcssagcs

vith
hcili but wh sC ability t dccodc writtcn mcssagcs is hmited;(3)tl e capa 0of
d ublc~standard

thc a cragc litcrate adult, vh can handlc b th oral and vrittcn1 cssages vith rela-

tivc casc; and (4) the unusually high capacity of spcciahsts (d

ct rs, thcol

gians,

vhcn thcy arc dcc ding mcssagcs vithin thcir

vn
PhilosoPherS, scientists, etc),
arca of spcciahzation (Db iously a translation dcsigncd for childrcn cann t bc thc
samc as onc prcParCd f r sPcciahstS,nor can a transladon f r ch drcn bc thc samc
as Onc for a nc

litcrate adult
`l

PrOSPCctivc audicnccs di r not only in dccoding ability,but pcrhaps cvcn l

orc

in thcir intcrcsts,For cxamPle,a translation dcsigncd to sth ulatc rcading for plca~
v
surcV l l,c quitc diffcrcnt from one intcndcd f r a pcrs n anxious t lcarn h

to asselllblc a colllPhcated machinc, RJIorco cr, a translator f African myths for

p sons wk) mlDly wal t tc,satis

tl

r cu sity

al) ut

stlangc PcolDlCs and PlacCs

156

EuGENE NIDA

will Producc a difkrent piece of work om onc wh rendcrs thcsc same myths in
ho arc1u rc intcrestcd in thc linguistic structurc
af rl11acccPtable to li11guists,
undcrlying thc translation than in cultural n vclty

Two basic Orientations in translating

sincc thcre arc,ProPcI

ly spcakng,n such things as idcntical cquivalents

(BCll c

1931and1931a 37),Onc Inust in translating scck to nd the closcst P ssiblC cquivalcnt H

vcvCr, thcrc arc fundamentally t vo diffcrent tyPcs of cquivalcncc nc

vhich may bc ca1lcd formal and an thcr vhich is l)ri1nar y dynan1ic,

F rmal

cquivalcnce focuses attcntion on thc mcssage itsclf, in b

th f rln

and

Contcnt In such a translation one is conccrned vith such corresPondcnccs as PoCtry

to P ctry,scntcncc

to sCntcncc,and conCcPt to concePt Vic

vCd frolll this f rn al

orientation,onc is concerncd that thc1)1cssage in thc reccPtor language should rnatch

as closcly as PossiblC thc diffcrcnt clemcnts in thc sourcc lan8uage This rncans,f r
r culture is c nstantly c nlPared
ith tl c
exan1Plc,that thc l11essagc in thc rcccPt
n

cssagc in thc sourcc culturc t

The tyPc of translati n

lcncc might bc ca cd a

dctcrn1inc standards f accuracy and correctncss

vhich m st completely tyPincs this structural equi a-

gloss translation/ in

hich

thc translator atteml)tS t

ft11c ri

reProducc as litcrally and mcanh1gfully as PosSiblc thc forn1and contcnt

ginal Such a translation 1ight bc a rendering of somc N1cdicval Frcnch text into
Enghsh, intcndcd for students f certain asPccts of early Frcnch htcraturc not
)ra
requiling a k11o vlcdge of thc original language of thc tcxt Tl cir nccds call
rclati
f

cly close aPProxiluation to the structurc of thc carly Frcnch tcxt,b

th as t

rm(c,g,syntax and idioms)and c ntcnt(c.g,themcs and conccpts) such a trans_

lati n

dlly

`v uld rcquirc numerous footnotcs in ordcr to n1ake t11c text

C0111PrChCnsiblC
A gloss transladon of this tyPC is des

ncd to PCrmit thc rcaclcr to i(lcnti

hirusclf as R111y as P ssil)lc

vith a PcrS n in the sourcc~languagc co11tcxt, and t

undcrstand as much as he can of thc cust ms, 111anner of thought, and n eans f

CxPrCSSion For cxamPlc,a phrasc such as

holy klss

(Romans16 6)ll

a gl SS

translation vould bc rcndcrcd litc1 ally,and ' ukl Pr bably l)c suPPlcluentcd ith

a botnote cxPl ning that thiS was a customar) mcthod f grecting in Ncw
Testamcnt tlmcs
It1 c ntrast, a translati

n
vhich attcn1Pts to Produce a dynan1ic rathcr than

af rmal cqui alencc is bascd uPOn

the PrinciPle of CquivalCnt cffcct

(F iCu

and

PhilhPs 1954) In suc11 a translation ne is not so c nccrnCd

ith matching thc
rCcePtor~languagc lllcssagc vith the s urcc languagc1ncssagc,but id1thc dynan1ic
rclationshiP, that thc rclati nshiP bct ccn rcccPtor and Incssagc should bc sub-

stantially thc samc as that

hich cxistcd bct veen thc original rccePt rs and the

mcssagc,
A translati

n f dynan ic cqui alcncc airns at comPletc naturah)css

f eXPrcS-

sion, and tries to rclatc the reccPtor to modes of bcha ior relevant vvithin the
vn culturc;it docs not insist that he understand thc cultural Patterns
conteXt of his

of thc sOurce-language contcxt in order to connl)rchend thc mcssagc (Df coursc,

thcrc are arying de:reCs f such dynamic-equivalcncc translati ns, One of thc

PRINCIPLES OF CORREsPONDENCE

157

m dern Enghsh translatl ns vvhich,PerhaPS n1 rc than any thCr,seeks f r cqui alcnt ef ct is J.B,PhilliPs s

rCndcring ofthe Ncw Tcstamcnt.In Romans1 16hc

quitc naturany translatcs greet nc anothcr ith a h ly

kiss

as givc

onc anothcr

a heart handshake all ar und,

Between thc tw polcs of anslating(i,c.bCtwCcn stoct brmal eq alcncc

and c n PlctC dynan ic cquivalcncc)thcrC arc a numbcr

fintcr ening gradcs,rcprcscnting various acccPtablc standards f litcrary translating During the Past sfty
years,ho vcvcr,therc has bccn a:uarkcd shift f cmphasis i n thc f rmal t thc

dynan1ic dirncnsion A rcccnt su

`lnary of oPini

n on translating by literary artiSts,

PubhshCrs,cducat rs,and Pr fCssional translators indicates clcarly that thc prcscnt

dircction is to

vard incrcasing cmPhasis n dynan1ic cquivalcnccs(Cary 1959),

Linguistic and cultural distancc

In any(hscussi n f equi alences, vhether structural or dynan1ic,onc must al

vays

bcar in 1uind thrcc differcnt tyPcs of rclatcdncss, as dctcrn incd by thc hnguistic
and cultural distancc l,et

ecn thc c dcs uscd t

c n cy

thc mcssages In somc

ol c comParati ely closcly rclatcd

languagcs ancl culturcs,cg.translations m Frisian into English,or i m Hcl)rcw
into Arabic On thc thcr hand,the languagcs l aay not be rclated,cven though thc

instanccs, for cxamPlc, a translation n1ay in

culturcs arc closcly parallcl, c,g, as in translations Flolll Gcrman into Hungarian,
edish are Ind ~Eur Pean languages,
r o 1s
cdish into Finnish(Gcrman and s
whilc Hunganan and Finnish bel ng to thc Finn ~Ugrian hmily) In sti othcr

instanccs a translation may inv lve n t nly diffcrcnccs f linguistic af hati n but
also highly divcrsc culturcs,e g Enghsh into Zulu, r Greek into Ja ancsc,2

veen source and rcccptor codcs

arc lcast,onc should cxpcct to enc untcr thc lcast numbcr ofscrious ProblCms,but
Whcrc thc linguistic and cultural distanccs l)et

as a mattcr of fact if languages are too Closcly rclated

ne is likely to bc badly

deccived by the suPer cial sirnilaritics, vith the result that translations d nc undcr
thcsc circumstanccs arC oRcn quitc P r.Onc of thc scrious dangcrs consists of so-

called false fricnds,

i,c borr
vcd rc gnatc vords vhich sccn

but are not al vays s ,cg,Enghsh

sPaniSh j n r

',Enghsh virF1

bc cquivalcnt

dcm ,ad and French dcm ndcr,Enghsh n r and

c and Latln virF1 s,and Enghsh clcdc n and Grcck dit

n os

Whcn thc culturcs arc rclatcd but thc languagcs arc quite different,d
lat r

is callcd upon t

makc a good lnany formal shiRs in thc translati

c trans~

n Howc cr,

thc cultural sin1ilaritics in such instanccs usually Pr idC a scrics of Parallchsms f

contcnt that makc thc translati n ProP

rti natcly1nuch

lcss difHcult than

languagcs and cultures are disParate In fact, differenccs bet

vhen b th

ccn culturcs causc

many morc sevcrc comphcations for thc translat r than d differcnces in languagc
structure

Definitions of translating
DcHnitions of ProPcr translatlng arc ahnOst as numerous and aricd as thc Pcr~
sons ho havc undcrtaken to discuss the sul|
iect,This divcrsity is in a scnsc qLlltC
)

158

EuGENE NIDA

understandable; f r d crc arc ast difFcrcnces in the materials translated, in thc

purPoses ofthc Publicati n,and in thc nccds fthc Pr SPccti e audicncc Morco er,

hvc languages arc constantly changing and styhstic PrCfcrcnces undcrg c ntinual
modi cation Thus a translation acccptablc in One Pcri d iS Rcn quitc unacccPt_
ablc at a later dmc.

A number ofsigni6cant and rclativcly comPrchcnsivC clcHniti ns f

ha e

translati n
been ffcrcd Pr ch zka(Gar in 1955 111 ff)dc ncs a good translation in

tcrms of c tain rcqtll mcnts which mu bc made f tlle translator,namcly

(1)

Hc must undcrstand tllc Original wOrd thcmadcally an(l stylistically ;(2) hC must
o ercomc thc difcrences bctwccn the tw
hnguisuc structures ;and(3) he must
rcconstruct thc styhstic structurcs of the riginal
ork in his translation
In a dcscription f ProPer translati n of Poctry,Jackson Mathc
s (1959 67)
statcs

(Dnc thing sccms clcar: to translate a Pocm

holc is t

pocln,A wholc anslad n

con PosC

will bc R thhl to thc n2d rcr,and it wi

anothcr

aPPr xi 1atc

the brm thc ginal;and it will ha e a h fi own,which is thc v icc of thc

anslator Richmond Latdm re(1959,in Brower195 56)deals with tlac same
basic Pr blC1n f translating P ctry. He dcscribcs thc fundamental PrinciPlCs in

tcrms of thc ay in vhich Greek poctry sh uld bc translatcd,namcly t makc

F

m thc Grcek Pocm a P cm in Engish whch,wl lle givhg a high minimum of

vhich ould not bc thc kind f
mcaning ofthe Grcck,is still a nc :Enghsh Pocn
fl

pocm it is ifit wcrc not transladng thc Grcck which it translatcs,

No Pr PCr dcnniti n f translation can avoid some f thc basic dif6cultics
ESPCcially in thc rcndcring of Poctry, thC tCnsion bct vccn form and contcnt and
thc c nHict bct vccn f rmal and dynan1ic equivalcnccs arc alvvays acutcly PrcsCnt

Hove er, it sccms to bc incrcasingly rcc gnizcd d at adhercncc to thc lcttcr may
indccd knl thc sPirit villiam A CooPcr(192 484)dcals with this P1 l)lcm rathcr

rcahstically in his articlc On Translating Gocthc s Pocms/ in :hich hc says: If the

language of thc original emPl ys vord f rmations that gi c risc to insurmountable

n, and ngures of sPccch

vholly

reign, and hcncc

incomprchcnsiblc in thc ther t nguc,it is bcttcr to chng to the sPirit of thC Poem
and clothe it in languagc and Hgurcs entirely frcc fron1a
k`
ardness of sPccch and
dif cultics

dircct translati

bscurity of Picturc This might be callcd a translation fr m culture to culture

It rnust bc rccognizcd that in translating poetry thcrc arc very sPccial Problcms
in
ked,br

tlle brm of exP ss0n(rh hm,meter, sonance,ctc)is CssCndal

f the mcssagc to the audicnce But all translatin:,

vhcthcr fP etry r Prosc, must bc c nccrncd als

vith thc rcsP nsc f thc

to con11nunicating thc sPirit

recCPt r;hcncc thc ultirnate PurP sC f thc translati n,in tcrms ofits imPact upon

its intendcd audicnce,is a ndamental factor in an evaluati n f translations This

rcason underhcs LcOnard Forstcr s de nition(1958:6)of a good translati n as onc

vhich

ful lls thc samc PurPoSC in thc ncvclanguagc as thc original did in the language

in which it was written

Thc rcsolution f thc con

ict bct vccn

literalncss of form and equivalcncc f

rCSPonsc sccms incrcasingly to fa or thc lattcr,csPccially in thc translating of Poetic

matcriJs C,W Orr(194 318),br examPlc,(lc bcs alldaung

as s

mcwhat

cqui alcnt t painting,for,as he says, thc paintcr(locs not rcProducC CvCry clcta

f the landscaPe ~~hc selects vhat sccllls bcst t hiln Likc

It is the sPirit,not only thc lcttcr, that hc sccks t

visc f r thc translator,

cmb dy

in his o

vn crsion

PRINCIPLEs OF CORRESPONDENCE
ards (1957 13) cch Cs thc samc Point
Oh cr Ed

m e

truth in a tra lation.

159

ic/: We CXPcct aPPr xi^

thc tmcst PosS lC~fc,eF d

,What wc wantto hw

ns l11ust Comc to us as thcy

the riginal The charactcrs,thc situations,thc rcnccti

vere i11thc auth r sn ind and heart,n t neccssarily PrccisCly as hc had thclll on
his hPs

It is One thing, ho 'c cr, to Pr duce a gcncrahzcd dc nition of translating,

vhcther of p etry or prosc;it is oftcn quite another t

dcscribc in somc dctail thc
signi cant charactcristics of an adcquatc translation,This fact Sa

ory(1957:49-50)

highhghts by cont1 asting dian ctrically oPPosed

n a dozen i1nP rtant
Pini ns
princiPlcs of translating Ho vcver,though So1 c disscnting v iccs can bc f und on

hat translating sh uld consist

virtually all Pr PosalS as t0
thcrC arc sc eral
signi cant%aturcs

of anslating n which many ofthc m st comPCtCnt judges arc

incrcasingly in agreemcnt

Ezra Pound (1954: 273) statcs thc casc for translations making ScnSC by

But as carly as 1789Gcorgc CamPbCll

dcclaring for Inorc sCnsc and lcss syntax

obscurc
n should not bc charactcrizcd by
scnsc E,E Milligan(1957)alS argucs r scnsc rathcr tl an w rds, r hc PointS
ut that unlcss a translation collall unicatcs,i c makcs scnsc to dle reccPt r,it has
(1789 445 ff.) argucd that translati

not justihcd its cxistcnce

sPirit and
In addition to mahng scnsc, translati ns must alsO convcy thc
manncr of thc ri inal (CampbCl1 1789 445 f), F r the Biblc translator, this
ari us vriters of thc ScriPtureS should bc
mcans that thc indi idual stylc of thc

rcHcctcd as hr as P ssiblc(CamPbd11789 547).ThC Samc sentimCnt is clcarly

CxPrCSsCd by Ruth M,Underhll(193

16)h hCr treatmCnt of cc ain

f translating magic imcantations of thc Papago Indians

Pr blcms

f southcrn Arizona:

(Dnc

can h Pc to n1akc thc translati n cxact only in sPirit, n t in lctter Francis storr

(1909)goes s hr as to classi1translators into

thc htcralist and thc sPiritudist

ls/ and in d ing so takcs his stand on thc Bibhcal tcxt,

sch
t1

c sPirit gi Cth life

Thc lcttcr killeth but

As evidcnce f r his thcsis, Storr citcs the diffcrence bct vccn

vhich he contcnds rePrcscntS thc sPirit, and thc Enghsh

the Authori`cd X/crsi n,
Rc iscd
erSion, vhich sticks t thc lcttcr, vith thc rcsult that the translati n lacks
a sPI chJ h Thc

abscncc of lit y stylis n thc En81i RCxi d Committt c

was,h wc cr,Corrcctc(1in the Ncw En ish Bil)lc(Ncw TCStament, 1961),in

vhich nc cntirc Pancl

as composcd of Pcrs ns with spccial scnsitivity to and

comPCtCncc in Enghsh stylc

Closcly rclatcd to thc requircmcnt of scnsitivity to thc stylc of thc ori8inal is
f r 1 f CxPressi n in thc languagc intovhich ne

thc nccd for a natural and easy

is transladn

(CamPbell 1789: 445 ) Max Bccrb hll1(1903: 75)considCrs that

the cardinal F`ult of rnany vhO translate Plays int Enghsh is thc fa urc to bc natural

in expression;in fact,they makc thc reader acutcly c nscious that thcir cork is a
translation

For thc mOst Part, thcir ingenuity consists in

nding Phrascs that

eragc Enghshman GoodsPccd(1945:8)echocS

ith rcspect to Biblc translating by dcclaring that: Thc best

thc samc scntimcnt
c uld

n t possibly bc uscd by the a

translation is not onc that kecPs forCvCr t)cforc thc rcader

s rnind thc fact that this

is a translatiOn,not an original Enghsh comPositi n,but onc that n1akes thc readcr

rgct that it is a tlanslauon at all and makcs him kcl that hc is l hng into thc
ancientvritCr s Fnind,as hc sl ould int that fa contcmPorary ThiSiS,indccd,n

160

EuGENE NIDA

hght matter to undcrtakc Or t

cxccutc, but it is, nc crthcless, the task of any

icwPoint
hcn hc
J B PhilliPS(1953 53)con rms the samc

dcclarcs that
Thc tcst f a real translati n is that it sh uld not rcad likc translation at all
1is sccond princiPlc of translatin8 re~cnf rccs the rst, namcly a

translation int Enghsh should avoid translator s Enghsh

It must bc rcc gnizcd, h
vc Cr, that it is not casy to Produce a complctcly
natural translati n, esPecially if thc original
vriting is good btcraturc, Precisely
bccause truly good
vriting intilnately re ects and ercctivcly cxploits thc t tal
serious translatc,1

idi matic

capacitics and sPccial genius of thc languagc in vvhich thc ,riting is done

A translat r must thcrcf rc n t nly contcnd vid1thc spccial dif cultics rcsulting
fr n1such

an cfFcctivc cxploitation of thc total rcs urccs of the s urcc languagc,

scck t0Pr duce sOmcthing rclati cly cqui alcnt in the reccPt r languagc
h hct,Justin O Bricn(195 81)quotcS Raymond Guorin to the cffcct that
most con incing critcrion oF thc quahty fark is thc fact that it can only`hc
bc
ithout l sing
translated vith difHculty,for ifit PasSes rcadily into anothcr languagc

but als

its csscncc,thcn it rnust ha c n Particular csscncc Or at lcast not onc of thc rarcst,

An casy and natural style in translating, desPite thc cxtreme difscultics

Producing it- csPCCially vvhcn translating an original f high quahty iS nc crthcf the
lcss csscntial to Pr ducing in thc ulti1natc rcccPtorS a rcsPonsC si1nnar to that
ori8inal rcccPt

rs In ne vay or anothcr this princiPlc of shn ar rcsPonsc has

bccn vvidcly hcld and crccti cly statcd by a number f sPccialiSts in thc Rcld of
translating E cn though Matthcw Arnold (1861, as quotCd in Sa

mil

himsclf Kjcctcd in ac tual Pracuc c thc PrincilDlc of

ry 1957: 45)

rcsp nsc, hc at lc t

seems to have th ught he vas Pr ducing a shnilar rcsPonsc, for hc(lcclarcs that;

A translation should affcct us in thc samc vvay as thC Original rnay bc suPPosCd t

havc afFected its nrst hcarcrs DcsPitc Arnold s bjccti n tO some ofthc iccr trans-

lations done by others, hc

ic fs of
as at lcast strongly oPPoscd to the litcrahst
such Pers ns

as F.W Ncwman(186 xi ) Jowctt(1891),on tllC Otllcr hand,

comcs somcvhat closcr to a present_day concePti n f silllnar resP nsC in stating
that: an Enghsh translatin ought to be idi matic and interesting, not only to the

scholar,but t thc lcarned rcader .

Thc translat

, sceks t Pr ducc n his

r,

rcadcr an innPrcsSi n sin1ilar r ncarly similar t that produccd by thc riginal

soutcr(1920:7)CxPrcsSCS CssCntially this samc vic

in translati n

v in stating that

C)ur ideal

is to Producc n the 1inds f ur rcadcrs as nca11y asl)oSSil>lc thc

san c effcct as
as

Produced by thc original n its rcadcrs,

and R A,Knox(1957
ymcnt

5)insiSts that a anslation shottld bc rcad with thc samc intcrcst and clll

vluch a rcading of thc original vvould havc a ordcd,

In dcahng xxith translating fron an csscntially linguistic point of vicvv,Proch zka

(in Garvin19s5)rC Cn rccs ths samc vicwP int,namdy,that hc

sh uld

translati

makc thc samc rcsultant imPrCssi n on d1c rcadcr as thc original docs on

its rcadcr

r a tlandation is to mcct thc four basic rcqtlIrcmcn

of(1)makjng sense,(2)

conVcying thc sPirit and luanncr of thc riginal,(3)havin a natural and easy f rm
of cxprcssion, and (4) pr ducing a silllilar rcsPonsC, it is ob i us that at ccrtain
P hts

the c nnict bctwccn content and

rm(or mcaning and manner)will be

acutc,and that one r the ther must give ay. In gcncral,translators arc agrced
hcn thcrc is n haPPy comPr miSe, mcaning must ha c Pri rity ovcr stylc
that,

ii

PRINCIPLEs OF CORREsPONDENCE
(Tanc

161

hat ne must attcmPt, ho vevcr, is an cffcctivc blend

ck 1958: 29).

rnattcr

and lnanncr/

for thcsc t v

asPccts f any mcssagc arc inscparably united

Adhcrcnce to Contcnt, Vithout consklcrati n offor 1,usually rcsults in a at rnediocrity, vith n thing of thc sparklc and char 1of thc ri inal On thc thcr hand,
sacrihcc of Incaning for thc sakc of rcpr
imPrCsSi
chan

n,and R l

t c

ducing thc stylc may Producc Only an

mmulllcatc tllc mcssagc,The%rm,howc cr,may be

Cd morC radically than thc content and st

l be substantially Cqui alcnt in its

effcct uPoll thC reccptor Accordingly, corrcspondence in mcaning must havc

Pri rity o er
nc cr be done

corrcsPondCncc in style, Ho vc Cr, this assigning of Prioritics must

in a Purcly mcchanical fashion,f r vhat is ultilYlatcly rcquired,esPe_

cially in thc translati n fP Ctry,is a rc-crcation,not a reProducti

(Lattilnore,

lll Brower195 55),

Any sur ey of oPini ns n translating servcs to Con

rn

the fact that dcfniti ns

ns f translating arc not scr cd by dctcrn inistic rulcs; rathcr, thcy

dcPCnd on Pr babilistic rulcs ()ne cannot,thcrcforc,statc that a Particular transdescriPti

lati n

is good or l ad
ith ut taking into considcrati n a myriad of factors, vhich

in turn must bc veightcd in a numbcr f dircrcnt vays,` ith apprcciably diffcrcnt

ansvcrs.Hence

thcrc

this a good translati nP

:ill al

vays bc a aricty of ahd ans

CrS t0thc qucstion,

Is

PrinciPles governing a transIation oricnted toward or1maI

cqui alcnce
In rdcr to undcrstand s mcvvhat1n re fully thc characteristiCs of difFcrent typcs

f translations, it is in1portant to analyzc in more detail thc princiPlCS that govern

a translationvhich attcmPtS t rcproducc a formal cqui alCncc such a f rmal_
equivalencc( r E)translati n is basically source-oricntcd;that is,it is designcd
to rCVCal as rnuch as P ssiblefthc f rn1and c ntent of thc riginal rncssagc,

In(loing so,an F~E translati n attcmPts t rcproducc sc cral formal clcments,

including:(1)8rammtlticd units,(2)consistcncy in word usagc,and(3)mcanings

in tcrn1s ofthc sOurcc contcxt Thc rcPr duction of gramrnatical units rnay consist
in (a)translating nouns by n uns,vcrbs by verbs,etc;(b)keePing all Phrases and

ustin8the units);and(c)PrCsCrving
f punctuation, paragraPh brcakS, and P ctic

sentcnccs intac t(i.c n t SPlitting uP and rea

all f

rmal indicat rs, c,g, marks

indcntati

In attemPting to rcProducC c nsistency in word usagc, an F~E translati n

usually airns at so-callcd c nc rdancc f tern1in l gy; that is, it al vays rcndcrs a
particular tcrm in the s urce language d cun1cnt by thc corrcsPonding tcrm in the

rCccPtor documcnt,Such a principlc rnay,of coursc,bc PushCd t an absurd cxtcnt,

vith thc result l)cing rclati cly mcaninglcss strings of vords, as in somc PassagCs
of thc so~callcd Concordant
crSi0n ofthe Ne v Testament On thc Other hand,a
ccrtain dcgrcc of c nc rdanCc may bc highly dcsirablc in ccrtain tyPcs of F~E trans~

lating For examPle, a rcader of Plato s E)ialogues in Enghsh may Prefcr rigid
consistcncy in thc rcn(lcrin8of key terms(as in J wett S tl anslati n),so tl at he
n)ay ha c somc con11)rchcnsi n ofthc vay in vhich Plato uscs cc1 tain vord symb ls
to dcvcl P his philosoPhical systCm, An F~E translati n may also makc usc f

162

EuGENE NIDA

brackcts,Parenthcscs, r cvcn alics(as in thc King Jamcs BiblC)R)rw rds added

t make scnsc in the translati
n,but tllissing in thc riginaI document,
h
rdcr t rcProducC n1canings in terms f thc sourcc contcxt,an F~E translati nn rmal
mPts nrJt tt,makc a tmcn iI1idi ms,btlt mthcrto P1 ducc
clt
such cxPrcssi

ns morc r

less litcrally,s that thc rcadcr lllay bc ablc to pcrcci

son1cthing of the
ay in `vhich thc original d culncnt employcd local cultural
elcn1cnts to convcy mcanings
In many iI stanccs, ho cvcr, onc sin1Ply cannot rcProducc ccrtain formal
ele1ucnts fthc s urce lncssagc For cxamPle,therc may bc Puns,chiasn1ic rdcrs
of v rds, instanccs of ass nancc, or acrostic fcaturcs f linc_initial sounds vhich
complt,tely de eqdCIlt rcnd hg In such h allces one must emPl y c tah
tyPcs of1narginal n tcs, if thc f aturc in qucstion n crits a11cxPlanation In sOmc
rare instances onc docs light uPon a roughly cqui alcnt Pun r Play n vvords F
eXaluPlc,in tra1
v rd

isshdJ, :on)an is derived fl om isb n1an/ it is PosSiblc t usc a CorresP

Enghsh Pai1

, ;vr

slatin8thC HCbrcw tcxt of GCncsis2:23,in which the Hebrew

dn and`12

nding

In H0 Vcvcr,such f rn1al corrcsPondCnces are bviously

rarc,for languagcs gcncrally differ radically in bot11c ntent and form

vill
A consistcnt F~E translation
b iousl c ntain much that is n t rcadn
intclligiblC t thc avcragc rcadcr Onc rnusttheref rc usually suPPlement such trans-

lations it11n1ar:inal notcs,n t only to cxPlai11solt`c0f thC forl11al fcaturcs xx hich

mc fthc formal
cquivalcnts cmploycd, for such cxPressions may haVc signiscancc Only in tcrms of
coul(In t bc adcquatcly rcPrescntcd,but also t rnakc intclligiblc s

thc sourcc languagc or culturc,

soIt1c tyPes oF strictly F~_E translations, c g

intcrlincar rcndcrings and

co:nPlCtely concordant translations,arc of li1nitcd 'aluc;othcrs arc of8reat aluc

For cxamPlc,translati ns ff rcign-lanuagC texts Prcparcd esPccially for linguists
rarcly attcmPt anything but closc F~E rcndcrings In such translati

ns thc ording

is usuall)quite literal,and c cn the scgmcnts are oRt)n numbcred s

that thc c rrcs-

nding units11`ay bc rcadily c mparcd.

From what has bccn said directly and indirectly about F~E translations in
PrCceding sections, it lnight be suPposed that suc11 translations are catcgorically
rulcd ut,To thc contrary,thcy are oRcn l)crfectly` ahd translations oF certai11tyPes

f1ucssagcs for ccrtain tyPcs of audicnces. Thc1

clati c

aluc and effcctivcness of

Particular tyPcs of translati ns for Particular audicnccs Posc an thcr qucsti n,and
must not bc confuscd ith a description of thc nature of ari us kinds of transla_

tions At tl)is point ve are conccrncd only

vith thei1

cssCntjal aturcs not xxith

thcir e aluation,

verning translations oriented toward dynalnic

:iPlC

In contrast ith formal-cquivalencc translati ns thcrs arc rientcd to vard

dynan1ic cqui`alcncc.In such a translati n thc f cus f attcntion is clircctcd,not so
vard the source nlcssage, as to vard t11c rcccPt r rcsP nsc, A d)nan1ic_
t
nc conccrning vhich a
cquivalencc (or D E) tra11Slati n may be dcscribcd as

n uch

bihngual and bicultural Pcr: n can justiHably say, That is just thc way

w ulcl

PRINCIPLES OF CORREsPONDENCE
say it It is important to rcahzc,h

163

vcvcr, that a D~E translation is n t mcrely

anothcr Fncssagc vhich is lnorc Or lcss siInilar t

that of the s urcc It is a transla-

tion,and as such must clcarly rcncct the mcaning and intCnt of thc source

Onc vay

of de ning a D~E translation is t dcscribc it as thc cl scst natural

equivalcnt t the s urcc languagc mcssagc

This tyPc of dc nition contains thrcc

essenual tcrms:(1)cqui
FcnF,whch P ints toward the s urce languagc mcssage,
(2)n rur
vhich points to
ard thc rcccptor languagc,and(3)cFos sr,
hich binds
thc t vo

`,
oricntations
t gcdlcr n thc basis of thc highest degrcc of aPproxirnation

Hove cr,sincc a D~E translation is(hrcctcd prirnarily to vard equi alcncc f

rcsponse rathcr than cquivalcncc f forrll,it is imPortant to dc6nc m rc ftllly the

irnPhcati ns ofthc v rd ndt rczF as aPPhCd to such translations Basically,the vord
nclrurd is aPphcablc to thrcc arcas of thc co 11nunication ProceSs; f r a ndFurd`
rendering rnust t(1)thc rcccPtor languagc and culture as a vhole,(2)thC c ntcxt
of the Particular rncssagc,and(3)the reccPt r^language audience,
Thc c nf rmancc f a translati n t thc rcccPt r languagc and culture as a

vh le is an essential ingredient in any styhStically acccPtablC rcndcring, Actually

this quahty of hnguistic aPpropriatcncss is usually noticcablc Only vhcn it is abscnt
In a natural translation,thcreforc,thosc fcaturcs vhich v uld mar it arc conspicu~

ous by thcir abscncc J H Frcrc(1820:481)haS clCscribcd such a quahty by stating,

thc languagc of translation ught, vc think, . bc a Purc,imPalPablc and invis~

iblc clcment,thc luedium f th ught and fcchng and n thing morc;it ought ncvcr
to attract attcntion to itsclf ,
All i1nP rtations fr n forcign languagcs
C to bc o cd. Such an a tlstmel tto thc Ccl,tor langu c and ctllttlre
must result in a translation that bears no obVious trace of f

G A Black(1936:50)dcscribes Jamcs Th

reign origin,s that,as

ms n s tlanslations of Hcinc,such

renderings arc a rcproduction of thc riginal,such as Hcinc hi1nsclf,if rnaster of

thc Enghsh languagc, vould ha c givcn

o principal arcas of adaPtati n, namcly,
A natural translati n in olvcs t
grallalllar and lexicon In gencral thc gramluatiCal m discations can bc made the
morc rcadily,since lnany gral11111atiCal changes arc dictatcd by thc obh8atory struc_

turcs of thc rcccptor languagc That is t say, onC is obh cd t

n akc

such

as shiRing word rdcr,using

erbs in placc of nouns,and subsdtuting
nouns for Pr n uns Thc lcxical structurc of thc s urcc mcssagc is lcss rcadily
a uStmcnts

a uS dt

b ious

tl

c mal tk rcqtllrcmellts of thc rcccptor hnguagc,br in ead of

rulcs t bc f ll
vcd,therc are numerous altcrnati

c PoSsibiIitics Thcrc arc

in gcncral d1rcc lcxicaI lcvcls to bc c nsidercd:(1)tCr 1s for vvhich thcrc arc rcadily
a

lablc

ptlrallck,c g riv

,rr e,sr nc, njft

,cStC.;(2)ttSrms which idcntify ctlltur~

rmt ectS,bLlt witla somcwhat m ar ftlllcjons,c

b o ,whicl

Enghsh Iucans an bjcct vith pagcs bound t gcthcr into a unit,but vhich,in Nc v
Tcstamcnt ti1ncs, lncant a long parchmcnt or PaPyrus ro cd uP in thC form of a
scroll;an(l(3)tms which ide i ctlltural sPC0ducs,c,g,9 n uc,h m r, hdh,
chcrvbii,,,and Jubi
e,to otc on afCw i m thc Biblc usu |tlnc srst sct of tcSrms
inv lves no pr blcm In thc sccond set f tcrms scvcral c nfusi ns can arisc;hcncc
one must either usc an ther term which rcnccts thc rm f thc rc rcnt,th ugh
not the equi alent functi n, or
vhich idcntines thc cquivalcnt function at thc

CxPCnsC ff rmal idcntity In translating tcrms of thc third class certain forcign

assOciations can rarcly bc a oidcd No translati n that attemPts t bridgc a vidc

164

EuGENE NIDA

cultural gap can hoPc to Chn1inatc all traccs fthe f rcign sctting For cxan1Plc,in
B lc trandathg it is qukc imP ssil le to rcm vc such%rc n CttS as Phd s cs,
sdddvcec sofomon
F

s
cmP/

vus fcncr rion,fi

n

beddcd

ln tlae t

ci so/

sdcr jficc,and

_
c,or sucla B1t,licd tl cmes 0inriraJ, d

dmb God, l()r

tllcsc cxP

sS0 arc decPly

[1t structum of thc mcssagc,

thc tl
:

It is inc itablc als

that
vhcn s urce and rcccpt r languagcs rcPrcscnt ery

diffcrent culturcs thcre sh ukl be rnan l)asic thcmcs and acc untsvhich cannot be

naturahzcd by thc pr ccss of translatin8, F r CxamPlc, thC Jivar Indians of

Ecuad r ccrtainly do not undcrstand 1 Corinthians 11:14, 1)ocs not naturc teach

us that R)r a man to wcarlon8hair is a dlshon r to him?`for in gencralJimro mcn

let thcir hair grow long,whilc Ji aro a(luk w mcn usually cut theirs rathcr cl sc
Similarly,in 1any arcas of Wcst A ica thc bcha or ofJcsus disciplcs in spreadin
lca cs and branchesin his vay as hc rodc int
Jcrusalcm is rcgardcd as rcprchensiblc;
f r in acc rdance vvith West African custom thc Path t
be valkcd on r ridden
o er by a chicfis scrupulously clcancd of all littcr,and anyone vho thr0 vs a branch
(c crtheless, thcsc cultural
in such a person s
vay is guilty of gric ous insult

(liscrcPancies orcr lcss dif culty than1 ight bc imagined,cspccially if fo

tnotcs arC

used t P int out the basis for thc cultural (livcrsity; f r all Pe Ple rCc gnizc that
ther Pc PlCs bCha c differently fr ln thcmsclvcs,
Naturalncss of cxPrcssion in thc rcccPt r languagc is csscntially a Pr blcm f
co-suitability but n sc eral lcvels, fvhich thc m st imPortant arc as f

ll
vs

onc1nust oRcn say, G d loves

instead of God is l vc );(2)grammatical catcg rics(in s mc languagcs so callCd
(lica n mintati cs must agrcc in numb widl tllc su cd,so that tllc two qhall
P

(1)w rd classes(e g ifthcrc is n

n un for lo c

be nc cannot l)c sai(l, and accordingly, onc must say

thc

t
o Pcrsons Shall act

ugh thcy are onc Pcrs n (3)sCmantlc dasscs(swCar words in onc

languagc may bc bascd uP n thc pervcrtcd usc
f divinc namcs, but in an thcr
Ianguagc may bc Primt r y cx emcntal and anatomical);l+)disc u c pCs( mc
languagcs lnay rcquirc direct quotati n and othcrs indirect); and (5) cultural

just as th

Contcxts(in S mc sooctics thc Ncw Tcstamcnt practice of sitting down to tcach

cms rangc,if

not unbec

min9

In additi n to bcing aPpropriatc to thc rcccptor language and culture,a natural

translation must bc in acc rdancc vith the c ntext f thc particular1uessagc Thc
Pr blCll s are thus not rcstrictcd t gr ss gra 11natical
als

and lcxical featurcs,but1nay

inv lvc such(lctailed mattcrs as intonation and sentcncc rhythn

1954

(Ezra P und

298).The tr ublc is that, Fettcrcd to mere vvords,the translat rl ses thc

SPirit f thc riginal author

(Manchester1951:68)

u: s J
`
T

T:i L
ffF
I
i
;
i
anomahes,a idcd in a succcssful translati n,
vhich immediatcl strikc thc rcadcr
l f

l i

But vulgaritics arc much lcss fa Pr blCn1 than slang or colloquiahsms Stanley

Ncwman(1955)deals with this problcm of lc

cls of v cabulary in his analysis

of sacrcd and slan :languagc in Zuf`i, and PointS Out that a ter 1 suCh as n,c`
rclated t English r,,cr cdn,is not aPProPriatC f r thc rchgious atn osPhCrc of thc
,

kiva Rathcr, nc ll,ust sPcak f Alncricans by rncans of a Zuii exPrCSsion lneaning,

PRINC1PLEs OF CORRESPONDENCE
htcrally,broad-hats

, F r

165

thc Zu^is,uttcrin8mcFi d in a ki a ccrcmony vould bc

as out of placc as l,ringing a radio into such a mccting

OnomatoPocic CxPressions arc considcrcd cqui alent t slang by thc sPCakcrs

fs l c languagcs In s mc languagcs in A3ica,R)r cxamPlc,cCrtain hi8hly imita
tivc cxprcssions(somcti1ncs ca cd idc Phoncs)havC bCCn rulcd ut asinaPPr priate
t the dignised c ntext of thc Biblc, Undoubtcdly the critical attitudcs
f sOmc
rnissionary translat rs to /ard such vivid,but highly colloquial,f

rms f cxprcssion

havc c ntributcd to the fechng f rnany Africans that suchvords are inaPProPriatc

in Bibhcal contcxts In some languagcs, ho /c cr, SuCh onomat P cic usages are
not only highly dC cloPCd,but are rcgardcd as esscntial and bccoming in any tyPc
f disc urse For cxamplc, Vai vai,a language of British Guiana,uscs such cxPrcs~
sions vcith grcat frcqucncy, and vith ut thcm onc can scarccly c 1rnunicatc the
cmotional tonc f thc lncssage,for they providc thc basic signals for understanding
thc spcakcr s attitudc t0 vard the e ents hc narratcs,

Some translat rs arc succcssful in a iding vulgarisms and slang, but fa into
thc crr r of luaking a rclati cly straightfor vard mcssagc in thc s urcc languagc

sOund hkc a comphcatcd lcgal documcnt in thc rcccptor language by trying too
hard to bc c mPlctcly unambiguous;as a rcsult such a translator spins out his de ni_

tions in long, tcchnical Phrascs In such a translation littlc is lcR of thc gracc and
naturalncss f thc Origina1.

Anachronisms are anothcr rncans of

iolating thc co-suitability f lllcssagC and

Enghsh vhich used iron xide in

Vould bc tcchnically correct, but Ccrtainly anachronistic On thc

PlacC of rust

contcxt, For cxamPlc, a BiblC translation int

othcr hand,to translatc hca ens and carth by uni Crsc in Gcnesis 1:1 is not so
raclical a dcParturc as onc rllight think, f r thc pcoPlc f the ancicnt vvorld had a

highly(lcvCl PCd conccPt of an rganizcd systcm c n Prising thc hcavcns and thc

carth, and hence universe is not inaPProPriatc Anachr nisms involve tvv tyPcs

f r rs:(1)u l.g cc,ntemPo ary words whkh fal b h 01 lcally rmt

Peri ds, e.g translating

dcmnP ssCSsed

as mcntally distrcsscd,

and(2)using

ld~fashioned language in thc rcccPtor languagc and hcncc gi ing an iluPrcssion

f unreaht
APPr PriatCncss of thc messagevithin thc c ntcxt is not lucrcly a mattcr
thc rcfcrcntial c ntcnt of thc

rds Thct tal irnpression of a1ncssagc consists not

mcrcly in thc objccts, c cnts, abstractions, and rclati nshiPs symb li'cd by thc

vords, but also in thc styhstic sclecti n and arrangcmcnt of such sylnbols,
Morc vcr, thc standards f styhstic acccPtability for arious tyPes of disc ursc
/hat is cntirely aPProPriatc in spanish,
dircr radically fronn languagc to languagc

r cxamPlc,1nay turn ut to bc quitC unacccptable PurPlC ProsC in Enghsh,and

thc En:hsh prose ve adn1irc as digni cd and cffccti c oRen seclus in sPanish t be
colorless,insipid, and flat~ Many sPaniSh litcrary artists take dehght in thc fl
vcry

clegancc of thcir language,

vh c n1 st Enghsh

ritCrs prcfer b ld rcahs 1,

prccision, and movemcnt

It is csscntial not nIy that a translation a
id ccrtain bvious failurcs to adjust

dle lnessagc to thc c ntext,but als that it incorPorate ccrtain Positivc clcmcnts of

style
hich Pr vidc thc Pr PCr cm tional tonc f r thc disc urse. This cmotional

tonc must accurately rcncct thc P int of ic v of thc author Thus such clements
as sarcasn1,irony, or vhilnsical intcrcst lnust all bc accuratcly rcHected in a D~E

166

EuGENE NIDA

translation Furthcrm re, it is csscntial that cach ParticiPant intr duccd int thc
mcssagc be accuratcly rePrcsCntcd Thatis tO say,indi

iduals rnust bc Propcrly char~

actcrizcd by the aPPr Priatc sclccti n and arrangcmcnt f

ords, so d1at such

atures as social class r gcograPhical dialect vill bc immcdiatel cvidcnt D

orco er,caCh

Charactcr n1ust bc Pcrn1itted t ha c the sa1nc kind ofindi iduaht and

personahty as thc author hirnsclf gavc thcrll in thc original mcssagc,

A third clcmcnt in thc naturalncss f a D E translation is thc extcnt to vhiCh

the mcssagc ts thc rcceptor langua8c audiencc This apPropriateness lllust be

judged on the basis f the levcl of cxPericncc and thc caPacity for dccoding,if onc
is to ailn at any real dynar11ic cqui alcnce (Dn the other hand, onc is n
surc ho v thc original audicnce rcspondcd or
lators, f

t al vays

vcrc supposcd to resPond :iblC trans~

r cxamPlc,ha c Rcn rnadc quite a P int of the fact that thc languagc of

thc New Tcstament xs as Koinc Greck,thc language f thc man in thc s

eet, al`d

hencc a translation shouId sPcak t thc man in t11c strcet Thc truth of thc mattcr
is that n1any Ncw Tcsta ncnt rncssages vcrc not dirCcted Primarily to thc1nan in

thc strcct,but to thc man in thc congregation F r this rcas n,such cXPrcssions as

Abba Fad1er/ Jf rclntlr ,and baPtizcd into Christ could bc uscd vid)rcasonable
exPCctation that they vould bc undcrstood
A translati nvhich ain1s at dvnan1ic cqui alcncc incvitably in

ff ,rmal a( ju ments,R)r

l cs a nun bcr

onc cannl,t haxc his rmal cake and cat h d namicall

too somcthing must gi e!In gcncral,this lil litation invol es threc PrinciPal arCas
(1) ccial lkcrary forms,(2)sCmanticJly cx ccllt c cxprcssions,and(3)intra
organ1sIu1c lncanlngs
The translatin fP Ct1 y b iously involvcs l orc a(ljustn cnts in litcrar) f

rm

than(l cs PrOSC,for1 hythmic f rms diffcr far morc I adically in forn1,and hcncc in
csthctic aPPCal,AS a resu t,ccrtain rhythn1ic pattcrns1uust oRcn bc substitutcd f r

vhcn Grcek dactyhc hcxamctcr is translatcd in iambic pcntamctcr,

thcrs, as
M rc ver,somc ofthe m st accePtable translating of rhyn1cd ersc is accomPhShCd
by substituting frcc vcrse In Bible translati11g thc usual I)roccdurc is to attcmPt a
klnd of dignincd Pr sc
hcrc the original cmploys Poct

y,sincc,in gcneral,Bibhcal

rm

Contcnt is rcgardcd as n1uch morc imPortant than Bibhcal f

Whcn sc1nantically cx centric PhrasCs in thc s urce languagc arc mcaninglcss

or n1islcadi11g if translatcd htcralIy into the rcccPtor lan

uagC, onc is obhged to

makc s mc ad lqtmCllts in a D~Et1anslatio11F r cxaml)lc,t11C scmitic idiom r(l

uP the l ins fy ur n1ind rnay nlean n thing rnorc than Put a bclt around thc hiPs

of your th ughts if translated litcrally,under such circumstanccs one Inust Changc

an cxocentric to an cndocentric typc of cxPrcssion, c.g,

gct rcady in your
thinking D
ore cr, an idion1 may not be mcrcly n1caninglcss, but may cvcn
Con ey quitc thc vr ng111caning,in
hich casc it1uust also bc m diicd, C)Rcn,

f r cxa11nPlc, a sirnile111ay bc substitutcd f r thc Original 1nctaPhor, cg

sons of

fr m

thundcr 1na bccomc 1nen likc thundcI

Intraor8anisn1ic mcanings su`r most in thc process of translating, for thcy

dcPend s largcly uPon thC t tal cultural contcxt of thc lan uage invhich they are

uscd,and hcncc arc not readil transferablc to othcr lan uagc-culturc contcxts In
ord rdPcinos,usually translatcd as humblc
thc Nc :Testament,for cxamPlc,d1c

in
Enghsh,11ad
vcry
dC
r l
vl)
nitc cmotive connotations in the Greek vorld,

whcrc it c ried thc Peloraj e meamngs f low, humiliated,

dcgladed, mcan,

PRINCIPLES OF CORRESPONDENCE

167

and basc. Howcvcr,thc Chri ians,who camc Pon0Pally i m the lwcr strata
J1 } % 11 FdJJ }`t
l:

Tcstament into Enghsh cannot exPcct to carry all thc latcnt cmotivc mcanings in

the Greek word Si1nilady,such translauons as anointcd, 1cssiah, and Ch1 lst
cannot do hlljustice t thc Grcck Chiisr s,which had assOciadons intimatcly hnkcd
with thc hoPes and asI)irations of thc early JuclC Christian community Such
lcly to tcrms of theol gical
cmotivc clcments of1ncaning necd not bc rclatcd s
hnport Thcy apply to all lcvels f cabulary In Frcnch,for examPle,therc is no
tCrm quitc cqui alCnt to Enghsh J,on,c,in contrast vith h sc,and in Enghsh n thing
quitC likC FrenchJo er,which in many rcsPcct likc English homc,but ds means
1

hearth and hreside

as
cll

as

cus

and salon f a thcater En oti ely, thc

Enghsh wor(lh mcis dosc t French` /cr,but rc rendally hoi,lc iS uSually cquiva
Cd l)y an aPProPriatC pronoun)
lcnt t mdison, Jl iFdrion,and che'(f ll
l

Notes
This idi na is l)ascd uPon thc rcquircmcnt that PlaintiffS and defcndants sPit

n thc gr und in fr nt f cach thcrvhen a casc has bcen Hnally tricd and
cnt1nctcd out Thc sPitting indicates that all is forgi en and that the
accusations can nc cr l)e br ught into c urt again

PuniS11n

Wc als cncounter cC1 tain rarc situations in vvhich thc languagcs arc related

but the culturcs arc quitc(lisParatc For examplc, in the casc f Hindi and
English onc is dcaling with tw languagcs on thc samc languagc hmily,l)ut
thc culturcs in qucSti n arc 9cry diffcrcnt In such instanccs,the languages arc
als

hkcly to be so distantly rclatcd as to makc thcir linguistic af

mattcr of rnin

r conscqucncc

hation a

Chapter 14

atharina Reiss

TYPE'KIND AND IN

DI ID ALITY

OF TEXT DECISION MAKING IN

TRANSLATION
Tra s/ared by S 5a/T/<` ro/,

1 General preliluinary remarks

"I
tion of a

T | : I
L targCt languagcl tcxt that is l nctionally cqui alcnt to an SL tcxt[sOurce

languagcl(2mc(ha:sL and TL+1me

or,who bccomcs a
n)

um:tlac transl

sccondary sendcr;thus tI anslating: sccondary c lalltlunicati

1 1 1 Thc usc of two natural languagcs as

Cll as the enlPloymCnt fthe mcdium
f thc translator nccessarily and naturally rcsult in a changc of rnessagc during the
communicati c Process Thc tl

has P i1 tcd out that an idca

e rctiCian

c mmunication

is en1Pl ycd, l9ecause thc rcccivcr al

f communicati n,Otto Hasdo (1969),

hcn nc singlc language
is rarc cvcn

vays l91

exPectati ns,which arc differcnt om th sc

this fhctor thc

c mn1unicati e difft

n knowlcdge and11is n
ofthc se11dcr H F,Plctt(1975)callS

ings his o

rcncc In translating,thcn,such diffcrcnccs arc

all thc1nore to bc expcctcd At this P int I distinguish bct vecn

intentiona and

unil)tcntional changcs affccting thc translati n.

t

,,inFcnrioIa f cJ, nJcs n ay arisc lr

lll thc diffcrcnt languagc structures as

fron1ditrenccs in translating con1Pctcncc

iS dl e la g c(F nch

hbrmation abotlt a
n;no
in
rmation
ab
ut
thc
mcans of a cl)
pcr

Ex, Jc

1971

malt

ell

as

DECIsION MAKING IN TRANSLATION

Ich bin zum Bahnhof gcgangcn(GCrman:n

169

informati n about

thc Pcrs n;inbrmation about thc mcans of travcI)

=Linguistically conditioncd comlnunicativc difercncc,

Ex La

Francc cst vcu c(PmPidou at thc dcath of dc Gaullc)

Frankrcich ist Witwc~Frankrcich ist Wit vc gc vordcn~
Frankrcich ist vcrwitwct~Frankrckh ist vcrw st orphancd]1
Lingu^tically conditi

Frankrcich

ncd:La Francc~Wltwc IWi(1owl

is ncutcr in Gcrman,Thc ima8e

Waisc

odd t a pcrson ignorant of Frcnch

f wid w is

[orphan is als

ncutcr;thc imagc of an cmotional attachmcnt Progran11ncd

(li:crcntl

JnrcnriondF chcIn es frcqucntly occur in translating, if thc airns pursucd in thc trans_
lati n

arc different fr ryl thosC of thc Original;if,bcsidcs thc lan

uagc di"crcncc of

thc TL rcadcrs,therc is a changc in thc rcading circlc,ctc, sinCc this

vill cnta a

no attemPt any morc

to strivc for a functi nal cquivalcncc bct /ccn thc sL and the TL tcxt, but for

vith the f reign function It

adcquacy of thc TL rcvcrbahzation in accordance
f ll
vs that,bcsidcs a text tyPology rclc ant to translating, a translation tyPology
sh uld bc vorkcd out
change of functi n in thc act of communication,there is n

1.2 Con

unication comPrises linguistic and non- nguistic action

1,21Writtcn tcxts an(l tcxts Put in wriung(matCrial br translating Purposcs)arc

to bc charactcrizcd as onc way Communication (Glhz1973) ThiS mcans,on tl e

onc hand, that n n-hnguistic clcn1cnts contribuung t

(gestures,facial cxPrCssions,spccd ofsPccch,int

ral com1nunication

nation,ctc)are Partly Crbahzcd

(=allC iatlon of thc tcxt andysis),0n the odacr hand,thc tcxt analysis is madc
n f such

morc dif cult by thc li1nitation of thc Possibilitics of cxPhcit verbahzati

clemcnts as
vcll as by thc spatio-tcmPoral sCparation bct vccn addrcsscr and
addresscc and the lack of fecdback durin8thC act f communication;thcsc factors
lcad,among other reasOns,to a =ariable undcrstanding of a givcn tcxt,

122 Acti n

is intenFiondF bch vior in d J cn

sj u

rion(VcrmCCr1972), Intcntion

1ncans hcrc sPccch purposc, sPCCCh ailll, Imotivc lcading to lan8uagc c

n1rllunica_

n(LC
and `ski 1973~_5: 288) Thr ugh thc intcntion,verbalized by thc author
in his tcxt, this tcxt rcccivcs a coln1nunicativc function for dlc Pr
cCss f
ti

communication In ordcr t

l)e ablc t establish this intention the translator rcccivcs

signincant assistancc if hc detcrn1ines to

f

vluch tcxt-tyPc and tcxt^Varicty(rclc ant

r translating)any gi en tcxt bCl ngs

rittcn

tcXts rnay ha c singlc or plural intenti ns Plural intentions Inay bc of

vith it, the tcxt

bc samc rank and rdcr Mostly, ho vcver, nc intention (and,

function)iS don1inant:
Ex 3

C:or o und u und a spricht man in11ncr wic cin k;soll cs wic
cin c crklingcn,l sst lnan die Ccdillc sPringen

(mncmo chlalcal

rhymc:

170

KATHARINA REIss
Intcnti n1~t

c n c a1 ule

Intention2~t

fac itatc1 cn1Cn1berin8by

cl1

brm

tist

Intcnti n3~to

giving the tcxt an

VCeten thc lcarning Pr ceSs l)y gi i11g thc

text a Plcasing forln)

CounterexamPlc3a
Ein Wicsel/sass auf cinen1Kiesel/inn1ittcn Bachgcricsel

(Christian NI rgcnstcrn)
Intenti n1~thc

commur1icati n of an objcctivc hct

Intention2~artistic crcation to con cv an aCsthctic

11uPrCSSl n

The(l 1uh)ance of intcnti n2is c8tabhshcd thr ugh the tcxt itsclf
te Ticr/Tat

I)as rafhnicr-

s un)des Rcimcs len NIax Knight gi cs c Enghsh crsions,and

1 Le g

dl d Cm

A wcascl

cq v nt(1969 103-4):

A ferrct

PCrchCd on an cascl

nibbhng a carr

withi11a patch of tcascl

in a garrct

etC

1.3 Languagc is(a1,l ng other hctors)a tC1nPo1 al Phcnomcn n and thus subjcct t
thc c nditi ns of ti1nc This also aPPhcs to languagc in

rittcn tcxts and thcrefore

to d1csc tcxts themsel es,a fhct r

hich is signi cant f r translating

1 3 1 A natural conscqucncc of this fact is,

rstly, thc necessity of rc-translating
one and thc same SL tcxt, if the TL has changcd to such an cxtcnt, that the

TL version rcHecting Prc ious language conditions d cs n t guarantee functi nal

cqui alencc any morc(e g Bible translations,thc translations of classical auth rs)
1 3 2 A furthcr c nscqucncc of this fact lnay bc thc loss f undcrstanding of thc
original sL tcxt functions,bccausc of a change in the situation,in vhich thc sL text
fulsllcd its function,and/or bccausc

ation(c,g"Caesar,C

r l

f the in1Possibility of rcconstructi1 8this situ-

nCnrcri dc3

:/

1c@~electio1 eering PalllPhlet=oPCrati c

`f@f

cial contcxt-110 : a historical

reP rt an(l als translatcd as such=i ormati c text;Jonathan swiR,GLJf`ivcI
Trd c satirc On contemp rary social ills = exPrcssivC tCxt

vith an oPcrati C
text
SCC 2 1 1 bclo

Torn ut

of its original s

secondary lonction;today only rccognizablc in this ftlnction by thc exPcrts spccial~

izing in this Pcri d; for the
ad cnturc

rdinary

rcadcr (als of thc

riginal)

~ a fantastic

talc=cxprcssi c text)

2 The translating prOccss

Pl,Jsc cn/ 7 9 sjs

In order t

PlacC a R1nctionally cquivalCnt TL tcxt bcsi(lc an sL

text the translat r sh uld clariF`f thc f11nctions of thc sL tcxt This n1a

be donc in

a thrcc~stagc-proccss, Vhich1nay,in PriI1ciPlc,be carried ut cithcr by starting from

DECIsION MAKING IN TRANsLATION

171

:ith thc text as a vh lc,or by bcginnin ith

d1e smallcst textual unit and cnding

ith thc analysis f thC sn1a cst tcXtual unit For

thc tcxt as avholc and cnding

Practical as vvcll as for tcxt-thcOrctical considcrations,I ha

c choscn thc proccss of

ProcCCding fr n1 thc lar8cst to thC sn1allcst unit, (In practicc, thc conscicntious
anslator rcads dlc wholc tcxt rst to gct an imPression;f1 om a tcxt hnguisdc point

f vicw,the tcxt is nowadays rcgardcd as thc P1 lmary language gn,)Bel w,ths

three~stage ProcCSS xlill be PrescntCd as a tcmporal scqucnce f

r purcly mcthodo-

lo:ical rcas ns. In l)ractice, thc scParatC stagcs of analysis dovcta

, particularly if

thc tra11slator is cxPcriCnccd

2.1 Total functi n in the framework ofwritten1orms of cOrnlllunication

^^ a Phen
mcnon goi11g bcy nd a singlc
2,1,1 Estabhshmcnt f thc
rexr~F
Pe
hn8uistic or cultural contcxt, bccausc thc follo ving csscntially di crcnt forms f

rittcn c mmunication may bC rcgardcd as bcing Prcscnt it1 c cry sPccch

vith a culture l)ased n thc
con1n1unit
11ttcn :ord and als becausc cvcrV author
of a tcxt ought to(lccide in PrinciPlc on onc of thc thrcc f rl s bcforc bcginnh1g
to f rn ulatc

his tcxt

QLJcsFion

WhiCh bask commulllcativc form is realizcd in d1ec n etc xt with

thc hclP of vrittcn texts?

Thc c 1111uniCation of content~informativc tyPc

Thc co ununication of artistically rganizcd content~cxprCssive tyPe

Thc c n1n1unication of contcnt vith a pcrsuasi e charactcr~oPcrati C tyPe

H1ds in oricnFdri n

scmantic as wdl as Pmgmatic oncs(contCnt an(l knowlcdgc of

thc v rld),f r instancc, prc-signals ,i,c,titlcs or hcadhnes(novCl,lavv, rcPort

at thc

)r rnctapropositional expressions
f an accidcnt, s nnct, strikc call, ctc,)

bc nning f a tcxt(GrosSc1976)(cg, Hcrcwith I authorizc . in thc casc f

a gCncral P wCr f attorncy,c ,);mCdiuln pr ss onal Pcllodicals,pamPhlcts,
the1

vs sCCtion of a nc
spaPcr,Ctc

usc f
a

languagc

The ParticuIar icqucncy of vords and Phrascs of cvaluation(poSiti c for thc

addresser r for thc causc t0
VhiCh hc has c mmitted hi1nscl negativc for
any obstadc to his colnmitmcnt),d1C Particular fl cqucncy

gures may, alla ng thcr

f cert n rhet

"cal
fact rs, lead t the c nclusi n t11at thc text
is

oPCrativc Dccisivc question

arc c dcaling wkh a sPccch bject caPable of

making an aPPcalP

The

featu1 c that sPccch clcments arc caPablC

f Pointing l)eyond themselvcs

thc princiPlc of linkage

(rhymcs,lCit mc,tiR,Pt rallel ms,rhytllm,etc)and the\mns rm ion of

to a signiRcance of thc
tlae mttterial of

h0le

(C)r

sSC 1976),

ality (Muk o sk )m

lead to tlle conclusion that the text

bcl ngs to thc cxPressi c tyPc,

shoukl the elen)cnts quoted undcr a and b be abscnt,the conclLIsion may be

that thc tcxt is informative

Thus a

r ugh

grid l)as bccn estabhshcd for the anal sis

172

KATHARINA REIss

212J ixed~forI,,s

r wc acccpt thc tllrcc tt,xt tyPes,the in%rmatlvc,CX

es

and thc opcrativc,Pe,as the basic rms of writtcn communication(intcr cultural),

uld bc takcn int account that thcsc tyPcs arc not only rcahzcd in thcir Purc

for that is, that thcy d n t alvvays aPPcar in thcir fully rcahzcd f rn and it
it sh

sh uld

also bc c nsidercd that,for a

f a tcxt varicty, or if vc ha c

aricty of rcasOns(changC in thc conventions

vith Plural intcntions) the con111,unicativc

t d

intcntion and co )rnunicati c forn1cannot bc unambigu usly adaPtcd t cach other,

h

thc nrst casc

tcxts mcrcly aPPcahng to an afnrmative attitudc f the addrcsscc

vith ut intending to trigger off imPulsCs of bchavi r, eg, nc vsPaPer articlcs

cxPresSing oPinions (no fully rcahzcd form f the Perativc tcxt) In thC Scc nd
casc

vcrsised legal tcxts in the Middlc Agcs;in ordcr f r thcir content to bc accept-

ablc,thcy had t bc prcscnted in vcrsc forn1=grcatcr dignity f rhymcd languagc!

(MixCd ft)rm betwccn inft)rmati
c and cxPlesS C tC tyPc,)

2 1,3 dtliri n F yP s2B hler s thrcc functions of thc linguistic sign,in analogy to

vhich I ha c is latcd thc thrcc main tcxt functions, arc cxtended by Roman
Jak bson t includc thc Phatic and thc Poctic functions Would b th of thcsc func~
tions bc suitablc t

isolatc tcxt tyPCS rclCvant to thc ch ice f a translating rncthod?

Not so, in my opinion! Relatcd t

cntirc tcxts and not only to singlc lamguagc

clcments,thc Phatic ft nc tion(=the establishmcnt and main nance of contact)is
rcalizc(l in all thrcc f the basic f rms of Colll1nunication,i,c,the Phatic function
docs not lcad t

Particulars of the tcxt c nstruction,

For instancc

Picturc Po card mah li(lay:inbrmatl c tcxt With Phatic hnctlon

Original birthday poc cxPrCssivc tcxt Vith Phatic hnction
Me1nory aid in an ad crtiscmcnt slogan: Pcrati C textvith phatic
functi n

Thc phatic function docs not arise fr

the tcxt f rlu,but fr

thc usc t
vhiCh

the text is Put

Likevvisc,the Poetic function of thc language signs is reahzcd in all thrce f the
basic c n)rnuniCau c f rms

Socccr rcPortagc:

informativc tcxt,partly vvith P

cg, dcr~ ann

Ctic languagc clcmcnts,

in fahlgruncn Trik

t,

Erstaunhch

matt war Holzenbcin,fchlcdos Grabowsk,

cindrucksv ll Ncubcrger (rhet rical triPlc sgurc)
Lyrical Pocn

cxprcssive tcxt~thc p0etic function dctcrlllines thc

vh lc
Salcs promoton

tcxt

(C.g,lll v qe%rm) pcl at c xt with clcmcn f

loan structure (Hantsch1972)

P Ctic language

H
vcvcr,in
ievv of thc rclc ancy for translating purposcs,an additional typc,
a hypcr~typC/ Sh uld bc is latcd as a suPer-structurC for thc thrcc basic tyPes
Fhc IlauFFi m d1 Fr xr9 Pe

The nced%r this arises fr m thc fact that thc translating

DECIsION MAKING IN TRANSLATION

173

material docs not onlv C nsist of auton mous vvrittcn texts,but als ,to a argc
vritin8, arc PresCntcd
vhich, though Put d vvn in
cxtcnt, Hrstly of erbal tcxts,
ora y, aIld, sccondly, of verbal texts,

VhiCh are nly Part of a largcr

holc and

are Phrased vith a vic v to, and in c nsidcration of, thc additional inf rmation
suPPhcd I)y a sign systcn1othcr than that of languagc (Picturc + tcxt, music and
tcXt, 8csturCS, facial exPrcssi ns, bunt~uP scCncry on d1c stagc, shdcs and text,

ctC)
Thus, vhcn thc rnessagc is verbahzcd,the multi medial tyPc PosscSSes its o

vhch ught to t)c taken into account in translati11g,besidcs~and above

~the rcgulalldcs of thc thrcc basic rms f writtcn c mluunicauon Thcrc rc I
rcgula1iucs,
v
n

Put this tyPe abovc thc thrce basic f

rn1s,though,forn1crly,I Placcd it beside

ve cr,
then1 H
c should als considcr a suggcstion madc by a rcSCarch grouP of
thc PhdiPs c nccrn, according t0 vhich thcsc c tra-hnguistic conditi ns sh uld bc

regardcd as thc basis f r a tyPology of rncdia rclc ant t translating

2.2 Thc sccond Stagc f thc analysiS airns at thc cstabhshn1ent

f the FcxF ,d'iC9

ie , thc classiRcation of a gi cn tcxt aCCording to sPeci cally structurcd soci

cultural Pattcrns of collalnunication bel nging to spcci c languagc comn1unities.

Text

crsial conccPt in linguistics Thc denotation of text

variety as vvcll as that f tcxt type is at PrCsCnt still uscd f r thc mOst aricgatcd
tcxtual Phcnomena.Thc1 cforc,I mcanvhdc(lcfnc text aricty as suPCr~individual
arict is still a contr

aCts of sPCCch rvriting, vhich are linkcd to rccurrcnt actions of co 11uunications

Particular Pattcrns of languagc and structurc ha c dc eloPcd bccause
rccurrcncc in sh ar collalnunicative constcllations The Pf, nom n n oftcxt
aricty arc Partly
varicty is n tc n ncd to nc languagc ThC vari us kinds of tcxt

and in xx hich
of thci

not con ncd t nc languagc or onc culturc, but thc habits of textuahzation, thc
a considcrablc
PattCrns of language and structurc oRcn diffcr from onc anothcr t
extent Hcncc, the cstabhshn1ent of thc tcxt varicty is f decisive imPortancc for
thc translat r, so that11e lnay not cndangcr thc functi

nal cquivalcncc fthe TL

tcxt b) nai ely adoptiI)g sL convcntions.

ExamPlcs:
Es ar cinmal:tc xtual oPcming signal h1Gcrman br hirv talcs
In thc namc fthc Pc Plc:f r crdicts
`

41incs+2

31incs struCtural Pattcrn for thc s

nnct

Dircctions R)r use in Frcnch and Gcrman:According t thc sPcciHc text

arietv therc is a distributi n f structurcs con11non to both languages
Thc passi e brn1at1d imPcrsonal exPrcssions~con
c11tions in Gcrman
Thc indennitc Pr n un on -+insnitivc Phrasc~c nvcntion in Frcnch
0ne singlc cxamplc lna)not always su cc for thc cstabhshn cnt f thc tcxt varict
Ex 4

Enghsh dcath notice:

FRANCIS On Thursday,March17,Jcnny,bClo

:Cd wik of T ny

Francis and motbcr f And10ny scrvicc at St Mary

s Chu1 d1,

174

KATHARINA REIsS
Ell

ughton,950am,Tucsday,March22,followcd by crcmatlon

N lcttcrs or fI
crs,Pleasc
The translati n int

Gcrman would bc m rc Or lcss as bllows(thC italicizcd words

and cxprcssions charactcrize con cntions observed in Gcrman):

Am17 M rz
c^rdrb

m0nc gchcbtc Frau,i,,e n licbc A/luttcr

JENNY fRJNc^Js
Ell ughton il,N Il,cn dCr nfcho

Jcn(or in uc r Traucr)

Tonv FrancIs
ln1t Anthon

Traucrgottesdienst: IDicnstag,dcn22,3,9.50in St Maricn(Elloughton)

Anschlicsscnd cJ

die Feucrbcstattung

Von Kondolcnzschrcil,cn und Kranzspcndcn birrcn

,,

ir

h ichst Hbsrdnd zu

J,n,cn

2.3 Third stage of thc analysis: thc analysis of stylc (d e analySis of a Particular
reground This analysis is
tcxtual surhcc) N w thC rcxF ind1T idu
thc
`is Placed
lll
r s dccisive battlc
is fought on thc
f suPrcmc h11Portancc, l)ccause tbC translat
le el
f thc tcxt individuaI,
hcrc st1 atcgy and tactics arc di1 cctCd by tyPc and
varlCt

nncction bc undcrst od to mean thc ad h c selcction f

p ssibilities of c n11)inati n suPPhcd l)y thc languagc

S) Stcm,Thc lIqc0flanguagc in a
Cn sL tcxtis hvest cd lll r lcr to d iI i11

dctail, rstly, hat linguistic rncans arc uscd to reahzc sPcci cc n1municati e f11nc~
Lct st le in this c

hnguistic signs and of thci1

u ns,and,sccondly,hOvv

thc tcxt is constructed 111is dcta cd scmantic,syntactic

and Pragmatic analysis is ncccssary,bccausc,as is vcll kn0 vn,not cvcn in onc single
languagc(lo fo1 l and function sho a1 1 relation Thc samc Phcnol

Cnon aPPhes

to thc relation fsL to TL

2.4 At this Point I scc,as it xx crc,a juncturc bct /ccn thc srst Phasc ofthe ProcesS

of translation,thc PhaSe f analysis,and the scc nd Phase f the ProceSS f transla~

tion, thc phasc of rcvcrbahzati n, for it is alrcady hcrc that thc translator, at any
ratc thc exPcrienccd translat r,Pays hced to possil)le contrasts,
Thc(lctailed semantlc, syntactic and pragmatic analysis is carricd out in sluall
stages of analysis, Pr cecding fr m t1 c
v rd, the syntagma, thc PhrasC, thC
sentcncc,thc seCtion(Para
aph or chaPtcr)uP to the lcvel of the cntirc tcxt.
:1

ThC ProccSs of rCVcrbahzation is a linear one c nstructiI g thc TL tcxt ut

fv rds, syntagmas, clauses, scntences, ParagraPhs, ctc DuriI1g this ProcCSs f
rc crbahzation
tl

a dccision has t

be madc f r cach elemcnt of thc tcxt vhether

e hnguistic si ns and sequcnccs of linguistic signs selected in thc TL in co rdin-

ation ,ith a sign forl l and sig1 Rlnction can guarantec thc f lncti nal cquivalencc
f r vhich a translator shouId stri e, by duc c nsidcration of tcxt varictY and tcxt

tyPc

CIsION MAKING IN TRANSLATION

175

3 Phase of reverbalization
Rclc ancc of thc classiHcati n oftcxttyPe a11d tcxt aricty to thc translating l roccSs

Thesis: Thc tcxt tyPC dCtcrn1incs the gcncral rncd1

d of translating;

The text varicty dcmands c nsklcrati nf r languagc and tcxt

structurc con cntions

3.1 Normal cases

If functional cqui alcncc is sought during thc proccss of translation,this n1cans

vrittcn to con ey c ntcnts, thcsc c ntcnts should also bc

a If thc SL tcxt is
con c cd in thc TL tcxt
N1odc of translatiI g

Frdns dr on dcct,rdinJ FO r e sensc clnc/m dnin

in ordcr t 1uaiI1-

hat is
conveycd in1Phcitly in thc sL tcxt shoukl bc cxphcated in thc TL and ice ersa
This ncccssity ariscs, on thc nc htll)(l, " n) structural c fcrcnccs in the t vo
tah1thc in ariab ity of thc c ntcnt To this cnd it lnay l,c ncccssary that

ed,and,on thc thcr hand,fron1dircrences in thc collcctivc Prag_

languagcs invol
matics of

thc two language communidcs involvc(1,

Ex,5a

Vo

v()us il

scs or

troduisez Par

troite

ou

tkl

Cn

ous orFdnr c nr

(=exPlicit)

sic' cI,, cn sich durcl,(lic scbmalc(Dffnung(J,or by rubbing against

i

walls

(=impliot)

durch' v ngcn in Gcrman contains thc imagc of rubbing against an

Cd8c
Ex,5b (aftcr Klaus Rtllkcr)A rcP rt by a Frcnch Prcss agcncy about thc
f1

al

sculcn1cnt huit d

Partcmcnts
Pour Poher
Nur ad1t aller fl anz sischcI)Dcpartcments

PrcsidCntial clcctions in Francc

q s vot rcnt en n ajorit

litcral translad
sti 11ntcn

in ihrcr Mehrhcit f rP hcr

cqui alcnt t1 anslation:Nur acht dcF faundcrr franzt 9sischen

DcPartCmcnts sdmmten in ihrcr Mchrheit fttr Pohcr,

b

Ifthc sL tcxtis vrittcn in order t cOnvcy artistic contcnts,tbcn the contents

h1thc TL sh uld bc c nvcycd in an analogously artistic organization Modc oftransladng:rrdIls

dfinJ,id nr: cd ion(not in the nse

Got the u s)

Thc al.slat

idcnti es ith thc artistic and creativc intcntion of thc SL author in order t

lllain-

tain thc artlstic quahty of the tcxt

Ex

(Oltcga y G
Ent1

cvco que es

js rjd rmJ rdd Tr ducoon)

u cd una csPccic de JfFin, bcnccrr c, kim
t

SuPCr iviente de una fauna(lcsaParccida,PucSt

frcntc a otro hombre,dc crecr quc cs cl otr

ticnc raz n,

quc cs usted capaz,

yn ustcd quicn

176

KATHARINA REIss
litcral translatlon: cillc Art lctztcr Abcncerr
ft)r tl

vithout content

c Gcrmall rcader)

cinc Art AusnahmcRdl (abSencc f the ardstic

contcnt trans1adon
c

mP ncnt mctaPh) and lit ary

alltlsion)

functionally cqui alcnt translati n: eine Art lctzter Ritter ohne

Furcht and Tadcl

(0nc elemcnt fthe a isuc orga zation

in Ortcga s essay is thc many vcrbs

and n uns alluding t scafaring, cithcr dircctly or in a

gurativc scnsc,in sPitc of

thc hct that d1c sul,jcct has n tlling to do with seah1 lng This is an indicau n that

hc k aware ofJakob Grimm s qaying,accor ng to which translating rcscml,lcs a

ship luanncd tO sail thc scas,but though it safcly carriCs thc goods,it ruust land at
shorc ith a diffcrcnt soil under a diffcrcnt air, Thc mctaphor is ob ious bccausc
all thc imagcs PrcsCnted by O cga n the su cd of translation dcri c f1 m what

schlciennachcr,Humb 1dt and Goethe ha e s"d about thc ProblCm,Thus,hc must

ha c

known Grimm s IllctaPh0r as wcl1.Hencc,thc translator is satisHcd in cho

sing

as shiRcd cqui alents conccpts fr ln scafaring, vhcrc thcre arc nonc in thc riginal,

if thcsc arc casilY availablc in Gcrman The rcason is that at

thcr ti1ncs,vvhcn in

thc sPanish languagc the ass ciation vvith seafaring is irnPhCd, an cquivalcnt
Gcrman cxPrcssjon is n0t a ailablc drribcIr = cln orl,t,,Cn, instcad of F gJcIr ThiS iS
ne fthc cxamPlcS I mean when1 c rrhg to thc anal gy ofarusuc brm )
c, IF thc SL tcxt is vritten to con ey pcrsuasi ely structurcd contcnts in ordcr to

f beha i r, thcn thc c ntents Convcycd in thc TL must l)e

caPable f triggering ofF analogous imPulSes f beha i r in thc TL rcadcr,

triggcr off imPulSes

Ex,7:

Black is bcautiful

aPpcaring in Enghsh in a German sales Pr m tion could

n t bc rctaincd in thc translation into Enghsh fa
holc salcs
This sl gan

promoting tcxt,if that tcxt is intcndcd f r south African buycrs,

I dc f translating: ddPrirc
of persuasi

rr nsF r1iaJ,

ThC Psychological mechanisms of thc usc

c language should bc adaPtcd t tlac nceds f the nc v languagc

communit
3.2 Since f rrll and functi n of language signs do not sho v a relation of1:1, the

samc SL scquCncc may bc rePrcsentcd in d e TL by any othcr languagc scquencc

dcPcnding in vhich tcxt type and tcxt variety thcy aPPear and vhich functi n thcy
may have to fulnll thcrc,

Ex,8:

El nii lloraba b ef

dJ

deF3durismo

Text varicty: social nc vs;tCxt tyPe:informati

c,

Das Kind wchte ul1tcl dcm% ss

Ex. M cclh

lloraba b od

u4d F bdur^mo,como antes call a al

advertir F sdbor dc` sd` (S nchCz-Sil a,Marcchn

,Pan y

ino)

DE

Tcxt va1 lcty

CIsION MAKING IN TRANsLATION

177

narrativc;tcxt tyPc:cxPrCSSivc(Parallchslns;rhythn

elcmcnts of art tlc organizatlon:rctained in the TL)

M cclho w n unter dem r d r%I!

, e
F

Gescf,m

des s Fzcs gcsch vicgcn

er zu r be

hatte

Ex.10:s u ren mmer

e,blen
a

fol cst qui s y c

Tljs sayin8of Francis I is rncnti ncd in a histor b k
Text varict :scho lbo k;tcxt typc inf rmati c,
FI

ucn Jndern"ch ofr,w

nen

tratlt,ist hon

dtlmm

b Mcntioncd in a drama by Victor Hugo(transl l y Gcorg

Btichner),M rid Tudor.
Tcxt aricty (lrama;tcxt typC:CxPrcssive
Dn

ond

(sC al

'F

hJ dc

Tdf,0n Narr

,wer

r trauen mag

scmantic shiRs,rhymc and rh/hm rCt ncd)

c Itclll in an ad crtisemcnt f rvinc souvcnt fcmme

aric Lcs
ins du Postnlon nc aricntjamais,
Litcrar allusion in c njunction vith

pun lucmory aid and thc

arousal of symPathy in thc conn isscur Thc allusi n sh uld

bc re~Pr grammcd
Text arict :thc ad crtising of products;tcxt type oPerati C
Frdu nf,crzcn sind FrtIJcrjscr,,P

stillon~Wcinc bctrugen nie

3.3 Problematic cases

r tllc tln e ba

c brms fc mmul lcation

arc not Kalized in thcl1

mkcd brms,212),thCn tllc Principlcs of anslathg r

as aids f r a dccisi n

uK rm

thc thrcc bt

in cascs of conHict, In princiPlC, thC modc

thc cntirc tcxt apphes to all tcxt clcmcnts,cven if thcy do not bcl

ltf.

sk Pes r c

f translating for

ng to the same

tyPe as thc don1inant typc

If,f

r instance,clcmcnts of p ctic language are used vhcn contcnt is conveyed

(in rmati c tyPe) thc S callcd l

an structures(Hantsch1972) the Lanslati n

ought to strivc br an analogously PoCtic form

r th sc

clcmcnts H wcvcr,if this

is not PossiblC in thc TL vithout l ss f thc unity of content and artistic f rm,thcn
the rctcntion of c ntcnt is dominant in informati c tcxts and is t

l)c PrCfCrrcd to

thc maintenancc of an artistic form.

Ex, 11: F`un gibt cs eilich

rn

dcrnc N madcn,f r dic ein Caravan nur dcr

zweitscsh nste hn ist(s ddc Fsche z iFui,J,strc icht)

Text iaricty:ncvsPaPCr itCm;text tyPc:infrmativc

Wc ha e hcrc an itcrn rcfcrring to an oPini nP ll am ng :ncrs f camPing places

as rcgards the bcha ior of Gcrman h liday makcrs Thc Strei ichtcr [a ncwSpaper
columnl in the sJddcurscFl

z irun [a nc vsPaPerl

arC RCn distinguishcd by an abun_

dancc f cntertaining Puns and othcr kinds f Play vith language At thc samc tilnc,
h wc cl,the su cct in arhbly a toPical statc of ,and tlac main hndi n
f thc tcxt is thc c 11nunication of contcnt, In translati n Puns and thcr kinds

178

KATHARINA REISs

of play with languagc v l havc t bc ign rcd to a grcat extcnt sO as to kccP thc
content inva1 iant

If,ho
cvCr,artistically structurcd contcnts in a tcxt of dnc cxPrcssivC tyPc havc
to bc convcycd and i during this pr ccss,thC artistic organization llilight be l)arn1ed
by thc rctcntion of thc samc c ntcnt ele1ncnts,thcn thc rulc apPhcs for cxPrcSSivC
tCXts that thc c ntcnts

Ex 12:

may bc changed

une P qucrctte, u
b uton d

htcrally

une Pri1ne
rc, u

un coucou,ou un

or

(samucl BCcket)
.cin Ginscl,`
,cJ,en,odcr cin Hi1nmclssc

dcr cinc sch`Jsse`bJuJ,,e odcr cinc Buttcrb` mc

FtIss

n,

`c
.(in arlancc
of

contcnt)

Ehuar ToPho en

cin Tauscndsch nchen,cinc Pri1ncl,cinc

oSC
schlissclblume,einc Buttc
1

FiL1ally,if,in c n cying contcnts vith a Persuasi c form intcndcd to triggcr off

irnPulsCs f bcha i r, thc unchangcd adoPtin of ClCments of content r(loanCd)

clcmcnts f artistic structurc frolm the sL tcxts docs n

t ha c

an opcrativc cffect,

thesc clc1ucnts may bc rcplaccd by othcr clcmcnts fulslling thc dcsircd functl

n,

Ex 13: Fuchsc fahrcn Firestonc-Phocnix

Foxes usc Firestone_Phocnix(falsiHcati n f

ass ciation,loss f

alhtcration;imP rtant clcn1ents of thc Perative use of languagc)

PrOS Prefer Firestonc-Phoenix(changc of contcnt to retain PositivC
assoCiation and alliterati n)

If opcrativc tcxt clcmcnts aPPCar in di rcnt tcxt tyPcs,then the adapting mcthod
thcsc singlc elen ents as long as this is I)ossiblC vvid out
any h m to0tllcr thc c ntcnt to be convcyed on tl C casc ofthc hhrmathc PC)
or to thc artistic organization as a vhole(in thc casc f thc cxPrCSSivc tcxt)
of translating also aPplies t

4 sPeciaI cases

If thcrc js a(li&rcncc bct vccn thc Original tcxt functio11and thc function of the
translation,thc tcxt tyPology rclc ant to translation as :cll as thc cstabhs11n1cnt of

thc givcn tcxt

ariety are f no signiicancc at all for thc qucstion` 'hat lu dc f
t1

anslating should bc ad PtCd t attai111uncti nal cquivalencc h1that case a9`c

n shottld Kpl c thc tt xt P logy in order to suPPIy itablc c tt,ha for

the m de f translating As has bccn111cntioncd ab ve,in changcs of functi n thc
m ofd1c translaung pr ccss is not a11ymorc thc att nmcnt of a hncti nally TL
gf rdns`dFj

tcXt,but a TL tcxt Possessing a brm which is adcquatc to thc Rrei:n hnction,

Thc critcria arc not to bc dcri cd oln the qucstion
to what cnd and f r wh m
has thc tcxt been

rrCnP/ but fr rn

thc qucsti n tovhat end and fc)r

h m

is thc

tcxt rr nsFdFctJ7

E,g

gra uuar t1 ansIation

~ Aim of thc translation:

vhethcr thc puP is

to exan inc

ith cabulary and grammatical structurcs of thc

acquainted

DE

CIsION MAKING IN TRANsLATION

179

thc tcacher Rcgardless of hich

text tyPc is rcahzcd l)y thc SL tcxt,only ocabulary and gran`mar
arc Considered

forcign languagc; translated R)1

Eg,intcrhncar

crsions

Airn f thc transIati n thc rcpr duction of thc SL tcxt for

rcscarch purPoscs;tranSlated Ior thc studcnt ignorant of thc SL,

Eg,sumInarics fc ntcnt
~Ai1n f
a cc1 tain

the translation;c nuuunication of contcnts rclc ant f r

furthcr usc;translatcd upon sOn cb dy S Ordcr

Note
1

Translator s rcmarks in square l)rackcts

Chapter 15

James s

HoImes

THE NAME AND NATURE OF

TRANSLATION STUDIES1

s F: jtc
takcs place has bccn fairly

:}

r ;I

`cll desncd l)y thC sociologists of sciencc and rcscarch,3

As a nc ProblCm or set of Problems colncs into

t11(:rc is an in

ux f

i st:y% t

rescarchcrs f1

icw in thc wodd f

lcan ing,

ln adjaCcnt arcas,l)ringing with tlacm tlle Para

d ms an(lm dels that hax e Pro Cd l1uithl in tbeir

wn dds Thcsc paradigms

and m dcls arc thcn br ught t bcar on thc nc Problen1,ith onc oft
o rcsults
In sOIuc situations thc problcln provcs an1enablc to cxphcitation,analysis,cxPhca~
tion, and at lcast partial soluti n vithin thc bounds of onc of thc Paradigms or
n1 dcls,and

in that casc it is anncxed as a legitimatc branch of an cstabhshcd

eld

f study In thcr situations thc Paradigms r m dcls fail to ProducC sumcicnt

rcsults, and rcscarchcrs bccon c axx=arc that ne v mcthods are nccdcd t aPProach
thc Pr blcna
In ths sccond tyPc ofsituati n,the rcsultis a tcnsion bet vccn rcscarchcrs invcs~

tigating thc ncvv ProblCm and colleagucs in thcir former elds, and this tension
can gradually lCad t thc cstabhshment f nc v channCls of c mn1unication and thc

dcvcloPment f vhat has been called a ncvv disciPhnary utoPia,that is,a nc v sensc
of a sharcd intercst in a common sct of problcms, apProachcs, and

bjcctivcs()n

v grouping ofrCsCarchcrs As W O Hagstron1has indicated,thesc

t 0stCps,the cstabhshmcnt f col111nunication channels and thc(lc cloPmcnt of a

( sciPlinary ut Dua, m c it Poss lc%r soentis to enu witb thc cmer ng
thC Part of a nc

1972

THE NAME AND N;ATURE OF TRANsLAT10N sTUD1Es

disciPhnc and t

clairll lcgitilnacy for thciI

Point f

sity bodics r gr uPs in thC largcr socicty

vic vvhCn

181
apPcaling to univcr~

1.2
Thoug11t11erc are no doul,ta w sdn lars who would o cct,l)articularly among
thc linguists, it vvould sccn1to mc clcar that in regard to thc colnPlcx of Prob~
lcms clustcrcd round thc Phcn mcnon of translating and translati ns,s thc scc nd
situation n :aPPhcS ARCr ccnturics of incidcntal and dcsult ry attcntion from
a scattcring of authors, Phil
thc l gian

gians, and htcrary scholars, Plus hcre and thcre a

or an k osyncratic linguist, thc sut,Jcct

a markcd and constant incrcasc in interest on thc Part

f translati n11as

c yed

f sch lars in1 cccnt

yCars,

/orld War as a kind f turniL1g Point, As this intercst1 as sohdi~

vith thc Scc nd

ed and cxPandcd,lnorc and11a rc scholars havc n 0 cd int the eld,Particularly
fron1the adjaccnt sclds of linguistics,linguistic PhiloSophy,and litcrary studics,but

flom such secmin y more rcmotc disciPhncs aS in rmation thcory,logic,and

mathematics,cach ofthen1carrying vit11hi1n Paradigms,quasi-paradigms,l l0dels,
and mcthod l gics that hc felt could bc l)rought to bcar n this nc ProblCm
At rst glancc, thc resulting situation today vould aPPear t bc one f:rcat
als

ith no c nscnsus regarding thc tyPcs of1n dcls t bc tcstCd,thc kinds

f rneth ds t bc apphed,the arictics of tcrluinology t be uscd M rc than that,
confusi n,

thcrc is n t cvcn likcn1indcdncss about thc contours of thc Hckl,thc Pr

blCn1sct,

the discil)hnc as such Indccd,scholars arc not so much as agreed on tbc

ery namc

r thc11c Ckl
NcvcI hclcss, bencath thc suPcrhcial lcvcl, therc arc a11umbcr of indications

that f r

thc6ck) f rescarch focusing on tbc problcms f translating and translations

Hagstro1 s disciPhnary utopia is taking shapC,If this is a salutary(lcvcloPmcnt(and

1

I behe c that it is),it bll wS that it is w

h our whilc t h hcr the dc

Pmcnt

cl

by c nsciously turning our attention to n attcrs that arc scrvin8to in1pcdc it

1.3

Onc of thcse imPcdirncnts is the lack f aPPr Priatc channels of co nmunicati n

For sch la1 s and rescarchcrs in thc cld,thc channcls that do cxist still tcnd t run
via thc ldcr disciPhncS( ith their attcndant norms in rcgard t m dels,n cthods,

and telmlllologD,S that Pap s on thc su cct f tlanslaton arc dispcr d o cr

idc aricty ofscholarly ckls and j urnals for practising translators

r
ther c n1mul`ication channcls, cutting acr ss
disci )lines t rcach a sch lars vorking in thc6cld,fr n
hatc cr

periodicals in a

lt is clcar that thcrc is a nccd F

thc traditi nal

background

2.1
But I should likc t

f cus ur attention on t vo othcr imPcdi1ncnts to thc dcvclop

mcnt of a disciPhnary utopia The nrst f thcsc,thC lesscr fthc t vo in imPortancc,

182 JAMEs s HOLM Es

is thc sccmingly tri ial mtcr fthc

namc r

this ncld

f rcsca1 ch

It would n

at this c

nkrence, r

ne

be vise to continue rcferring to the disciPhne by its subjcct Inatter as has been d

the 1aP,as the Gcncral scmanticists c nstandy rcmind us,

distinguish thc t / can only furtllcr c nfusi n

is not thc tcrritory,and failurc t

ritings dcahng` ith trans~

Through thc ycars,di erse tern1s ha c bccn uscd in

ns, and ne can nd rcfcrcnccs in Enghsh to thc art r

the craft of translation, but alsO t

thc PrinciPlcs of translati n, t11e funda~

mcntals or the philosoPhy si1nilar terms recur in French and Gcrman,In s luc
cascs thc choicc of term renects the attitude, P int f aPPr ach, r backgr und
ritcr; in othcrs it has becn dctcrn incd by thc fashi 11 f tl c n 1ucnt in
of thc
lating and translati

sch larly tcrminology

Thcrc have been a kw attcmPts t crcatc morc lcarnc(l tcnus,most ofthcm

vith thc highly acti c disciPhnary sufHx -ology Rogcr G f6n, R)r instancc, has

suggcstcd thc dcsignation translatology in Enghsh,and eithcr its cognatc or FrcIcfLIc~

r

F ic

l gy su x dcH cs

in FKnch6But since the

iom GKck,puhsts mjcct a

hCn thc Other elemcntis not e

contan1ination of this kind,all thc ln rc so

en from

nsFt,rio or Renaissancc Frcnch

,ay out, for n1ctaPhorol gy

Classical Latin, but from Latc Latin in t11c casc of Fr

in that of rr ducrjon Yet Greck alonc offers n

vould hardly bC of aid to us in makng our

rnCtaphrascolo8y ,or rnctaPhrastics

othcr

grouPs in thc largcr

7 such ther terms as anslatistics or
hich ha c
transhstics , l)Oth f
bcen suggcsted, v ukl bc morc rcadily undcrst d,but hardly morc accePtable
subjcct clcar c cn to university bodics, let alonc t
socict

t1

2.2.1
Tvo

further,lcss classically constructcd tern s have comc to thc fore in rcccnt ycars

One fthesc
f

began its hfc in a longer for

1,

thc thcOry f translating or thc thc ry

tramslation (and its corrcsPonding forms: Theoric(lcs1Jbcrsetzcns

th orie

dc

In English(and in Gcrman)it has ncc gonc the way f1any such

terms,and is n
v usually comPrcssed int translation thcory ((berscrzunJsfJ cor c)
la tra(lucti n )

It has bccn a Pr ducti C dcsignation, and can bc c cn morc so in futurc,but only

if it is rcstrictc(l to its ProPCr rnCaning For,as I hoPc to luake clear in the c

ursc

of this PaPcr, tbcrc is much valuablc study and rcscarch bcing done in thc disci~
Plinc,and a ncc(l for much m rc t bc d nc,that does n t,strictly spcakIng,fall

ithin

thc sc

Pc f

thc ry f rmation

2.2.2
Thc scc nd tcrm is onc that has,t

allintents and Purp SCs, V0n the cld in Gcrman

a dcs1gnati for tk elldrc s0/ nc:Ths is the rm l/llcrscr7un sTl

IssCnsC

corlstruCted ttD brm a Parallcl t sP ch sscn h , FerdFur

,arld many
"sscnsch
tl sscnsch n hF1 ench,thc mPtarablc dcs na n, scicnce dc la aclLlc~

gaincd ground,as havc Parallel terms in various othcr languagcs.

in Enghsh as Eugcnc Nida

vho in 1964 dnosc to cnddc his thcorcdcal handbook owclrds sCjcncc

tion ,has als

Onc ofthe F1rst to use a Parallcl~sounding tcrn

THE NAME AND N.

TURE OF TRANsLATION STUDIEs

183

rdnsfdrin 9It sh uld bc n tcd, th ugh, that Nida di(l not intcnd thc Phrasc as a
namc f r thc cntirc Hckl of study, but only for

ne asPect of the Proccss of trans_

lating as such10 0thcrs, most of them n t nati c spcakcrs f Enghsh, ha c bccn

m Kb ld,ad c hg thc tcrm`0encc of translati n (or ranslation icncc )
thC aPPr Priate dcsignation for this emcrging(hsciPhnc as a vh lc l
o ycars ago
this rccurrent suggestion vvas f ll
vcd t)yS lncthing likc can nization of thc tcrm

hcn Bausch,Klcgraf,and V ss to k thc dccision t make it thc rnain titlc t thch

analytical bil)liograPhy f thC cntirc6cl(l ll

k was a dcosic,n that I, r one,rcg t It is ntlt tl, I ed to tl e rm rJbc

tht re arc w ifally
aW ar mcn nst tla dc gmtion

scFzunJs sscn hfI

:, r

brthc su cct h Gcrman The Pr bkm is notthatthc sciPhne is l clt a

ssensch
not l 1ss nscJ, m can ProPer bC called s0cnccs Ju n ne today
wcluld t c iss th tk rms sP ch ssensc l al d rcrdr ss nsch ,WhlC

btlt tl at

morc than a fc v v0uld qucstion vhether linguistics has yet rcachcd a stagc of Prcci

sion,formahzati n,and paradign formation such that it can ProPCrly bC dcscribed

as a scicncc, and
vh c Practically cveryone vould agrcc that literary studics arc
not, and in thc f rcsccablc ftlturc vill n t bc, a scicncc in any true sensc of thc
English wor(l,in thc samc way I qucstion whether wc can with any justi
cau n usc
a designation f r the study f translating and translati ns that places it in thc
c n1I)any

of rnathematics,physics,and chcn1istry,or cvcn biology,rather than that

fs ci logy,history,and PhiloS phy or for that rnatter of litcrar studies

2.3
Thcrc is,ho vc cr,anothcr tcrm thatis acti c in Enghsh in thc naming of ne v disci~
PhnCs

ThiS is thc

distincti

rd

studics

, Indccd, f r disciPhncs that vcithin thc ld

n of the univcrsitics tcnd to fall undcr thc humanitics or arts rathcr than

thc scicnccs as nclds f lcarning, thc vcord

vould sccm t bc al1nOst as actiVe in

E h aS thC wOI cl 1ssensc dfrin Gcrman Oncl ccd ody thlik cll R n sttl cs,
Arnerican studics, Com1n nvealth studics, PoPulation studies, con11nunication
studies Truc,thc w rd ralses a w ncw comPlications,among them thc hct that
it is(limct lt ttl dc0vc an a ec ti
d rm Ncverthclcss,tllc dcs nat0n\ranslatlon

0uld sccn1to bc thc n st aPProPriatC of all th se ava ablc in Enghsh,

and its ad ption as thc standard tern1for thc(lisciphne as a vcholc r uld rcm vc a
studics

fair am unt of confusion and n1isundcrstanding I shall set thc cxan

PlC by111aki11g

usc f it in thc rcst f this Papcr A greatcr irnPcdhncnt than thc lack f a gcncrally acccPtCd name in thc ay f thC de eloPmcnt of transIati n studies is thc lack
f any gcncral consensus as to thc scopc and structurc ofthc disciPhnc,what c nstitutes thc6cld o translation studicsP A ft

ww tlld

Say it coincidcs with c

mParati :C

(or contrasti e)tCrn1inological and lexic graPhical studics; sc cral lo k uPon it as

vith comParativc or contrastivc hnguistics; many

practically idcntical
considcr it lar:cly syn

nym us vith

:ould

translati n thc ry, But surcly it is different,if

not al ays distinct,fr

m the rst t
of thcsc,and1nore than thc third,As is usuall
to bc found in thc casc of cmcrgimg disciphnes,thcrc has as yct becn littlc meta_
reflection on thc naturc of translati

n studics as such_ at lcast that has madc its

vay into Print and to my attcntion, Onc of thc fc

/cascs that I have found is that

184 JAMEs s HOLM Es

of

crncr Kollcr,wh

setzungswisscnscha

has gi cn the fc,llowing ddincation of the su

ist zu vc

tc

ubcl

bs : r

hcn als ZusammcnI

Forschungsbem hungcn,dic v n dcn Phinomcncn

ect
i1

alle

:ssun8ullcl ubc1
tH)crsctzcn und ubcrsctzung

ausgehcn dcr auf dicsc PhJnomcne zielen (Translation studies is t bc undcrst d

as a col|ccti c and h1clusive designation for all rcsearch acti itics taki11g thc
Phcnomcna of translating and translation as their basis or focus,12)

3.1

vould

vs that translation studies is,as no onc Isupposc

Such(lisciphnes,it has often bccn PointCd ut,ha c

tw m or ccuvcs,which Carl G HemPel ht s Phrased to dcs lbc particular

PhCnomcna in thc v rld of our cxPcrience and to estabhsh gcncral PrinciPlCS by
1;As a ickl of purc rcscarch
mcans of vhich thcy can bc cxPlained and Predictcd
Fr nn this dehneation it foll

dcny,an cmPirical disciPhnc

~that is t say,rcscarch l)ursued f r its o vn sakc,quitc apart fron

any dircct Prac-

tical aPPhcati n outsidc its 0 vn tcrrain ~ translati n studics thus has t vo

main

bjccti cs: (1)t dCscribe the Phem mcna oft1 anslati11g and translation(s)as thcy
rld of our cxpcricnce, and(2)t
tnanifcst thcn1sclvcs in the ls

cstabhsh gcncral
,hich
these
PhcnomCna
can
bc
exPlaincd
and
PrcdictCd.Thc
princiPlcs by mcans of
t
l)ranchcs of Pure translati n studics conccrning themselvcs vith thcse objectives can be dcsi8nated dcscrjPFjyc rrdns`

(TD)and rhco,cricd`rrd ns

rio

Fi n

sF1Idics (I)TS) or rrdns`drion descri`F on

sruJics(ThTs)or rr

ns`dr on r

corl'(TTh)

3.1.1
e r ns~
Of these t o,it is PerhaPs aPPr PriatC to gi c rst considcration to d scriPr

n sFudics,as the branch of thc disciPhnc`vhich constantly maintains the closest

ith thc cmpirical Phcnomcna undcr study Thcrc

contact
`dFi

m0j r

vould scclla to bc thrcc

klnds of research in DTs,which may bc disdnguishc(l by thcir focus as

product_oricnted, functi n-oricntcd, and Pr cess-orientcd

3.1.1.1
Producr~orjcnFcd D s,that arca f rcscarch vhich dcscribcs existing translations,has

traditionally bccn an irnPortant arca of acadc

)ic rcscarch in translation studics

Thc starting Poi1 t for this tyPe of study is thc(1csc1 iPti n of indi idual translations,

or text-focuscd translati n(lcscriPti n A sccond Phase is that ofcon1Parati c translation dcscriPti n, in vhich

comParativc analyses arc madc of arious translati ns

arious languagcs Such indi idual
ns
Pr

ide
thc
matcrials
f r sur cys of largcr corPuses
and c n ParativC descriPti
of thc sa 1c tcXt,cithcr in a singlc languagc or in

of translations,for instancc thosc n1ade vitbin a sPeci c Peri d,languagc,and/or

tcXt or disCourse tyPc.II)Practicc the corPus has usually been restricted in all thrcc

r mcdic al Enghsh

vays SCvCntCCnd _century hterary translations into Frcnch,

Biblc translations But such dcscriptivc Sur cys can als bc largcr in scoPe,

THE NAME AND NxATURE OF TRANSLATION sTUDIEs

diachrnic asvcll as(aPPr
Pr duct^

xirnatcly)Synchronic,and onc f

ricntcd DTs

`ight Possibly bC a gcncral hist

ambiti us such a goal lllay s und at this tirnc

185
thc c cntual g als of

ry of translation~ho vever

3.1.1.2
FuncFion- rie,,red D s is not intcrcstcd in thc dcscription
scl cs,

but in thc dcscriPti

n f

f translati ns in dlc

thcir functi n in the reciPicnt S ci -cultural

situation:it is a studv of contcxts rather than texts.Pursuing such qucsti

ns as vhich

tcXts Wcrc(and,oRen as imP ltant,were not)translatcd at a ccl taln timc in a

ccrtain placc,and vhat in uenccs vcrc cXcrtcd in consequcncc,this area fresearch
is one that has attracted less c nccntratcd attcnti n than the area just n entioned,

though it is ften intr duccd as a kind of a sub_thcme r countcr-thcmc in hist

ries of translati ns and in litcrar hist

rics Grcater cmPhasis n it could lcad t thc

dcvcl Pn cnt of a cld of translation s ciology for ( r~_lcss fchcitous but m re

accuratc,sincc it is a lcgitin

atc area of translation studics as vcll as fs ci logy_

socio-translati n studics),

3.1.1.3
Proc ss-oricnred D

sc nccrns itsclf vith thc proccss0r aCt of translati

httlc black box

Pr blClal of vhat cxactly takcs PlacC in thc
as hc crcatcs a nc v,more or lcss rnatching tcxt in an

subjcct

fthe

n itsclf, Thc

translat

s n1ind

ther languagc has bccn thc

f much cctllati n nd c Part ft1anslaton s tlac ribts,l)ut

tllcrc has

bccn ery littlc attcmpt at systcmatic in estigation of this ProcCSs undcr lab rat ry
vhiCh, if
mplcx onc, nc
c nditi ns. Adn1ittedly, thc proccss is an unusually c

bably bc thc m st complcx tyPc of c cnt

I, A, Richards is corrcct,

rnay vcry Pr
14But psychologists havc dcvcl
duced
in
thc
c
olution
of thc c smos,
yet Pr
Pcd
and aI c devcl
Ping l ghly soPhisticated mcthods f r analysing and dcscribing othcr
c mPlCx

vill

mcntal Proccsses, and itis to bc h Pcd that in futurc this Pr blc t 0,

bc gi cn closcr attention,lcading to an area of study that rnight be called trans~

lation psychology or Psycho-translation studics,

3.1.2
The other main branch f Pure translati n studics,
fleorer1cd`rr ns` Fion

rdns`dr on
lati

rJlcor

srtJJI s

or

,is,as its namc imPhCS,n t intcrcstcd in dCscribing existing trans-

ns, obscrvcd translati n ftlncti ns, or cxPcrilllCnta y dctcrrllincd translating

n studics,in combination

vith the inf rmation availablc fron1rclatcd nelds and disciPhnCs, to cvolvc princiPlCs,theorics,and rn dcls vhich vv l scr c to cxPlain and prcdict hat translating
proccsses,but in using thc rcsults of dcscriPtivC translati

and translati ns arc and vill bc,

186

JAMEs s HOLM ES

3.1.2.1
Thc ultin1atc goal of the translati n thc rist in thc broad scnsc must undoubtcdly

bc to dcvcloP a full,inclusive theory acco un dati11g so many cIcn1cnts that it can

scrvc to cxPlain and Predict all Pbcnon1cna falling`vid1in thc tcr1 ain of translating
and translation,to the exclusi n of all phcn mcna falling outsidc it,It hardly needs
t

bc P i11tcd ut that a cnerd

FrcJns`

ri

,n r, orJ

in such a truc scnsc ofthc tcrm,if

indccd it is achicvablc,

v l ncccssarily bc highly fk)1 n1ahzcd and, 11

c cr thc
scholar n1ay strivc aRcr ccon my,also highly con1PlCx

Most f thc thcOrics that havc bccn Pr duccd t

than Pr lcgomcna to suCh a gcncral translati

date arc in rcahty littlc In rc

n thcOry.A good sharc fthcm,in fact,

arc not actuaHy thcorics at all,in any scholarly sense of thc ter but an array of
axioms,Postulatcs,and hyPothcses that arc so formulatcd as t
be both t inclusi e
also n n~translatory acts and n n~translati ns)and t o CxClusi c(shuttin:

(c vering

out son1c translat ry acts and some vorks gcncrally rec gnized as translau ns)

3.1.2.2

Othc1 s,th ugh

thcy too may bear thc designation of gcncral translati n thcorics

( CquCntly Preccdcd by thc sch lar sI)r tccti cly cautious tovards ), arc in fact
not gcncral thcOrics,but Partial or sPeciHc in thcir scoPc,(lCahng
ith only onc or
a fe :of
Partia

thc arious asPCcts of translati 11thcory as a vholc, It js in this arca of

thc ries that thc1)

st

signi

cant advances ha c l)ccn made in l~ccent ycars,

ill Probably bc ncccssary for a grcat dcal

and in fact it
c nducted

f furthcr rcscarch t bc

in then1bcf rcvc can c cn bcgin t think ab ut arriving at a true gcncral

thc ry in thc sensc I have just outlincd PdrF

F rdnsdFion Frlc rics arc sPeci

Cd in a

nun11)cr of vays I vould suggcst, though,that thcy can l)e grouPcd togcthCr into
s

x n1aln kinds

3.1.2.2.1
First of all, thcrc are translati n theorics that I havc callcd,
ith a s mcvhat
un rd od x cxtensio11of thc tcrn

, 22 Jiun rcsFhcFcJ rrdns`dFj nF/lcr,ric ,aCCOrding to

thc Incdiunn that is used
ediun)-rcstrictcd the ries can l)c furthcr subdivided into
tl c
csf translation p rmc(lb)humans(human tlanslad n),as P brmcd

by c ml)uterS(machne anslati n),and

as Per%rmcd by the two in c uncti n

(n1ixCd or luachine~aided translatl n) Human translation brcaks (l

n into (and

rcstI^ictcd thcorics r the ries 11ave l)een dcvel

Pcd for) raI translati n or intcrPreting ( vith thc fu1 thcr distinction l)ct /ccn consecutivc and sin1ultanc us) and

rittcn

translati

n Numcrous cxamplcs of aluablc

rcscarch int machinc and

machinc~aidcd translation arc no d ubt fan1iliar to us all, and PerhaPs a

into oral human translation

scvcral

hat cxarnl)lCs ofmcdjun rcstrictcd thcOrics oF rittcn

translation d not con1e to n1ind so cas y is largcly o`ving to d1c fact that thci1
auth rs

theories,

have the tcndcncy to Prcscnt then1 in thc guisc of unmarkcd

r gcncral

THE NAME AND N

ATURE OF TRANsLATION sTUDIEs

187

3.1.2.2.2
Sccond, thcrc arc thcorics that arc arca-restrictcd Hrc ~rcsrr cretl FJ,corics Can be
vhiCh is
ft vo cl sely rclated kinds; rcstrictCd as to d c languagcs in ol cd or,
usua1ly not quitc thc samc,and occasi nally hardly at all,as to thc culturcs in ol cd
In both cascs, lan8uagc 1 cstriCtion and culturc rcstriction, thc dcgrce
f actual
lin1itation can varv Thc rics are feasible for translation bct vccn, say, Frcnch and

Gcrman(languagC-P r rCStHctcd thc rics)as oPP sCd

to translatlon lllthin Sla

ic

languagcs (languagc-group rcstrictcd the ries) or

m R mancc languages t
Gcrmanic languagcs (languagc-gr uP Pair rcstrictcd thcories) si1nilarly, the rics
n1ight at least hyPothetically bc de cloPcd for translation vithin S :iss culturc(oncculturc rcstrictcd),or f r translati n bctvveen S viss and Bclgian culturcs(cultural~

ithin vvcstcrn EuroPc (cultural_gTouP

PPosed to translation
Pair rCStrictcd), as
rcstrictcd)
r bct veen lan8uagcs rcflccting a prc~tcchnol gical culture and thc
/CstCrn Culture (cultural-group pair rcstrictcd).

languages
f contcmP rary
Languagc-rcstrictcd thc rics havc cl sc af nitiesvith the
ork l)cing donc in comPcarc

ti

guagc

s be rcmcmbcrcd that a lan~

n grammar muqt bc a dlerentthing om a contl tl1 e8Fammar

C linguisdcs and styhstics(though it must alwa

P r translau

dc clopcd

for thc purPosc oflanguagc acquisition) In thC

cld f culturc_rcstricted

[1mlturc Ksmcti ns, bchg

ssith languagc rcstrictions, somctirnes gct introduced int language_

rcstrictcd thcOrics,
hcrc they are ut of placc in all but thosc rarc cascs vhcrc
tllcohcs thcrc h l,ccn l dc dct"lcd Ksearch,thclt

c nfuscd

culturc and languagc boundaries c incidc in both thc s urcc and target situations It
is morco er no doubt true that somc aspccts of d

eorics that arc prcscntcd as gcncral

in rcality Pcrtain only to thc Wcstcrn cultural area

3.1.2.2.3
vith
Third, there arc r n -rcsrrjcred rf,eorics, that is tO sav, thcorics that deal
disc urscs

or tcxts as vholcs, but c nccrn thcmscl csvith lo vcr linguistic ranks

or levels Traditi nally,a great deal friting on translation vvas cOnccrncd ahn

st

cntirely vith the rank of thcvord,and the ord and thc ord grouP arc still thc

ranks atvhich much tern i11ologically oricntcd thinking about scicnti

c and tcch~

nological translati n takcs Placc A/1ost linguistically oricntcd rcscarch,on thc thcr

hand, 11as unt

vcry rccently takcn thc scntcncc as its uPPcr rank liIllit, largcly

ignoring thc n acro_structural asPccts f cntirc tcxts as translation Pr

clcarl disccrnil)lc trcnd a va

s olll

SCntCntial linguistics in thc dirccti

blCms The
n of tcxtual

hnguistics Iill,itis to bc h pcd,cncouragc lin uistical1y oricntcdhcorists to1no c

bc
nd scntcncc~rcstrictcd translation thcOries to the m rc cornPlex task f devcl~

oping text_rank(or rank-frce )the ries

3.1.2.2.4
F urdl,there

arc rexr F e(or discoursc tyPc)rcs

ric

ed rJlcOI1es,dcaling with thc

Problcm of translating spcci c tyPCS Or gcnrcs of lingual n1cssagcs, Authors and

188

JAMEs s HOLM ES

1tcrary sch lars ha c l ng conccrncd thcmscl cs

vith thc Pr blclus intrinsic t
translating litcrary texts or specinc gcnres f litcrary tcxts; thC0l gians, sirnila1 ly,
ha c dev ted

much attention to questions f hovv t translate thc Biblc and od1cr

sacrcd orks In rcccnt ycars somc cff rt has bcen rnadc to(lc cl
P a sPcci c thc ry
for the translation f scienti c tcxts Allthcse studies brcak do n,h :c er,bccausc

rmalthc ry of mcssagc,tcxt,c)r disCoursc tyPcs Both

likc a f
of t)Pcs fc lllllluniCation, as furthcr dc clopcd by the Pra ue

Xl C still lack anythiI1

Buhlcr s thc ry

structurahsts,and thc de nitions oflanguagc varictics arri cd at by linguists particula11y of thc British school Pro

ide material for criteria in dc

ning tcxt types that

v uld lcnd thcmsclvcs t

Pcrati nahzati n1nore aPtly than the inconsistcnt and
n1utually contradictory(lcnniti

ns r traditi nal genre thcories. ()n thc Othcr hand,

thc tra(litional thc rics cannot be i8n rcd,f r they continuc t

creating the exPectation criteria of translati

n readers. Als

Play a largc Part in

requirin study is thc

iluPortant qucstion of text~tyPe ske ing or shifting in translati n

3.1.2.2.5
FiRh,there arc r1fllc-rCsFIicrCd hCohes,
hich hll into t 0tyPcs thCOries regardin:
thc translation f contcmporary texts, and thc ries ha ing t (lo vith thc transla-

tion f tcxts fr 1Il an oldcr Period, Again therc

v uld

sccn1t bc a tcndcncy to

prcscnt onc ofthc thc ries,that ha ing to do vith contcn11)orary tcxts,in thc uise
of a gcncral thcOry;the othcr,thc thc ry of vhat can pcrhaPs bcst bc callcd cr ss~
ten

ral translatior1, is a :

attcr that has lcd t much disagrecn1cnt, Particularly

among litcrar y orientcd theorists,but t

fc f

gcncrally ahd c nclusions

3.1.2.2.6
Fh1ally,thcrc arc Pr
rCsFricred
c
l

onc

cs,thcOrics vvhich coninc thcmsclvcs t

rl,c
'

or rnorc sPcciHc Pr blcms ithi11thc cntirc area of general translati

nt11eor),Prob~
lcms that can rangc
ion1such broad and l)asic qucstions as the lhnits
f
aliancc
and in ariancc in translation or thc naturc of translati n cquivalcncc(or,as I should
prcfcr to call it,translation n1atching)to such m rc sPcciHc mattcrs as thc translation of ryletaPh rs r f ProPcr namcs

3.1.2.3
It should bc n tcd that thc ries can cqucntly bc rcstrictcd in1norc than

ncvay

Contrasti c linguists intcrcstcd in translation, f r instance,

vill Probably Pr

ducc

thcOrics that arc not only languagc-rcst1 ictcd but rank~and ti nc-rcstrictcd,ha

i11g

to do vith translati ns bct vccn sPeci c PairS of c ntclnPorary temPoral chalccts at

11c
sentencc rank,

the rics f litcrary sc11olars, si111ilarly, usually arc1 estrictcd as

to rncdiun and tcxt tyPe,and gcncrally also as t

t

culturc grouP;thCy normally havc

do vid1vrittcn tcxts vithin thc(cxtCndcd)Westcrn litcrary tradition This does

not ncccssarily reducc the v rth f such Partial the ries,for cvcn a thcOrctical tudy

THE NAME AND NATURE OF TRANsLATION sTUDIEs

189

va ~sa a thcor of thc manncr in vhich sub rdinatc clauscs

vritten Enghsh can

in contcmporary GCrman no cls should bc translatcd int
ha c imPhcations for thc m rc cncral thcory to vards vhich sch lars must surcly

vork It v uld bevisc, though, not to losc sight of such a truly8cncral thcory,

rcstrictcd in c cr

and viscr still not to suCCun 1)to thc dclusion that a b

of restrictcd the

ries~

for instancc,a comPlex flanguage-rcstrictcd thcOrics fhov to translatc scntcnccs

~can bc an adequatc substitutc for it,

3.2
ARcr this rapklcr icw of the t vo uain branches f Purc1 escarch in translatiom
studies, I should likc t turn to that branch f thc disciPhnC vhich is, in Bacon s

rds, f usc rathcr than f hght

` aPphcd translation studics,15
3.2.1
In this disciPhnc,as in so luany othCrs,thc nrst thing that comcs to n1ind vhcn nc
consi(lcrs t11c apPhcations that cxtcnd bcyond thc lilnits of thc disciphnc itsclf is
that f tcaching Actually,tbc tcaching of translating is of t

vo tyPCs vhich nccd t

bc carcfully chstinguishcd, In the ne case, translating has bccn uscd f r centuries

as a techniquc in f rcign-language teaching and a tcst f forci8n languagc acquisi~

tion I shall rcturn to this tyPe in a Inomcnt In thc sccond Casc, am re reccnt
PhCn men n,translating is taught in sch ls and c urscs to train Professi nal transf rrdnsFdFo' rrdininf, has raised a numbcr of
lat rs This scc nd situati n, that
qucsti n that fairly c1 yf r ans vcrs quCstions that ha c
n eth

ds,tcsting tcchniqueS,and curriculun

do Pri1narny vvith tcaching

Planning It is ob

us that thc scarch

rwd bundcd,rdhble answ s to these qucsdons con ittltes a m or tarca(and

r tllc time bong,ade t,rh m or arCa) f sCarch in aPPlied tlanslati n ttclics.

3.2.2
A sccond, closcly rclatcd arca has t d :ith thc nccds f r translati n aids, l)oth
lor usc in translator training and to mcct thc rcquircmCnts of thc PractiSin8trans~
lat

r, The nceds are lnany and ari us, but fall largcly into t vo Classcs: (1)

lcxico8raPhical and tcrn1inological aids and(2)gra 11nars,Both thcsc classcs of ai(ls

havc traditionally bccn pro idcd by sch lars in thcr,rclatcd disciPhncs,and it c

uld

hardly bc argucd that vork on thcrll sh uld be takcn cr in roFO as arcas of aPPhcd
translation studics But lcxic 8raPhical aids often fall far sh rt f translati n needs,
and comtrasti e gran11nars clcveloped for languagc-acquiSition purPoscs are not rcally

an adequate Substitutc for varicty 1narkcd translati n-n1atching gra 1rnars, 1^hcrc
would scem to be a need hr schc,lars lt

appllt

d translation s

lclks t ,clao

and

dcHne the sPCci c requircments that aids f thcsc kinds sh uld fulhl if thcy arC t
meet thc nccds of Practisi11g and PrOsPective translat

rs,and to vork together vith

lcxicol gists and contrasti c li11guists in(lcvcl Ping thcn

190 JAMEs s HOLMES

3.2.3
A third arca f aPPlicd translation studics is that of Fr

ns/c,rj

n`o`icy.Tl1c task fthc

translation sch lar in this area is to rendcr inf rmcd ad icc to othcrsin dc ning thc
place and l^ole of translators, translating, and translations in s

cicty at largc

such

qucstions,lor instance,as detcrn1ining vhat vorks nccd t bc translatcd in a givc11

.hat thc s cial and ccon n1ic P siti n f the translator is

and should bc,or(and hcrc I return to thc P int raiscd ab ve) hat Part translating
socio-cultural situation,

should Play in t11e teaching and learning of foreign languagcs In regard to that last
Pohcy question,since it sh uld hardly be the task f translati n studics t abct thc
usc of translat1ng in places vvherc it is dysfunctional, it v uld seeln t mc tl at
Priority should bc8i cn to cxtensi e and rigorous rcscarch to asscss the efscacy of
translating as a techniquc and tcsting lncthod in languagc lcarning

11c chancc that

it is not cfncaci us
ould aPPcar to bC S grcat tbat in d)is casc it
ilnPcrativc for Pro8ran

oukl sccm

Csearch to be Prcccdcd by Pohc) rescarch

3.2.4
Af urt11,quitc diffcrcnt arca of aPPhcd translation studics is that of rr
icism ThC lC cl of such criticisn

is today still frcqucntly vcry lo

nsFdrion cr1F-

v, and in many

vid1in thc scld of translation

cloPments
studics D ubtlcss the activitics of translati n intcrPrctation and cvaluation 1ll
al vays elude thc grasp of objccti c analysis to somc cxtcnt, and so continuc to
countrics still quitc unin uenced by (lC

rcHcct thc intuitivc, in PreSsi nist attitudcs and stanccs of the critic But closcr
contact bet veen translati n sch lars and translation critics could d a great dcal t

reduce the intuitive elcment to a morc acccPtablC le

cl

3.3.1
ARcr this bricf survey of thc n ain branches f translati n studics, thcrc arc t vo
furthcr poi 1ts that I sh uld likc to makc The Hrst is this: in vvhat1

dcscriPtivC,thC rctical,and aPPhcd transIati n studics ha

as Prccedcd,

csCnted as thrce
fairly disti11ct branchcs f thc cntirc disciPhnc,and t11c Ordcr of PrCSCntation n1ight
be taken t sug8est dat their imP

rt f rnc

c bccn l)1

anothcr is unidircctional,translation

n suPplying thc basic data upon vhich translati n the ry is to bc built,

and thc t
of theln Pr vi(hng thc schola1 ly ndings l)ich arc to bc Put t usc in

descriPti

aPPhCd translati n studics In rcahty, of c ursc, thc rclati n is a ("aIcctical onc,

rJ

:gtWT i

T: ;:ki:
instance, cannot do ith ut thc s hd,sPeciHc data yicldcd by rcsearch in descriPtivc and aPPhCd translation studics, vhile n thc Other11and ne cannot cvcn bcgin

Ti1al;
`

toVork in one ofthc othcr t vo iClds vithout havin:at lcast an intuitive the

rct-

ical hypod1csis as one s starting Point ln icxsr f this (lialcctical rclati nship, it
f ll

vs that, though thc nccds of a givcn momcnt1nay

ary, attCntion to a three

branchcs is required if the disciPhnc is to gro :and flourish

THE NAME AND NATURE OF TRANSLATION STUDIEs

191

3.3.2
Thc sccond point is that,in cach of the thrcc branchcs of translati n studics,thcrc
er chmcnsi ns that I havc 11 t mcntioncd, di1ncnsions haing to do

vith thc study, not of translating and translati ns, but of translation studics itself,
arc t vo 111rd

Onc ft11csc dhncnsions is 1istorica thcre is a Held f thc historv f translation

thcory, in hich s 111c` aluablc v rk11as l)ccn d 11c, l)ut als nc of d1c hist ry of
translation(lcscription and f apPhcd translau n studies(largCly a history of trans~
irgin tcrrit ry,
1ight bc callcd thc mcth dological or meta-

lation tcaching and translat r training)both of vluch are fairly vell

Likcvisc therc is a di1nension that

thcOrctical, conccrning itsclf vith Pr blCn1s fvhat lnethods and modc s can best

ics,
arious branchcs ft11e disciPhnC(h
translation thc

r instancc,can bc forn1cd br greatest ahdity, r hat analytic lncthods can bcst

bc uscd in rcscarch in thc

be uscd t achevc tlac most objcctive an(l mealllng l dcscr tivc rCstllts),t)ut also
dcvoting its attcntion to such basic issucs as

vhat thc(hsciPhnC itsClf comPrises

Tbis PaPer haS madc a fe excursions into thc rst f thcse t v (hn)cnsions,
but all in all it is llaeant to bc a contril)ution to the scc nd It docs n t ask ab vc
all for agrccn1cnt Translati n studics has rcachcd a stagc hcrc itis tiluc to cxan1inc
thc subjcct itsclf Lct thc mcta~discussion l,cgin

Notes
Vritten in August1972,this Papcr is PrcsCntcd in its second Pre^Pub cation

re isions DcsPitC the intcrvcning ycars,m st

f aly rcmarks can,I bchcve, stand as thcy vcre formulated,th ugh in onc
or t ol)laCcs I vould Phrase mattcrs somc vhat dif crcntly if I wcrc vriting
t day In scction 3 1 2 24,for instancC,subsequcnt dcvcl
pmcnts in tcxtual
hnguistics,PaI ticularly in Gern1any,arc n te ord1y More dircctly relc ant,

brm with nly a kw ylistic

the dcarth f rneta~rcHecti n on the naturc of translati n studics,rcfcrred to

at thc bcginning of sccti n 3, is somcvhat lcss striking today than in 1972,

again thanks largcly to Gcrman scholars Pardcularly 1 clcvant is Wol am

Wilss s as yct unPubhShcd paPcr Met11odischc Problen1e(lcr allgcmeh1cn und

angc
andtcn LIl)crsctzungsll:issenschaft

st11dics hcld in Gcrmershcim, cst

Gcmany,31May1975
`rcad at a colloquiutn

on translati

Cukural Gr
th in sCicncc , in Barry Ban ess (ed,),

socio`
s cn scFec ed Rc cJ1 s(H mon(lsw tll,M dl cx:Pcngon;

Modcrn s 0t,logy Rcachngs),PP 126^141 (abHdgcd rcprlllt of somc

Michacl A/1ulkay,
,

o/

A
cctS f cultural Gr0 vth in d c Natural scicnccs

, ~SOcj

[19691,No,1),qt tau nP 136

see e g
V O Hagstrom, Thc Diffcrentiation of DisciPlincs
,in Barnes,

` Rc,ctIrC/,, 36

PP 121-125("Printed
Basic Books, 1965

Hagstrom,P 123

m Ha:strom,TJle ScicnF

c Coi,lIl,1

nt

[NCw York

,PP 222-226)

Herc and thr ughout, thcsc tcrn1s arc uscd onl) in thc strict sc11sc of intcrhngual translati11g and translati n, (Dn the thrcc tyPcs f translati n in thc
br adcr scnse of the v

rd, intrahngual, intcrhngual, and intcrsen1iotic, scc

192 JAMEs s HOLMEs

R man
B1

Jakobs n, On Linguisuc AsPccts f Translation , in Reuben A,

owcr(cd),On Tr' J rj@n(Cambridgc,Mass

Htr`a d tInivc1

1959),PP 232^-239
Rogcr GofHn,
P

ur une forn1ati 11univcrsitairc sui8enc1

F11

is

sity Prcss,

(lu traducteur;

:
cX

scc thc Hagstron quotation in scctjon 1 1 ab ve

lF

Eugcnc Nida,rc,

10

ir

;
s`c0d R n PiJn
9Ft,s

rds d s en
dns`jrin ,'"
ncf P' ccdurcs Jn1 o`vcd jn B
LIrjn (Leiden Br l, 1964)

`e rrtIns
Cf Nida s latcr cnh htcning
rcmark n his use f the tern
thc science of
translation( r,pCrhaPs n1 rC accuratcl) statcd,thc scicntifc dcsciiP
tln f thc

sscS
invol
ed
in
translating)
Scicncc
f
Trans
atl n
, EugCnc A Nida,
Proc
r'dn u
vc,4511969],483-498,qu tation P 483n 1;1ny ltalics)

11

Klc f,arld Wd all)Wilss,Tfle s ncc J

- cllaltl BaLlst h,Josef

TrdnH onj n n ric FB rd`

(T l,ln n

Tihng Bcit

` 1 1 (197o;TBL,No 21)c vCrs thc)cars 1962 1969;

Linguisuk)
ol H

(1972;TBL,No 33)thC ycars 1970-1971 PluS a suPPlcmcnt vCr thc years

Co cred b thc irst lun1c

12

Verncr

Koller, tibersct7cn,tIbcrsetzung und tIl)ersctzcr Zu sd1wcdischc11

symposicn bcr

Pr blcmc dcr Jbcrsetzung

, B bc',

17 (1971), 311, qu ta-

z: c PJ :r1 lsJu

sym m

:
"lllaIl hnd
F
:
TeLf

f :T

:: c c

\iI

;:;

{,3

:
a1

::Jf
l\i&rl}
i11
ii=

rf

fll;:

:1;t

ck

14

:l;{

`right(ed,),

I1

;I1d

:1

: ;li

:ually not bct fccn t v tyPcs f rcscarch in thc

Chapter 16

George ste ner

THE HERhllENEUTIC MOTION

HE HERMENEuTIC MOTION,thc act

f clicitati

na11(l al)ProPria

tivc Janskr f meaning,is u1 ld Thcrc is initiative trust,an investmcnt o{

bchef, undcr vrittcn by prcvi us cxpcrience but cPistem logically cxposcd and

Psychologically hazard us,in thc mcaningfulncss,in thc scriousncss 0f thC facing

or,strictly sPcaking,ad crsc tcxt,Wc Venturc a leap: vc grant db in`rio that therc
d,that thc transfer vill not bc oid All undcris so1nething thcre to bC undcrst
hich is translation,
standing, and the dcm nstrativc statcmcnt of undcrstandin8
ith an act oftrust This con ding 1ll,ordinarily,bc instantancOus and un~

n
PlCx base lt is an oPerativc convcntion hich dcri cs
fr m a scqucnce
fI,11cn lncnological assumPti ns about d1c c hcrence f tl`c

v rld,about thc Prcsencc f rncani11g in cry different,perhaps formally antithetical semantic systcms, about thc ahdity f analogy and pa1 allcl Thc radical
gcncrosity of thc translator C I grant bcf rchand that thcrc n1ust bc s mcthing
starts

cxalnincd, l)ut it has a c

thcrc ), hiS trust in thc other ,

as yct untricd, unmaPPCd altcrnity of statCmcnt,

ConCcntratcs to a Phnos Phically dramatic(lcgrec the human bias t0 vards sccing

thc vorld as syn)l)ohc

as constitutcd of rclatiOns in vhich this can stand for that

and mustin hct bc ablc t

d s

if tbcrc are to bc mcanin8s and structures

But the trust can ne er bc hnal Itis bctrayCd,trivially,by nonscnse,by thc disco ery that there is nothing thcrc
Concr

ehcit and translatc.N nscnsc rhy1nes,P

sie

rc,glossolaha arc untranslatable bccausc they arc lcxically non~c 11nuniCativc

or delibcrately insigni

cant Thc comnlltmcnt of trust will,h wc cr, bc tested,

morc Or lcss sc crcly,alSo in the col, l on run and Pr ccss of languagc acquisition

and translation(d1ct`vo being inthnatcly conncctcd)

1975

This rneans nothing asscrts

194

GEORGE sTElNER

the exasPcratcd ch d in front f his Lath1readcr r thc bcginncr at Bcrhtz Thc

scnsation comes cry

f a blank, sloPing Surfacc

vhiCh
thers
gi cs n purchase s cial inccntive, thc ofHci us e idencc of precedcnt ~
kccPs onc at thC task,But thc donahave n1anagcd to translatc this bit bcf rc you
cl Se to bcing tactilc, as

tion oftrust rcmains ontologically sP

ntanc us and anticiPatcs Proof,often by a lon

/altcr Bcnja 1in, hich ill bc translatcd only

arduous gap(thcre are tcxts, says

aftc1 us ) As he sCtS Out, thc translator Fuust gamblc on thc c hcrcncc,

n thc
syn )ohc plcnitude of tbc
vorld c nc mitantly hc lca cs hirnsclf ulnerablc,

though only in extren1ity and at thc thc rctical edge, to t V0dialcctically relatcd,

mutually dctcnnincd mctaPhysical risks Hc may

nd that anything or ahuOst

anything can rncan c erything This is thc

crtigo()f scl sustaining rnctaPh ric r
anal gic

enchainmcnt eXPcriCnccd by medicval cxcgctists Or hc may fnd that therc

is notl)ing

thcrc lI.hiCh Can bc di 0rccd h oln its forn1al auton my,that every l can-

ing` orth cxPrcsSing is:n nadic and

l not cntcrinto any alternati c rnould Thcrc

is Kabbahstic spcculation,to vhich I wil rcturn,about a day on hich v rds ill

shakc()ff thc l)urdcn f ha ing to mcan and ill l)c nly thCmselvcs, l)lank and
rePletC as stonc

ARcr trust comcs aggression The second m ve f

an(l cxtractive Thc1

cle ant

the translat r is incu1

si c

analysis is that of Heidegger`vhen hc focuscs our attcn-

tion on undcrstanding as an act,on thc acCcss,inherently aPPr Priativc and tbcrcf rc

vi lcnt, f r cnr,Fn sto Dds in Dd-scin,the thing therc , the thing that is bccausc
it is there ,

nly comcs into authcntic bcinghcn

it is c

o1nPrchCndcd, i c trans-

latcd,1 Thc P stulatc that all c gnition is aggressi c, that evcry ProPositi n is an
inroad on thc v rld,is,of coursc,Hcgchan Itis Hci(lcggcr s contril)ution to l)a c
sho :11that undcrstanding, rec gnition, intcrPrctati n arc a con PactCd, una oid_

e can1nodulate Hcidcg8cr s insistcncc that undcrstanding is

ablc1n dc of attack,

not a mattcr of rneth d but f Pri1nary being, that bcing consists in thc under~

standing of othcr bcing into thc morc nai c, hn itcd a iom that cach act of
c mPrehensi n must aPPr
P atC an thc1 entity(vc translatc in o) Con1prchen~

sion, as its ctymology sho`vs,

c n1PrChcnds

n t only cognitivcly l)ut l)y cncirclc~

mc11t and ingcstion. In thc cvcnt of interlingual translation this manocu re of

comPrchCnsi n is exPlicitly in as c and cxhaustive saint Jcromc uses his hmous

i1nage of n caning brought h mc capti c by thc translator We brcak a codc dcci~

phcrment is disscctive,lca ing the shcll snlasl)cd and thc 1tal laycrs striPPcd E cry

lch d,but als thc cn1incnt translator, vill n tc thc shiR in substantivc Pres_
enccvhich f ll
vs n a Protracted or difhcult cxcrcisc in translati
n: the tcxt in
thc ther languagc has l)cc mc ahnost natcrially thinncr, thc li:ht sCCn1s to pass
unhindcred through its loosencd6bres For a sPcll the density of hostilc r scduC
ti c
therncss is dissiPatcd Ortcga y Gassct sPcaks of thc sadncss f thc translat r
aRer%dul Thcrc is also a saclncss aRer succcss,thC Augustinian rrjs

hiCh
Fj
foll
vs on thc cognatc acts of crotic and of intcllcctual P sscssi0n,
sch

Thc translat r invadcs, cxtracts, and brings hon e Thc sirnile is that f the
PCn^cast1uinc lcft an cmpty scar in thc landscaPc As :e shall see,this lcsP haf thc
tion is illus ry or is a1nark of falsc translation But again, as in thc case
translator

s trust,thcrc are genuinc b

bccn cxhausted by translatiol1 Far m

rdc1 linc

cascs, Ccrtain tcxts or gcnres have

rc intcrcstingly,othcrs ha c bcen ne8ated l)y

trans guration,by an act f aPPr P iati c Penetration and transfcr in excess of thc

-i

I ;

THE HERMENEUTIC MOTION

195

rdcrcd, morc acsthctically Plcasing, Thcrc arc originals

original, morc

ve no

longcr turn to bccausc the translation is of a highcr rnagnitude(thc sonncts of Louise

vill
Labo aRcr Rilkc s tJilldichrunf), I

mc back to this Parad x of bctrayal by

augmcnt
The third mo cmcnt is incorPorativc, in thc stron scnsC of thc
ord The
mcaning and offor 1,thc cmbodirncnt,is notrnadc in orinto a vacuum
Thc nativc scmantic cld is alrcady cxtant and cr
dcd. Thcre are innumcrablc
shadings of assirn ati n and PlaccmCnt of thc nc vly acquircd, ranging om a
c mPlCtc domcstication, an at-homcncss at thc c
rc f the knd
vhich cultural
irnP rt,of

history ascribcs to,say,Luthcr

s Biblc rr`orth s Plutarch,all thc vay to the Perma-

ncnt strangcncss and1uarginahty of an artifact such as Nab k s Enghsh-languagc

Onq n But
vhatcvcr thc dcgrec of naturahzati n , thc act fimP rtation can
tentially(hslocatc
or rcl catc thevholc f thc nativc structure.The Heidcggcrian
P

Vn being is modiHcd by Cach

ve arc hat vc undcrstand t be entails that ur

occurrcncc of comprchcnsivc aPproPriati n, No languagc, no traditional symbohc
sct or culttlral cnsemblc imPor without1 lsk f bcing tlans rmcd,Here tw

hmi

hcs of rnctaphor,Probably rclatcd, ffcr thcmscl cs,that of sacramcntal intakc or

incarnation and that f infecti n Thc incrcmcntal alucs of c lllllaunion pi ot on
thc moral, spiritual statc f thc rcciPicnt Though all(lcciPhcrmcnt is aggrcssivc
and, at onc lc cl, dcstructi e,thcrc arc diffcrcnccs in thc motivc of appr

priation

and in the c ntext of the bringing back , Whcrc thc nati c matrix is dis ricntcd

vill not snd a Pr Pcr locale

vill not cnrich, it
f mimicry(FrCnch nc ~
It will gencrate not an intcgral rcsPonse but a wash
crsions) There can be
dassicisln in its north~EuroPcan, Genual), and Russian
contagi ns of holity triggcrcd by the antlquc or R)rcign imPort ARCr a timc,thc
vdl rcact, cndea uring to ncutrahze or exPcl thC f rcign body
nati c organis1
or iln1naturc, thc irnportation

1uch f Europcan romanticisln can bc sccn as a riPostc t this sort of infecti n,as
an attemPt t Put an Cn11)argo on a Pleth ra f foreign,rnainly Frcnch cightcenth_

ccntury g ods In cvery Pidgin vc scC an attcmPt t PreSCrvc a zonc of nati c sPeech
non)ically cnf rccd
and a failurc of that attcmPt in thc facc of Pohdcally and ec
hnguistic invasion 1 hc dialcctic of cmb dirncnt entails thc P ssibility that vc luay

bc consumcd,
This dialcctic can bc sccn at thc lcvcl f indi idual sensibilit Acts f transla-

tion add to our1ncans;vvc comc to incarnatc altcrnativc cncrgics and rcsOurccs of

cling,But wc mayl)c mastcrccl an(l ma(lc lamc by what wc ha c importcd Thcre
are translators in vhonl thc
cin of pcrsonal,original crcati n gocs dry l acKcnna
y submcrging his o vn bcing Writcrs havc ccascd om
icc fthc f rcign tcxt had
CC) nC to Chokc thcir o vn Socicties
ith ancient but cr ded cPistclrllol gics of ritual
and s mbol can be knocked ff balance and madc t l sc behcfin thcir sx n idcntity undcr thc voracious ilnpact of Prcmature
r indigcstiblc assirnilation, The
cargo cults of Ncw Guinca,in which thc nau cs w rship what rPlanCs b0ng in,
SPCakS f

Pl tinus litera

translation, son1cti1nes too latc, bccausc thc inhalcd

Pr vidC

an uncannily cxact,ran1i cd imagc f thc risks of translation,

This is nly anothcr ay of saying that thc hcrmcncutic motion is dangerously

incomPletc,that it is dangcrous because it is incomPlete,if it lacks its fourth stagc,

thc Pist n~strokc, as it vere, :hich completcs thc cyclc, The a-Pri riStic move_

mcnt of trust puts us off balancc Wc

lcan t
vards thc c n l nting text(e ery

196

GEORGE sTE1NER

ards and launching at his target)

Wc cncirclc and invadc c 8niti ely.Wc con c homc laden,thus again off balancc,

havin8causCd(liscquilibrium throughout thc systcn1by taking a

translator has exPerienced this Palpablc bcnding to

vay fr m thc Othcr

and by addin:, th u8h P Ssibly

vith ambiguous conscqucncc, to our oVVn Thc
vo Ltilt.Thc hcrmcncutic act rnust co1npcnsatc Ifitis to be authentic,
systcm is n
it rnust rncdiatc int cxchangc and rcstorcd Parity
The cnact1uent of rcciI)rocity in ordcr to rcstorc balancc is the crux f thc
moticr and rnorals f translati n Butitis vcry difscult to Put abstractly The aPPr

priatie raPturC of thc translator - the

vord has in it, of course, thc root and

meaning of iolent transport~lcaves the riginal

vith

a dialcctically enig1uatic

rcsidue, Unquestionably thcrc is a di1nensi n of loss, f brcakagc~hcnce, as vc

havc sccn, thc fear f translation, thc tab s on rc clatory exP rt

vhich hedgc
sacred tcxts,ritual non1inations,and f rmulas in luan culturcs But thc rcsiduc is
c Thc
rk translatcd is cnhanced, This is s at a

also, and dccisi cly, positi

numbcr f

fairly ob

ious levels Bcing methodical,Pcnctrati c,analytic,enumcra_

tivc,thc Proccss0f translati n,likc all rnodcs of f cuscd undcrstanding, vill dctail,

illuminc,and gcn d|body folth its cct ThC Over determinaton oftl e intcr

PrCtative act is inhcrently inflati nary: it Proclairns that thcre is m rc hcrc than
mccts thc c c ,that thc acc rd betvccn content and exccuti c f rm is closcr,rn rc

Vorth trans~
dchcatc than had bcen obscr cd hithcrt , To class a sourcc-tcxt as

lating to d k immcdlatdy and to hvol c lll a dynamic of maglllH

latcr rc icw

(subjcct,naturally,t

don

and cven,Pcrhaps,(lismissal),ThC m uon of

f the original I ist rically, in terms

f cultural c ntext, of the Pubhc it can rcach, thc lattcr is lcR morc Prcstigious,

transfcr and Paraphrasc cnlar:cs thC stature

But this incrcasc has a morc imPortant, cxistcntial PCrsPcctivC, Thc rclations of a

ariants,c en ParodiCS,arc too di crsc

t allo v
f amy Single thcorctic, dc nitional scheme They catcgorizc thc cntirc
question of the meaning of lucaning in ti1ne, of thc existcncc and cffccts f thc
hnguistic fact utside its sPeci c,initial form But there can bc no(loubt that ccho
tCXt to its translati ns,in1itations,thcmatic

cnrichcs, that it is more than shado v and inert silnulacrum Wc arc back at the
Pr

blC 1ofthc n1irr r

hich n t nly re ects but als gcneratcs light Thc original

tCxt8ains fr

the ordcrs f divcrsc relationshiP and listancc estabhshcd bet veen

itsclf and thc translati ns Thc rcciProcity is dialcctic

ncvv formats f signi cance

arc initiatcd l)y distancc and by contiguity. Somc translati ns cdgc us alys ay from

the canvas,others bring us uP closc

This is s cven VVhcrc,PCrhaPS Cspccially vhcrc,thc translati n is Only Partly

adequate Thc

s f the tlanslat r(I will gi c

"lin
ProjCct as n to a scrccn,thc rcsistant vitahtics,thc

common cxamPlCS)localizc,dley
PaquC cCntrcs ofsPcci c gcnius

in thc Origina1. Hcgcl and Hcidcggcr Posit that bcing must engagc othcr bcing in

ordcr t achic ic sd dc nition This is truc On|in Pa

oflanguage w ch,at thc

vn hn1its of diacritical
PhonCtic and grammatical lc cls, can function insidc its
difcrcntiation But it is Pra8matically truc f all but thc ln st rudnncntary acts f

%rm and cxPrCssi()n.E stence in hist r)i,thC daim to rec gnizable identity(style),
arc based On rclations to othcr articulatc c nstruCts Of such relations,translation
is the m st graPhic

Nevertheless, therc is unbalancc, Thc translat r has takcn to

PaddCd,embroidered,

read into

much~he has

r too little~hc has skirnpcd,ehdcd,cut

ut

THE HERMENEUTIC MOTION

197

utflo v of energy fron thc s urcc and an

vh le
in 0int0 thc rcccptor altcring both and altcring thc harmonics of thc
system P guy puts thc mattcr f incvitablc damagc dc nitivcly in his critique

a vk

vard c rncrs, Thcrc11as bcen an

of Lec nte dc Lisle s translati ns of soPh cles:

cC quC la r aht nous cnscignC

i1nPitoyal9lcment ct sans aucunc cxccPti n,c cst quc toutc oPoration dc cct ordrc,
toutc op ration de d Placcmcnt,sans aucunc cxccption,cntra nc irnpitoyablcmcnt

et irrovocablcment unc doPcrdition,unc alt( )ration,ct quc Cctte doPcrdition,ccttc

translation will,thcrc rc,seck to

cquahzc, th ugh thc mcdiating stcPs nlay bc lcngthy and obhque VVhcre it falls

alt rati

n cst t tllours consid rablc, 2Gcnuine

short of the riginal,thc authcntic translation makcs thc autonomous virtues of thc

original m c Prccisely visiblc(V Ss is wcak at charactchstic cal P ints in his

1

Homer, but thc lucid h ncsty of his m mentary lack l)rings ()ut the aPPr Priate
strengths fthc Grcek) WhCrc it surPasseS thc original,thc rcal translation infcrs
that the s urcc-tcxt PosscssCs P0tCntiahtics,clcmcntal rcscrvcs as yct unrcahzcd by

itsclf This is schlcicrmachcr

s notion of a hcrmcncutic
vhich kn is bcttcr than

thc auth r did (PauI cclan translating APollinairc s sd`om ) Thc idCal, ne cr
accomPhshcd,iS nc oft tal c untcrPart r rc-pctition~an asking again
vhich
is not,ho vcvcr,a tautology No such pcrfcct doublc cxists, But thc idcal lnakcs

exPhcit thC dcmand f r equity in thc hcrmcncutic proccss,

Only in this ,ay,I think,can vcc assign substantivc rncaning to thc kcy n

ti

f Hdehty Fidchty is not literahslu or any tcchnical(lcvicc for rcndcring sPirit

ic
ha
er again in discussi ns of
Thcvh le f rn ulation, as
c f und it ver and
9hjr
transl on, llllPeles xt E:` C The tra lator,thc cxc ust,thc atlcr is
nf
Fo his tcxt,1nakCs his rcsponsc rcsPonsiblC, nly xS-hcn he cndeavours to restore thC
balance of f rces, of intcgral PrcsCnce,vhiCh his aPProPriativc comPrehension has

disruPted FidChty is cthical,but als ,in thc full sense,cConon1ic,By irtuC f tact,
and tact intcnsihcd is ln ral vision,the translator-interpretcr cI catcs a condition of
signi cant

exchangc Thc arro vs of rncaning,of cultural,Psychological benefaction,

mo e both -ays, Thcrc is,ideally, exchangc`vithout l ss In this rcsPCct,transla~
tion can bc Pictured as a negation f cntr Py; order is Prcscrvcd at both cnds of
thc cycle, s urcc and recePt r Thc gcncral lnodel herc is that of Lo i~strauss s
HnrJ,rclP
o ic srruc urt,Fe
vhich rcgards social structurcs as attempts at dynan1ic
v mCn,and material g ods
cquilibriulll achic cd thr ugh an cxchangc of`vords,
All caPturc calls for subscqucnt comPcnsati n;uttcrancc sohcits rcsPonsc,Cx gamy
and cnd gamy arc mcchanisms f cquahzing transfcr Within tbc class of scmantic
cxchangcs, translation is again thc most graPhic, thc lll St radically cquitablc
A translator is accountablc to the diachr nic and s nchr nic mobiIit and c nscr~

ation of thc cnergics of rllcaning A translati n is, morc than ngurati cly, an act
of doublc~cntry;both formally and m rally thc books nlust balancc
This vic v of translation as a hcrmcncutic of trust(
d,,ccn2cnr), of PCnctrati n,
ill all
v ust crComc thc stcrilc triadic
of en 1)odilnent, and f rcstitution,
modcl vhich has dolllinatcd thc hist ry and thcOry of thc subjcct Thc PCrcnnial
distincdon bct ,ccn htcrahsln, paraPhraSC and frcc i1nitation, turns out to bc

vh y contingcnt It has n PrCcision or Phil SoPhic basis It vcrl ks thc kcy

hct that a f urIold rlcrmcncitI,Aristotle s tern f r disc ursehich signi cs because
it intcrPretS, iS concePtually and Practically inhcrcnt in c
translation

cn d)e rudi1nents ()f

198

GEORGE sTEINER

Notes
1

,Pad R mr,

cllcc

d llcm ctl cltl h

(Paris, 1969)
2

Charlcs P guy, Lcs suPPhantS Para

lCs in( u rcs

Co ir

cn Prclsc

d s

mFe

d ons

s98
90s(Paris,

1959), I,P 890 This analysis F thC art of poctic translati n nrst aPPcarcd

in Dc mbcr1905Cf, m ne

PP 146^59

F1 msse,P

cr Fe m

nde nriqu

(Pa"s,1973),

ii|{

ii

Chapter 17

Itamar E en zohar

THE POSITION OF TRANSLATED

LITERATURE XA/ITHIN THE

LITERARY POLYSYSTEM
Ded`cdFed o Fl,e`"e/T,ory of Jarl,es S.

o F,,es-a9reaF s

tJde

of ra S/a
ol,a c/ac/ear fr`e/,c/,

llh

l c

J;

culturcs,rclati cly littlc rcscarch has bccn carried out so far in tbis arca As a rulc,
hist

vay to avoid thcn1,

rics f litcratures mcntion translati ns vvhcn thcrc is n

whcn dcaling with thc Middlc Agcs or thc Rena sancc,Rr instancc,Onc rnight of
course nd sP radic rcfcrcnces to indi iduaI litcrarv translati ns in various othcr
PCriods,but thcy arc seldom inc rP rated into thc hist rical acc untin an cohcrcnt

vay Asac nscqucncc, nc hardly gets an idca vhats c er ofthe hncti n f trans~
lated litcraturc for a literaturc as a vhole r ofits P sition vvithin that litcraturc,

orcovcr,thcrc is no a
ssiblc cxistcncc of translatcd litcraturc as
`arcncss ofthc p

a Particular litcrary systcm Tl c Prc ailing conccPt is rathcr that of translatlon or

just translatcd v rks

trcatcd on an individual basis Is thcrc an

assun1Ption, that is f rc nsidcring translatcd litcrature as a s

same sort of cultural and

crbal nct v rk f

basis f r a diffcrcnt

stcm? Is thcrc thc

sccms t bc an

rclati nsvithin vhat

arbitrary grouP f translatcd tcxts as thc Onc vcvilhngly hyPothcsizc f r riginal

htcraturcP What kind f rclations n ight thcrc bc a1nong translatcd c rks,

vhich
are presented as completed facts, iluported m thcr htcraturcs, dctached
fr n

thcir homc contcxts and c nsequcntly neutrahzed fron

thc P int f iC : f

center-and~PcriphCry strugglcsP

My gumcnt is that anslatcd w rks d c rrdate h at lcast tw Ways:(a)in

thc
va their s urcc tcxts arc sclccted by the target literaturc, thc PrinciPlcs of
1978/re ised 1990

200 ITAMAR EVEN-ZOHAR

sclcction nc cr bcing uncorrclatablc ith the h mec -systC111s of thc targct litcr_

aturc (to Put it in thc most cautious vay); and(b)in thevay thcy adoPt sPcci c

norms,bcha

i rs, and Pohcies~in short, in thcir use of thc litcrary rcPcrtoirc~

vhich rcsults fr l1 thcir rclati nsvith thc Othcr110 ne co-s stems These are not

ell
c nsncd t thc linguistic lc cl nly,but arc luanifcst n any selcction lc cl as
vn,
vhich to a certain
Thus, translatcd litcraturc may PossCss a rCPCrtoirc of its

cxtcnt could cvcn l c cxclusivc to it (see T

ury 1985and 1985a)

It sccms that thcsc P ints1nakc it n t nly justi6ablc t talk about translated

htcraturc, but rathcr imPcrati c to(lo s I cann t sce ho v any Sch larly cfFort

dcscril)c and cxPlain thC bchavior of thc htcrary Polysystc 1 in synchrony

and diachrony can advancc in an adcquatc vay if that is n t rccognizcd In thcr

vords, I conccivc of transIatcd htcraturc not only as an integral systcm

vithin
t

any litcrary polysystcn1,but as a1nost activc systcm vvithin it But

vithin thc p lysystcn and h

is

vhat is its position

this P sition connectcd vith thc nature of its

Siti n
f translatcd litcraturc in thc study of literaturc that it als Pcrmancntly occuPiCS
a pcriPhcral Position in thc tcrary Polysystcn but this is by n mcans thc
vhether
casc Whcthcr translatcd htcraturc becomcs ccntral or PcriphCral, and

Secondary

ovcrall rePcrtoircP Onc vould bc tcmPtcd t deducc fr na thc PeriPhcral P

this Position is conncctCd vith innovatory( Prhnary ) r conscr atory(

rcpcrtoircs, dcPends n t11c sPccinc constcllati n of thc Polysysten1 undcr

stud

2
To say that translated literaturc maintains a ccntral Position in thc litcrary Poly
systcrll mcans that it ParticiPatcs activcly in shaping thc ccntcr of thc Polysystcm
In such a situati n it is by and largc an intcg1 al part of inn vatory forces, and as

such likely to bc identined

vith n1 r

c Cnts

in hterary history

vhilc thcsc arc

taking placc This imphes that in this situation no clcar_cut distinction is rnaintaincd

ritings,and that oRen it is thc lcading

riters

( r mCmbcrs of thc a ant gardc who arc ab ut t bccomc lca(ling writcrs)wh

bct
ccn original and translatcd

producc thc rnOst consPicuous or aPprcciatcd translati ns N1orcOvcr,in such a statc

nc ofthc

vhen nc v litcrary modcls are emcrging,translation is likcly to bccome

mcans of clab rating thc new rcPcrt irc,Through thc rcign works,%aturcs(l)oth
PrinciPlCS and clements)arc intr duced int thc homc litcraturc vhich(lid not cxist
thcrc bcf rc,Thcse include P ssibly n t only ne 1n0dCls of reahty to rcPlacc thc

ld and estabhshed oncs that arc no longcr c

ft

ctivc, but a vvh lc rangc of othcr

urcs as wcll,such as a ncw(p cjc)languagc,or comP Siuonal Pat rns and

techniqucs, It is clcar that thc
cry princiPlcs f selccting thc vorks to bc trans~
latcd arc dctcrn1incd by thc situation go crning the(hon e)PolysystCn the texts
arc ch scn according to thcir c mPatil)ility vith the nc v apProaches and thc suPP s_
edly inn
atory rolc thcy may assumc vithin thc targct literaturc

What thcn arc thc c nditions vvhich gi e risc to a situation of this kind?It secms

r cases can bc discerncd,which cb ically vari us mamkstati ns fthe samc law:(a)whCn a P lySystcm has n t yCt bcCn crystalhzCd,that
in thc pr ccss of bcing cstabhshcd;(b) vhCn

to mc tllclt threc mal

is to say, vhcn a litcraturc is young,

TRANsLATED LITERATURE IN THE POLYsYSTEM

201

vithin a largc grouP f corrclatcd litcraturcs)or

a htcraturc is cithcr pcriPhCra

VCak,
r both;and(c) vhCn thcrc arc turning points,criscs,or litcrary vacuums
(

in a litcraturc,

In the Flrst case translated litcraturc si1nPly fulsls thc nccd of a youngcr litcrattlre to put iI1to c its ncwly foun(lcd(or rcn vatccl)ton8uc f )r as many litcrary
tyPcs as possiblc in ordcr t makc it scr iccablc as a litcrary languagc and useful f r

its cmcrging pubhc Sincc a young litcrature cannot in11ncdiately creatc tcxts in all
tyPes kn
vn t its ProducCrs,it bcnchts frorll the exPcriCncc of othcr litcraturcs,

and translatcd litcraturc bccomcs in d1is vay one f its most imP rtant syste 1s

Thc same h lds truc for thc sccond instancc, that of relatively estabhshed litcraturcs
vhosc rcsourccs arc hn1itcd and /h sc Position vvithin a largcr htcrary
hierarchy is gcncrally pcriphcra1.Asa c nsequence of this situation,such litcratures
often d n t de cl P the samc full rangc of htcrary acti itics(organized in a variety

of systems) bS
at,lc h a tacCllt larger litemttlrcs(wlllch h collsCquence may
crcatc a ftscling that thcy arC indisPcnsable)They may also
is fclt t

bc badly nccdcd

is~ ~

lack a rcpcrt

irc which

is,and in terms of the Presence f,that adjaccnt

htcrature This lack n ay thcn be lled, vh lly or partly,by translatcd litcraturc

For instancc,all sorts of PcriPheral literature may in such cases c

nsist of translated

htcraturc But far rnorc imPortant is thc c nscquCncc that thc ability of such

cak

htcraturcs to initiatc inno ations is oRcn lcss than that fthc largcr and ccntral htcr-

aturcs,ith thc result that a rclation of dcpendcncy1 ay bC cstabhshcd not nly in

pcriphcral systCms, but in thc cry ccntcr of thcsc cak litcraturcs (To avoid
` literaturcs may risc to a
n1isunderstanding, I
vould hkc to P int out that these

ccntral position in a
vay analogous to thc ay this is carricd out by PeriPheral
systems within a ccrtain PolySystcm,but this cannot bc discusscd herc)
Since PcriphCral litcraturcs in thc VVcstcrn Hcn isPhere tend morc Rcn than
not to bc idcntical vith thc litcraturcs of smaller nations,as unPalatablc as this idea
vc ha c n ch ice but t adn1it that ithin a grouP of rClatable
seen to us,
nadonal htcraturcs,such as thc htcraturcs of EuroPc,hicrarchical rclations ha c bccn
n ay

cstabhshcd since the cry bcginnings of these hteraturcs Within this (rllacro-)
P lysystcln SOmc litcraturcs havc taken Periphcral P

siti ns,vhich

is nly to say that

they vvcrc ften modcllcd to a large cxtent uPon an extcrior litcraturc, For such

hteraturcs, translatcd htcrature is not only a n1aJ r channel thr ugh

vhich
fashi nablc rcPcrt ire is br ught home,but also a sourcc of reshu hng and supply
ing altcrnativcs, Thus,
vhereas richer or strongcr literaturcs may ha c thc ption

t ad pt n
cltics fr n1 s n1e PcriPhCry vithin their indigcn us bordcrs,
vcak
htcraturcs in such situati ns oftcn dcPend n import alonc
ThC dynan1ics
ithin thc polysystcm crcatc turning PointS, that is to say,
hist rical n omcnts
hcrc cstabhshcd m dcls arc no longcr tcnablc for a y ungcr
gcncrati n Atsuch m mcnts,cvcn in ccntral htcraturcs,translatcd litcraturc1nay
assumc a Ccntral position This is all the lnorc truc vhcn at a turning P int n itcm
in the indigcnous stock is taken t

bc accePtablC, as a rcsult fhich a literary

acuun occurs In such a acuun1,it is Casy for forcign m

translatcd literaturc luay consequently assume a ccntral P

dcls t

siti

inflltratc,and

n Ofc ursc,in the

fcak literatures Or litcraturcs vhich arc in a constant statc of imPo cr~

casc of
ishmcnt(lack of htcrary itcms Cxisting in a ncighbor or acccssiblc f
this situation is c

cn morc Ovcr vhchning

rcign litcraturc),

202

ITAMAR EVEN-zOHAR

3
sition means
Contcnding that translatcd htcraturc may maintain a PeriPheral P
vithin the polysystc 1,gcncrally cmPloying
sccondary modcls. In such a sttuation it has no in ucncc nm or ProcCsSCS and
is m dcllcd acc rding to n rms alrcady con cntionally cstab1ishcd l)y an alrcady

that it c nstitutcs a PcriPhCral systcn1

d n1inant

typc in thc targct litcraturc Translatcd litcraturc in this casc bccomcs a

mal r factor fc nscr atism %ilc thc c ntemPorary o1 1 nal

htt raturc mi:ht go

n de cl Ping ncvn rmsand m dcls,translatcd litcrature adhcrcs to norms vvhich
ha c bccn rcjcctcd cithcr rcccntly or l ng bef re by thc(ne vly)estabhshed center

longcr1uaintains positi c corrclati ns vvith Original vriting

It n

A highly intcrcsting Paradox manifests itself herc: translation, by`vhich ne

idcas, itcms, characteristics can bc introduced int a literature, becomes a means

PrCSCrvc traditi nal taste. This(hscrcPancy bet vccn thc Original ccntral litcraturc and thc translatcd literaturc1nay ha C Cvolvcd in a aricty f vays,f r instancc,
t

vvhcn translatcd literaturc,aRcr having assumed a ccntral Positi n and inserted ne

itcms,soon lost Contact ith the original homc litcrature vvhich vcnt n changing,
and thercby bccamc a fact r f Prcscrvation of unchangcd rcpcrt irc Thus,a litcr~
aturc that n1ight havc cmcrgcd as a rc oluti nary tyPc may go on cxisting as an
ssincd9sr me d dnF n,oftcn fanatically guardcd by the agcnts of scc ndary m dcls
against c en llainor changcs

Thc c nditi nsvhiCh Cnablc this sec nd statc are of coursc(hamctrically oPpositc to thosc vvhich givc risc to translated litcraturc as a ccntral systcn

cithcr thcrc

are no m or changCs h tllc Polysystcm r tllese changcs arc not cffccted through
thc intcrvcntion of interhterar rClations materiahzcd in thc f rm of translations

4
Thc hypothcsis that translatcd litcraturc rnay bc cithcr a ccntral or PCriphcral systcm
d cs n t imPly that it is al

/aysvholly onc or thc Othcr As a systcn

translatcd

htcraturc is itself strati cd,and fron thc point f vie :of Polysysternic analysis it

is oRen from thc vantagc Point of thC ccntral stratum that all rclations
s stCnl

vithin the

arc obser ed This mcans that vhilc nc scction of translatcd literature ma

assumc a ccntral P sition, anot1 cr may rcmain quite PcriPhcra1, In thc f rc8 ing
analysis I Pointed out the cl sc rclati nshiP bet veen litcrary contacts and thc status

f translatc(l litcraturc,This sccms t

mc thc maj r duc to this issuc,W hcn thcrc

is intcnsc interIl(:rence,k is thc portion oftranslatcd hteraturc dcri"ng f1

sourcc litcrature vhich is likcly to assumc a ccntral Positi

om a malor

n, For instancc, in thc

Hcbrcw htcrary polysys 1n bctwccn thc tw world wars htcraturc anslatcd iom
thc Russian assumcd an unmistakably ccntral P

sition,whilc w rks translatcd f1

om

English,Gcrman,Pohsh,and thcr languagcs assumcd an bviously pcriPheral ne

MoRo cr,sincc thc m or an(lm st inno ato tranSlational n rms w e Pr duced
b translati ns fr

the Russian,othcr translatcd litcraturc adhercd t

thc modcls

and n rms elaboratcd b th sc translations,

The historical material analyzcd so far in terms of Polysysten

to lirnited to Pr

ic oPcrati ns is

vide any far-rcaching conclusi ns about the chanccs f translatcd

TRANsLATED 1ITERATURE IN THE POLYsYsTEM

htcraturc to assumc a Particular position But

203

v rk carricd out in this Hcld by

various othcr sch lars,as vcll as rny o vn research,indicatcs that thc normal Posi-

tion assumcd by translatcd litcraturc tcnds to bc thc pcriPhcral onc,This shoukl in

PrinciPle be comPatil)lc ith thcorctical sPeculation It rnay bc assumcd that in the
long run n systcn1can rcn1ai11in a constant statc of cakncss, turni11g Poi11tr or

t bc cxcludcd that somc PolysyStcn1s lnay

crisis,although thc Possibility shoul(lI1

maintain such statcs l r quitc a l ng ti1nc

orc cr,not all Polysystcms arc struc-

turcd in thc samcvay,and culturcs do(hffer signi cantly For instancc,it is clcar
that thc Frcnch cultural systc Frcnch literature naturally includcd,is rlluch lnorc
rigid than rn st thcr systelns This,c mbi11cd vith thc l ng traditi nal central Posi-

vithin the Eur pcan context (or xSithin thc EuroPcan

tion of Frcnch htcraturc
cmdy
macro PolysystCm),has causcd Frcnch translatcd htcraturc to assumc an cxt
hilc
siti n Tl)c statc of Anglo-Arnerican literature is comParablc,
PeriPhCral P

Russian, German, or scandinavian vvould seem to sho v di fercnt pattcrns f

bchavior in this resPcct

5
What c nsequcnccs may thc Positi n takcn by translatcd litcraturc ha c n trans_
c,thc distinction bet vccn
nal n rms,bchavi urs,and PohcicsP As I statcd ab

lati

a translatcd

rk and an original

v rk

in tcrms oflitcrary l)eha ior is a function of

/hcn it takes a

thc Position assumcd by thc translatcd litcraturc at a gi cn tiluc

tllat tllc vcl y CatCgo of`mndatc(l
ntral Posit0n,dle bordcdincs arc Jy
^e,s

c Fr n thc P int

v rks rnust bc cxtcndcd tO scn1i-and quasi-translations as

,of
translati
n thcory I think this is a morc adcquatC vay of dcahng vith
f ie

such PhCnomcna than to rcjcct thc

1 n the basis f a static and a-hist rical conccP

tion of translation sincc translational activity Participatcs,xs hcn it assumcs a ccntral

P

sitiOn, in thc Pr ccss of Crcating nc v, Prin1ary modcls, thc translat

Col)C n

h C

is n t ju

s n1ail)

to look br rcady madc modds in his home rcPelto C

intovhich the s urcc tcxts Vould be transfcrablc,Instcad,hc is PrcParcd in such

cascs to violate the homc c

n cntions

IJndcr such conditions thc chanccs that

thc translati nvill bc closc to thc riginal in tcrms of adcquacy(in thcr :ords,

a rCProduction f the lon1inant tcxtual 1 clations of the rigi11al) arc greater than

thcr visc, Of course,

on1thc point f vic 'Of thc targct litcraturc thc ad Ptcd
hHc bc too forcign and rcvoluti nary, and if thc
translational norn1s lllight for a
nc v

trend is dcfcatcd in thc litcrary strugglc,thc translation madc according t

conccpti ns and tastcs :ill ncvcr rcally gain gr

its

und Butifthc nc trcnd is victo-

rious, thc rcPcrtoire (c dC) f translatcd litcraturc may be enrichcd and become

morc llcxiblc Periods of grcat change in thc homc systCn1arc in fact thc only ones
xs hcn a translator is l)rCParCd t go far bcyond thc oPti ns offcrcd t hirn l,y 11is

cstabhshcd hon1c1 cPcrt irc and is

nhng t attclllpt a diffcrcnt trcatn1ent of tcxt
n1aki11g,Lct us re1uen11)cr that undcr stablc conditions iten1s lacking in a targct htcr~

aturc may remain untransfcrablc if thc statc

f thc polysystcm docs not allo v

innovations But thc Proccss of oPCning thc systcm gradually brings ccrtain litera_
turcs closer and in thc l ngcr run enables a situation hcrc the Postulatcs of
(tranSlational)adCquacy and thc rcahties of equi alencc n1a) ovcrlaP tO a rClativcly

204

ITAMAR EVEN-ZOHAR

high dcgree. This is thc casc fthc Eur Pean literaturcs,though in somc ofthcm
the mcchanism of rcjccu n has bcen so s 0ng that thc changes I am talkng about
ha e ccurrcd

on a rathcr li1nitcd scalc

Naturally,vhcn translatcd literaturc occuPies a PCriPhCral P sition,it bchavcs

tOtally diffcrcntly Herc,the translator s rnain cff

rt is t c nCentrate

uPon snding

thc bcst rcady rllade sec ndary m dcls for thc foreign tcxt, and thc rcsult
turns Out to be a non-adcquatc translation

Rcn

r(as I v u d PrCfCr t Put it)a grCatcr

discrcpancy bctvccn thc cquivalcncc achie ed and thc adcquacy Postulatcd

In othcr
vords, n t only is dle socio-htcrary status of translation dcPendcnt
upon its position vithin the P lysystcn but thc vcry practicc of translati n is also
strongly subordinatcd t that position, And c cn thc qucstion f vhat is a translated v rk cannot bc ans vcrcd d`ri ri in tcr 1s ofan a-historical out~ context

idcahzcd statc;it rnust bc detcrn1ined on thc grounds f thc Pcrati ns govcrning

thc polysystcm, sccn fr n this P int f vic v,translation is n longcr a Phcn 1
enon vvhosc naturc and bordcrs arc gi en oncc and for all,but an acti ity dcpcndcnt
n the relations vithin a ccrtain cultural s stcm

Chapter 18

GideOn TOury

THE NATURE AND ROLE OF

NORMS IN TRANSLATION

oWEVER HIGHLY ONE MAY THINK of Linguistics,Tcxt_

Linguistics, Contrasti c Tcxtology or Pra:maticS and of their exPlanatory

:ith rcsPCct to translational PhCn mena, being a translat r cannot bc

rcduccd to thc mcrc gcncration of uttcrances hiChvould bc c nsidcrcd transla~

po fc

tions

vvithin any fthCsc disciPhncs Translation acti itics should rathcr bc rcgardcd

as ha ing

cultural signihcancc C nscqucntly, translatorshiP am unts rst and f rc_

most to bcing ablc to P`cz1

ci s0Ci

F roFe, ic, to fulsl a function allottcd by a

and/or thcir products~in a ay

con11nunity _ to thc activity, its Practiti ncrs

:hich is dccn1cd aPPr Priate in its o vn tcrms of rcfcrcncc,Thc acquisiti n ofa sct
fnorms f r dctcrn1ining thc suitability fthat kind of bchaviour,and for tnanocuv_
ring betwcen all thc hct rs hich may constr n it,is thcre rc a prcrequisite r
bccon ing a translator vithin a cultural cn ironmcnt,

Thc proccss byvhich a l)ihngual spcakcr may be said to gain rccognition in

his/her caPacity as a translator has hardly bCCn studicd s far [
]In thc prescnt
chaPter thc nature of the acquired norms thcmscl
cs v l bc addrcsscd,along vvith
thcir role in dircctin8translation activity in socio-culturally rclevant scttings This

l bc f ll /cd by a briefdiscussion oftranslati nal n rms as a secondprcscntation

ordcr objcct f Translatl n studics,t bc rcc nstructed and studicd vithin the lond
f amcw rk which wc arc now in thc Pr cCss of skCtchin As sthcdy

ansla~

tional norms can nly bc apphcd at thc rccei/Jn Cnd,cstabhshing them is not rncrcly
usr
d by a target oHcntt,d aPpr h but sh uld bc cn

1978/reVised 1995

very
Fome

206

GIDEON TOURY

1 Rules,nor ms,idiosyncrasics
In its sOcio cultural dimcnsion,translation can bc(lcscol)cd as su ect t constr n

f scvcral tyPcs and varying(lcgrcc Thcsc cxtcnd far bcy nd the s urce tcxt; thc
syste 1ic di tcrcnccs bct vccn thc lan8uagcs and tcxtual traditi ns involvcd in the

act,or c cn the possibilities and lirnitations of thc cogniti c aPParatus of thc trans~

lator as a ncccssary mcdiat r, In fact, c gnition itsclf is in ucnced, Probably c cn

n1odi ed b s cio_cultural factors. At any ratC, translat

rs Perf rn1ing

undcr

diffcrcnt conditions(C8,translating tcxts of dirCrcnt kinds, and/or for di Qrcnt

audicnccs)often adoPt di= trcnt stratcgics,and ultiInatcly comc uP

ith n1arkedly

cry much doubt

(liffcrcnt Products S mcthing has ob iously changed hcre,and I

it that it is thc cogniti c aPparatus as such

In tcrms of thcir P tCncy,sOcio-cultural constraints havc bccn dcscribcd al ng

a scalc anchorcd bct iccn t vo cxtrcmcs: gcncral, rclativcly absolutc ru`es, n thc

onc hand and purc jdjos

n cr s

es on thc othcr Bct vccn thcsc t v polCs lics a

ast

middle gr und occuPied by intc u ecti e

norms thcmsclvcs forn

fat t rs

mmonly(lc gnatcd norms Thc

a8radCd c ntinuun1along thc scalc sOme arc stronger,and

s ncratic Thc
hence morc rulc-likc, othcrs arc vvcakcr, and hcncc almost idi
bordcrhncs bct
ccn thc various tyPcs of c nstraints are thus diffusc Each f thc
conccPts,including thc grading itsclf,is relati c too, Thus vhat is just a fa oured
Cll acquirc much lu rc
m de f beha i ur
vid1in a hctcr gcneous grouP may

wlthin a ccrtain(morc homogene us)sccuon thcrcf,in tcrms of

either human a8ents(eg,translators am ng tcxtcrs in general) r tyPes of acti ity

hn ling rcc

(cg,intcrPrcting,or lcgal translati

n,withn transladon tlt large)

Along thc tcmP ral axis,cach typc of constraint rnay,and Ren d cs rnove into
its ncighbouring domain(s)thr ugh Processes ofrisc and dechnc Thus,rncrc xs hirns
ma catch on and l)cc mc morc and morc normativc,and n rms can gain so much
vahdity that,for all Practical PurpoSCS,thcy bccomc as binding as rulcs;or thC thcr

vay around, f coursc shiRs of ahdity and fOrcc o cn havc to d

vith chan8es f
cicty In fact,they can al
a s bc describcd in c nncction vith thc

src,Fus vithin a s

notion of nor 1,cspecially sincc,as the proccss goes on,thcy are likely to cross its

tyPCs fc nstraints may c Cn

rcalrn, i.c, actually bccomc norms The othcr t
be rcdcHned in t ms ofnorms;rulcs as

m cct c[

lc intt su ccu

sociologists and s cial Psych

ImORl

Ccd C ,i(liosyncr ics

a~s

Imorcj

norms

l gists

have l ng rcgardcd n rms as thc translation

n munity~as to vhat is right and vrong,

adequate and inadcquatc into Pcrf rmancc instructions aPproPriatc for and apPhc~

of gencral
alucs r idcas sharcd by a c

al)lc to particular situations, eci ing what is Prcscribc(l and

rbiddcn wcll as

what is tolcrated and Pcrmitted in a ce n bcha

ural dimcnsi m(thC famous

squarc f n rmati ity , vvhich has latcly bCen elaboratcd on

vith rcgard
to translati

n in De Gccst199

38-40),Norms are acq rc(l by thc in

ldual

during his/hcr s ciahzati n and alvays imPly s ncrions~aCtual or Potenual,negati e

asvcll as Positi c, VV thin the c l11111unity,norms als
t

vvhich actual instanccs of bcha

i ur

arc cv

scrve as critcria according

F d Obviously,thcrc is a P int in

assun1ing thc cxistcnce of norms only in situations vhich all vv

f r

diffcrcnt kinds

of beha i ur,on thC additi nal condition that selection an1ong thcn1be nonrand

m.j

NORMs IN TRANsLATION
Inas1 uch

207

as a norn1 is reall active and cffccti e, nc can thcrcforc distinguish

i ur in rccurrent situations ofthc same tyPe,`vhich v uld rendcr

regularity of bcha

j of11
1ns as wcll
11ain sOurcc r any
Thc centraht f thc norms is not only n1ctaPhorical, thcn, in tcr ns of thcir

regularitics a

n along a Postulatcd continuum of constraii1ts;rathcr1 it is csscntia

Norn1s are the key c nccPt and focal I)o 1t in any attcmPt to accou11t for thc s cial
relati e Positi

rclc ance

of activitics,bccausc thcir cxistcncc,and the vide rangc of situati ns thcy

apPly to(
ith the c n rmity this imPhcs), C tllc m n hctors ensuring thc cstabhshment and retcntion of social ordcr.This h lds f r cultures t o,or f r an ofthc
systcms c nstituting thc1u,which arc,aRcr all,s cial institutions ipso%cto,Of
coursc,bcha i ur vvhich d es nor conforn1to PrC ailing nor 1s is alxx ays Possible

to ,N1 rc vcr, non-comPhancC vith a n

ln in Particular instances does n t in ah
datc thc n rn1 (HC
rnans 1991: 162) At thc Samc tilnc,therc voukl n rn1ally be
a PricC t l)ay for oPti11gf r any(lcviant kiI1d of beha iour

()nc thing to bcar in n1ind, `vhcn sctting out t study norn1-go crncd bchav~

iour,is that thcre is n

ncccssary identity bCt

ccn thc norms thcn1sclvcs and an

brmulation oF thcm h languagc Vel

thc cxistcncc of norms as icll

as

al f

,rmtllclti ns

of coursc1 cnect d dr Css of

f thcir rcspcctivc signi cancc H

vve cr,

thcy

imPly thCr intcrcsts,Particularly a dcsirc t conrr F bchaviour i c ,to dictate

nor1s rather than n ercl account for thcm N rmative formulati ns tcnd to bc
als

slantcd,thcn,and shoukl al va s bc takcn

ith a grain of salt

2 Translation as a norn1-governed activity

Translation is a kind
t

f acti itv vhich inc itably in ol cs at lcast t

:o lan8uagcs and

Vo Cultural traditi ns,i,c,,at least t v scts of n rlll-systCms On each levc1,Thus,

thc aluc bchind it ma bc descr cd as c nsisting of two malor Clcmcnts:

1
2

being a tcxt in a ccrtain languagc,and hcncc occuPying a Position, or lling

in a s ot,in thc aPPr
Priatc culturc, r in a ccrtain scction thcrcof;
constituting a rcprcscntation in that languagc/culturc of an thcr,Prc~cxiSting
text in so111c Other languagc,
>clc ngi11g to somc othcr culturc and occuPying

a dcHnitc P
Thcsc t

Siti

n vid1in it

tyPcs of rcquircmcnt dcrive m tw sources 'hich~cven though

g1 catly are nc ertheless al ays dircrent and

thc distancc bct vccn thcn1n ay ary

theref re oRen inc mpatiblc W ere it11 t for thc rcgulati c caPacity of n rms,thc

tcnsions bet veen the t vo sourCes of constraints oul(l ha c to bc rcs lvcd on an

cntircly indjli(`1 Li`basis, and

vith no clcar yardstick to go l)y Extren1e frec

aria~

tion may
vcll 11avc bccn thc rcsult,
vhich it ccrtainly is not Rathcr, translation
bcbaviour idain a culturc tcnds to manifest ccrtain reJu riri s, onc conscqucncc
bciI1:that cvCn if thcy arc unablc to account for deviati ns in any cxPhcit
ay,thc
PCrsons in~thc~culturc can oRcn tcll hen a translat r has failcd to adherc t sanctioncd Practiccs
It has Pr ven useful and cnlightcning to rcgard thc l)asic choicc

made bct vcen requiren cnts ofthc t

vhich can bc

diffcrcnt sOurccs as constitutin8an initial

208

GIDEON TOURY

norm Th ,at nslator

may sublCc t him/hclsclf otlacr to the ri nal tc ,witll

thc n rn`s it has reahzed, r to thc norms acti c in thc targct culturc, r,in that
scction of it hichv uld h st the cnd Pr duct If thc rst stancc is adopted,the
translation vill tcnd to subscribe t
als

thc norms ofthc sourcc text,and thr ugh thcm

to thc n rms ofthc s urcc Ianguage and culture This tcndcncy;

vhich has

Rcn bccn charactcrizcd as the Pursuit f adequate translati n,2 may vcll cntail
certain incomPatil)ihtics
vith targct nor 1s and PractlCes, csPecially those lying
bcyond thc ncre linguistic oncs,If, n thc Othcr hand,thc sccond stance is adoptcd,
nonns systclllS of the target culturc arc triggcrcd and sct int

mouon shiRs iom

thc s urcc

tcxt vvould bc an ahnOst inevitable Pricc Thus,

vhcrcas adhcrcncc to
source nor 1s dctcrn1incs a translati n s adequacy as comParcd t thc s urce text,
subscriPti nt norms originating in thc targct culture dctern1incs its acccPtab ity

Ob iously,c cn thc lnost adcquacy orientcd translati n invol cs shifts n1thc

sourcc tcxt In faCt,the ccurrcnce of shifts has l ng bccn ackn
vlcdged as a truc
uni ersal of translation Ho

vevcr,since the nccd itself to dc iate fr rll sourcc-tcxt

ay, thC actual redFizdFion of

pattcrns can al vays bc reahzcd in m rc than nc
so-callcd obhgat ry shiRs,t thc extent that it is n n-randon1,and hcncc n t idiovith
syncratic, is alrcady truly nor govcrncd, So is cvcrything that has t d
non-obligatory ShiRS, vhich arc of c ursc morc than just P ssiblc in rcal-hfc translati n thc
ccur c cr ,hcre and tcnd to constkutc thc1n ority of ShiRin8in any

singlc act of human translati n,rendcring thc lattcr a contributing factor to,as vcll
as the ePiton c f rcgularity,

cver Its initiahty

shoukl not bc o crinterPrCtcd,ho
rdinancc Over Particular norms vhich Pcrtain to lo vcr,and
theref re more sPeci c le els Thc nd f Pri rity Postulatcd herc is basically

Thc term

initial norlla

dcrivcs fr nn its suPcr

ficcIJ, and nccd not coinci(lc

vith any

rcar , ic , cJ,rOIa Fofic Frdcr

of aPp ica^

n Then ti n

is thus(lcsigncd to scrvc nrst and f rcm st as an cxP` ndFOr F@of.

E en if no clcar lnacro lc cl tcndcnc can be sho vn,any n1icr ~lcvcl dccision can

ti

still be accountcd for in tcrms of adcquacy vs accCptability (Dn thc othcr hand,in
cascs vhcre an verall choicc has bccn made, it is n t ncccssary that c cry singlc
/e arc still talking rcgularil

cr_level decisi n bc madc in full acc rd vith it

tics,dlcn,but n t ncccssarily of any absolute tyPe Itis unrcahstic t

rcgularitics any vay,in any bchavi

cxPect abs lute

ural doma1n,

Actual translati n(lccisi ns(thC rcsults of vhich thc rcscarchcr

v uld c

ni nt)

vill ncccssarilv inv lvc somc ad hoc combination f, rc mPron iSC bet vccn thc

t vo extrCmcs imPlicd by the initial norm.Stdl,f r thc rctical and lned1 d l gical
rcasOns,it sccms viser to rctain thc oPPoSition and trcat thc t v polcs as distinct

Ifthcy arc not re8ardCd as having djstinct rJ,e r r1ccIF statuscs,ho v uld
comPron1iscs differin in tyPC r in Cxtent bc( stinguishcd and acc untcd f r?
Fina1ly,thc clai1n that it is basically a nor1-govcrncd type of bcha iour aPphcs

in PrinciPlC

to translation of all kinds, n t nly literary, philosophical or bil,hcal translati

vhich is
vhcrc mOst norm_oricntcd studics ha c bccn conducted s

n,

far As has

rcccntlV bccn clairncd and dcmonstratcd in an all too sketchy cxchangc of vicvvs in

% cF(M shlCsingcr1989and Halr

f

co Fencc inFerPre rlf

1990l, mihr thin can c cn be sad

Needless tO say,tllis does not mcan tl

c nditions aPPly to all kinds

translati

at tllc exact same

n. In fact, thcir aPPlication in diffcrcnt

cultural scctors is PrccisCly onc of the asPccts that sh uld bc subn1ittcd t study

k
In Principlc, thc clai1n is als

ORMS IN TRANsLATION

vahd f r c cry S ciCty and hiStorical Pcri d, thus

fkring a amcwork r historically oricnted studics whch w

c mParls

209

uld als

all

w br

3 Translation norrns:an overview

Norms can bc exPectCd to oPcratC n

t only in translati n of all kinds,but als

at

cvcry stagc in the translating c cnt,and hence t bc rc cctcd n every lc cl ofits

product, It has Pr vcn convcnicnt to6rst(listinguish t

largcr gr ups

of norms

aPPhcablc t translati n:PrChn1inary vs, pcrati nal,

Preliminary norms havc to do vith t v main scts of con derau nsvhich

arc oRen interconnected:thosc rcgarding the existcncc and actual naturc fa de nite translation Pohcy,and th sc rclatcd t
Trdns` Fion Po/ic refcrs t
e en

tl

e dircctncss of translati n

thosc factors that govern thc choicc f tcxt tyPcs;or

of indi idual tcxts, t bc irnP rtcd thr ugh translati n into a Particular

culture/Ianguage at a Particular P int in ti1nc such a pohcy vill be said to cxist

inas1nuch as thc ch

icc is f

und to bc n n~random E)iffcrent P hciCS1nay of course

aPPly to differcnt subgrouPs, in terms of eithcr tcxt-types (e g literary vs. non_

htcrary)or hu1nan agcnts and gr uPs there f(cg diffcrcnt pubhshing houscs),and
the interface bet
ccn thc t

Ren fft,rs cry fcrt c grounds f rPhcy hunting

/cIl,q
IaCss o/
on invol c tllc tl rc old of toler~

C ns ati ns con mh8di

ance f r translating fron1 1anguagcs othcr than thc ulti1nate s

indirect translation pcrn1ittcd at a11P In translating frol11

tyPes/Peri ds(etc)is it PCrn1ittcd/prohibitcd/t

Per1itted/prohibitcd/t lcratcd/Preferrcd

urce language is

Vhat sourcc languagcs/tcxt-

lcratcd/PrCfCrrcdP What are the

mcdiating

languages? Is thcrc a
tcndcncy/obhgation t mark a translated v rk as having been mcdiatcd or is this
fact ign rcd/camouflagcd/dcnicd?If it is mcntioned, is thc idcntity of thC mcdiating languagc supPhed as vcllP And s n,

oPerational norms,in turn,may bc conccivcd of as dirccdng thc dccisi ns

madc during the act

f translati

ll itsclf Thcy affcct the matrix of the text~ie,

thc modcs of(hstributing linguistic lnatcrial in it~as

vcll as thc tcxtual rnakc uP

and crbal f rrnulatiOn as such Thcy thus g vcrn' dircctly or indircctly~thc rcla~
tionshiPs as vvcll that vvould obtain bct vccn thc targct and sourcc tcxts,i.c,

vhat

is more hkely t rcmaln in ariant undcr trans%rmation and what will change
so-callcd In

rrici

F n rms

may govcrn thc vcry

x1s enCe of target-languagc

matcrial intcnded as a substitutc f rd e c rrcsPonding sourcc language material

(and hellcc the degrcc
f actual

1FFncss f transladon),its locatic,n in tllc tcxt(or tllC

d srriburion),as weIl as the textual s m nrdFion3Thc

rm

cxtcnt to which omis~

sions,additions,changes oflocati n and1manipulatlons of segmentation are referrcd

( r0und thcm)may al bC dCt mhcd by norms,cvcn
nc
can
dl ugh thc
cry vCll ccurvithout thc Othcr.
Ob iously, thc bordcrhncs bct vccn thc Vari us matricial Phcn mCna arc not
clear~cut F r instancc,largc-scalc on1issions oftcn cnta changcs of scgmcntation
asvcll, csPecially if thc on1ittcd Porti ns have no clcar b undarics, or tcxtuallinguistic standing, i.e,if thcy are n t integral scntenccs,Paragraphs or chaPtcrs

to in thc translatt d tex

By thc samc token,a changc of location lllay oftcn bc acc

untcd for as an on1issi

210

GIDEON TOURY

(in onC placc)comPCnsatCd by an ad ti n(ClsCwhcrc) ThC dC0si n as to what

may havc rcally takcn Place iS thus(lcscriPtion-bound:What nc is aRer is(morc

or lcss gellt)cJcP dndFo9 Fhcscs,not ncccssallly met1,li a oullts,Whcsh
onc can ncvcr bc sure f any vay
Textual-linguistic nor ns, in turn, govcrn thc sclccu n f material to
formulatc thc targct tcxt in, or rcPlacc the original tcxtua1and linguistic material
vvith Textual~linguistic norms ll ay cither be Jcn
qua translati n,or P

'ricuF

rcz ,and hcnce aPPly to translation

r,in vvhich casc they vould Pcrtain to a Particular text_

tyPc and/ r rnode of translation nly somc oftherll rna

bc idcntical t dlc n rms

governing non~translati nal tcxt_Producti n,but such an idcntity should ncvcr bc

taken f r grantcd, This is thc method l gical rcas n hy no study of translati n
`

can,or should Proceed fr n1thc assumPti n dlat thc latcr is rcPrCscntativc of thc
targct language,or f any vCrall textual tradition thcrc f.(And sCC ur discussion
of ansl i n sPcci c lcxical items

.)

It is clcar d at prclin1inary norms haVc b

th logical and chron logical Prccc~

(lcncc er thc oPCrati nal ones.Ths is n tt say that bctwcen thc tw m or
grouPs thcrc arc no rclati nshiPs vhats c er,including mutual inucnccs or even
t

Vo- Vay

Conditioning Ho vcvcr,thesc rclati ns are by n means xcd and givcn,

and thcir estabhshment f rms an inscParable Part f any study of translati n as a

norm-g crncd acti ity Ne crthclcss, VC Can safcl assumc at lcast that thc rela_
tions
hch d cxist havc t d
th the initial n rm, Thcy 11ight cvcn bc f und
to inrcrsecF it~anothcr important rcason to rctain thc opposition bet

and acccPtability as a basic c

rdinatc systCn1f r

thc f rmulati

vcen adcquacy

n f cxPlanatory

hyP thCscs4

Opcrational n rms as such may bc dcscril)cd as scrving as a model,in accordanccvith vhich translations c mc into bcing, hether involving the n rms rcahzcd

by thc source text(ic, adCquatc translati n)Plus ccrtain modiHcations or Purcly

targct norms,or a Particular comPr n1isc bct veen the t vo Evcry rnodel suPPlying
Perf rmancc instructions rnay bc said to act as a r sFricrinJ factor:it oPenS uP ccrtain
Pti ns vhilc closing othcrs C nscqucntly, vhcn the Hrst P sition is fully ad ptcd,

thc translation can hardlv bc sai(lt

ha c

bccn madc into thc tar8et languagc as a

vholc.Rathcr,it is rnadc int a modcl languagc, vhicb is at best somc Part of the
f rmcr and at vv rst an arti cial,and as such n ncxistcnt
aricty s In this last casc,
thc translati n is not rcall ir,Frod ced into thc targct culturc cither, but is ii,iP scd

on it, so to spcak surc,it lnay c Cntually car c a nichc for itsclf in the lattcr,but

slot (Dn thc

thcr
hand, vhcn the sec nd position is adoPtcd,hat a translat r is introducing into thc

thcre is no initial attcmPt t

acc n modatc

it to any cxisting

targct culturc( vhich is indecd

hat s/he can l)c dcscribcd as cl ing no
ersion
)iS a
fthe riginal
v rk,cut t thc lncasurc of a Prccxisting luodc1,(And SCC ur discus~

sion f thc pPosition bctvccn thc

translati n of litcrar tcxts and
litcrar
translation as
vell as the dcta cd Presentation f the Hcbrc translation of a
Gcrman hF q6F nFdnd text)
Thc aPParent contradicti n bct /ccn any traditi nal conccPt f equivalcncc and
tl

e hmltcd modd into whch a anslation has st bCen dalmed tl,be m

ollly bc resol ed by posttllating tl at

tllded can

it`norms that determine the(tyPe

and cxtcnt o cquivaIcncc Iman sted bv actual translations Thc stu(l
f norms thus c nsututes a
ital steP t
vards estabhshing just ho :thc functional~
`

NORMS IN TRANSLATION
relati nal P

stulatc of cquivalcncc has bccn rcahzcd

211

vhcthcr in onc translated

tcXt,in thC v rk f a single translat r or school f translat rs,in a gi cn hist r~

ical Peri d, or in any othCr justi ablc selccti

n6 What this approach cntails is a

vhich
ari us contclllPorary
vish to rctain thc n tion of equi alCncc,
clcar

aPproaches(c.g H nig and Kussmau1 1982; Holz-Mantt ri 1984; Snc -Hornby

1988)ha c tricd to d
vithout,vvhilc introducing onc csscntial change into it

an ahist rical, largcly PrcscriPtivC c nccpt to a hist rical onc Rathcr tllan bcing a

singlc rclationship, dcnoting a rccurring tyPc of inariant,it comcs to rcfcr t any

rclation
vhich is f und to ha c charactcrizcd translation undcr a sPccincd set f

circumstanccs,

At thc cnd f a full~Hcdgcd study it vcill Probably bC found that translational

norms,hcncc thc rcahzation of the cquivalence P stulatc,arc all,t a largc extent,
dcPcndent on the P sition hcld by translati n~thc activity as vell as its Products
~in thc targct culturc An intcrcsting Held for study is thercf
nature oftranslational norms as comParcd t

rc comparati c:thc

thosc go crning non-translational kinds

f tcxt_Producti n In fact, this lond f study is absolutcly vital, if translaung and

translations are to bc aPPr Priatcly contcxtuahzcd.

4Thc1nultiPlicity of translational nor1ms

The dif cultics involvcd in any attcmPt to account for translational n

rms should

vcvcr, lie rst and f rem st in tvvo fcaturcs

not be undcresti1uated Thcsc, h
inhcrent in thc cry n ti n f norn1, and arc tlacrcf rc not unique to Translati n
studics at all

thc s cio-cultural sPcci city of norms and their basic instability,

Thus,
vhatc cr its cxact content, thcrc is absolutcly n nccd for a n rn to
aPPly_ to thc samc cxtcnt,or at all~t all sect rsvithin a socicty Even less
ncccssary,or indccd likcly,is it f ran rn to aPPly across culturcs In fact, samc
ncss hcrc is a n crc coincidcncc -or clsc thc rcsult of continu us contacts bet vccn
subsystems vvithin a culturc, r bct vccn cntirc cultural syStcms,and hcncc a mani-

station f hterkrcnce (For s mc gcncral rulcs f systcmic in rfthrcncc scc

Evcn-Zohar 1990: 53-72)E cn thCn,it is Ren1n rc a1natter of apparcnt than
of a gcnuinc idcntity Aftcr all,signi6cancc is only attril)utcd to a nor

in
hich it is cn1bcddcd, and thc systcn

1by thc slsFer,,

s rcmain different c cn if instanccs of

extcrnal bchavi ur aPpCar thc samc,

In additi n to thcir inhcrcnt sPcci city,n rms arc also unstablc,chan8ing cnti~

tics;not bccausc of any intrinsic Ha f but by thcir vcry naturc as norms At tin1cs,
norn s

change rathcr quickly; at othcr tilues, thcy arc morc enduring, and thc
proccss may take longcr, Eithcr vay, substantial changcs, in translational norms
to

,quite oRcn occur vithin nc s life-ti1nc,

Ofc ursc it is not as if all translat rs arc Pdss11'cin facc ofthcsc changcs Rathcr,

many ofthcn through thcir vcry activity,hclP in shaPing thc pr ccss,as do trans~
lation criticisn1, translation i(lcoIogy (including thc onc cmanatin from
contcmPorary acadcn1c, ftcn in thc guisc ofthc ry),and,of c ursc, arious nor 1scttin8activitics ol institutcs vchcrc, in lnany socicdes, translators are no ,bein:
trained. Vittingly or un
ttingly,they a try to intcrfcrc vith thc natural

c ursc

n PrcfCrcnccs, Yct thc succcss of

f c ents and to divcrt it according to thcir

212

GIDEON TOURY

their cndca urs is nc cr fully forcsccablc In lhct, the 1

elati c r lc

f diffcrcnt

agcnts in thc vcrall dynan1ics of translati nal norn s is st l largcly a mattcr of

c jcctttm cvcn r timcs Past,and much m rc rcsca h is necdcd tl,clari it
ith s cial p ssulcs t ,Constallt a t onc9s bcha iour to norms
Compl)ing
that kccP changh18is of c

sin1Plc,and m st Pc Plc~including translators, initiators of translation activitics and thc consumcrs of thcir Products~do
s

ursc fa1 fi nn

only tll)to a point Thcrcf re,it is not al that rarc to hnd sidc by sidc in a society

thrcc tyPes of cola l)cting norms,cach having its o vn fo

vcrs and a position ofits
o
thc oncs that dolminatc thc centrc of the systcn and
`n in thc culturc at large
hence dircct translati nal beha iour f thc so~callcd mdinsFrc I,,, al0ngsidc thc

rcmnants of Pre `ious scts of n rms and t11c rudirnents of nc 0nes,ho cring in thc

vhy it is P Ssiblc to sPcak~and not dcr gatorily

PCriPhCry. This is

trcndy , old~fashi ncd

r
Progrcssivc in translation
d erc D itis h any c,thcr bchr x1 uml dommn

of l cing
(or in any singlc section

Onc s status as a translat r may ofc ursc bc tcmP rary,cspccially if onc fails

to an CXtcnt
hich is dcclncd

insuf cicnt Tl)us, as changes of n rn1s OCCur, formcrly

c translat rs
grcssi
Pr

n"ght d J
m n nd tllcmsckes ju rcndy ,or n on as e cn do
t

adjust t thc changing rcquircn1cnts, or(locs s

At thc samc tilnc,regarding this Pr ccss aS inVol ing a lncre altcrnation of gencr~
vith a8c
ations can bc 1islcading, csPccially if gcnerations arc directly cquatcd
ccn onc s Position along thc
groups,Whilc thcrc ftcn arc corrclations bet
~
rnainstrealu

datcd

s agc,thcsc cannot,and sh uld n t bc

takcn as incvitablc, 111uch lcss as a starth1g PoiL1t and frame

ork lor thc study of

norms in aCti n
ost11ot )ly, )f ung PcoPlc b arc in the earl) l)hascs f their
initiation as trans at rs Ren bcha c in an cxt1 cmcly cpigonic
tbcy tend to
`ay
r 1according to datcd,but still cxisting norms, thc m re so if thcy rcceivc
PCrf
_

a ant-gardc

axis and c)nc

rcinforccmcnt fr m agcnts holding to dated norms, bc they languagc teachcrs,

cdit rs,
~

r cvcn tcachers f translation,

ultiPhcity and variation shoukl n t bc taken t imPly that thCrc is n such

thing as n rms actiVc in translation,Thcy only mean that rcal hfe situations tcnd to
bc c mplex;and
t

this c mPlexity had bCttcr be n tcd rathcr than ignorcd,if nc is

dra v any justisablc c nclusi ns As alrcady argucd,the only

1able

vay outscCms

cry text,cvcry aCt,on the

iatc Positi n and

vay to all tting thc dircrcnt n rn1s t11cmscl cs thcir appr P

alcncc, This is hy it is si1nPly unthi11kablc, fron thc P int f
ic
f thc study
`
f translati n as a11orm-go erncd activity, for all itcms to bc trcatcd on a Par, as
to l)cto c ntcxtuahze evcry l)hcnon1cn n,cvcry iten ,C

if thcy vere of thc samc systcn1ic position,thc samc signiHcancc,the samc lc

cl f

rcPrCsCntati cncss of thc targct culturc and its constraints Unfortunatcly,such an

indiscrirninatc approach has bcen all t

co1umon,and has cn lcd to a complcte

blurring of d1c nortuati c picturc,somctirnes c cn to thc absurd clain1that no n

rms

bc dctcctcd at all Thc nly xxay to keeP that Picture in f cus is t go l)cy nd

dlc cstabhs11n1cnt f rncrc chcck list: of factors xx hich rna ccur in a corPuS and
c uld

havc thc lists r( ercd,for instancc ith rcsl)cct t thc status of th sc fact rs as char~

actcrizin8 n1ainstrcan

datcd and avant-gardc activitics,rcsPcctivCly,

vhosc ncccssity
This in11ncdiatcly suggcsts a furthcr axis fc ntextuahzation,
has so far nly been imPhCd;namely,thc l,isr r1cdF one ARer a

bc marked as dated

if itvas active in a Prc ious Peri

,a norn1can only

d,and if,at that th c,it had

'
a di(Fcrcnt, non-datcd

NORMs IN TRANSLATION

position By thc same tokCn,n

213

rlll go crncd

bcha

ur can

ards it an
ant-gardC only in vic v ofsubs qucnr attitudcs t
nly be
idi syncrasy :hich nc cr cvolvcd int somed ing m re gcncral can

pro c to havc bccn

dcscribcd as a norrn by extension,so tO sPCak(see scction 1 aboc),Finally,thcrc

l ainstrca1u about mainstrcam bcha iour, cxcePt

hen it
haPPens t function as such,
vhich mcans that it t o is ti1nc l,ound VVhat I am
is nothin inhercntly

clain1ing herc, in fact, is that hist rical contcxtuah'ation is a must not()nly for a
tFidchron1c study,

vhich nobody vould c ntest,but als for9 cJ,r nic studies, vhich
b i us unlcss ne has acccPtcd the PrinciPlCS fs _callcd

still sccms a lot lcss

Dynalnic Functionahsn

shc

(for 'hich,scc thC Introducti n to Evcn-Z

har19907and

1992 Pas m),

Finally, in translation t o, non-normczFivc bcf,driour is always a Possibility ThC

pricc r sclcding this oPti n may bC aslow as a(cultura y dctermincd)nccd t

subn)it thc cnd Pr duct to rcvision Ho vcver, it lnay also bc far m rc sc crc to
thC Point f taking a
ay onc S Carncd rcc 8nition as a translator; vhch is Preciscly

vhy n n-normative bchavi ur tends t l,e thc cxccPti n,in actual Practicc On the
othcr hand, in rctr sPcct, de iant instanccs of behaviour may bc found t
cffcctc(l ch n
s

ha e

in the very systcm This is hy they constitutc an important Held

of study,as l ng as thcy arc regarded as vhat they ha c rcally bccn and arc not Put

ne baskct vith all thc rcst I1nPhed are intriguin

qucstions
such as
ho is all
vcd by a culture t introduce changes and undcr vhat circu 1
stances such changcs rnay bc cxpcctcd to occur and/or bc acccPted,

indiscrirninatcly int

5 Studying translational norIms

S

hr we havc discusscd n rms mainly in tcrms of their acti ity duhng a transla

tion evcnt and their effectivcncss in thc act f translation itself,To be surc,this is
:here and vhen translational norms arc acti c
hat is actu
c cr,
PreciSCly
allv a a ablc f r
bservati n is not so much the n r1us thcmscl cs, but rathcr
I

nor g crncd instanccs of behaviour To be c cn m rc Prccise,l,lorc oRen than

not,it is the Pr ducts f such beha i ur

Thus,c cnvhcn translating is clairncd to

bc studicd(hrcctly,as is the case ith thc usc of Thinking Aloud Protocols ,it is
only Pr ducFs :hich arc available,although Products of a diffcrent kind and ordcr,
N rms are not chrcctly obscr ablc,thcn,
vhich is all the m re rcason vhy
translational beha

i ur,

Thcrc alc two m rs urccs r

and cxtratcxtua

somc~

f an attcmpt to ccou,at for

thing should also bc said about therll in thc cOntcxt

a rcc ns uction

of anslati nal norms,tcXtual

textual the translatcd tcxts thc 1scl es,ft)r

analytlcal in ent rics oftranslations(i,c ,

kinds f norrlls, as vell as

irtual texts),for
arious

PrChn1in-

arV n rlns;

extratextua1: scllli-thcOrctical or critical formulations, such as PrcscriPtivC

thc rics of translati n, statcmcnts rnadc by translators, editors,Pubhshcrs,

and thcr PersOns involvcd in r conncctcd ith

thc acti ity,critical aPPraisals

of indivi(lual translations,or the activity of a translat

lators, and s

rth

r r scho f trans~
l

214

GIDEON TOURY
Thcre is a fundamcntal diffcrcncc bct fccn thcsc t fo typcs ofsourcc:Texts are

mdrv Products fn rm_rcgulatcd bcha i ur,and can therefore bc takcn asin mcdiatc rcPrcsentatlons thereof Normative Pronouncements, by c ntrast, arc n crcly
Prc,dut ts fthc c cnce and tkityf ncll ms hkc ally tt mPt to hrmtllate

a norn thcy arc partial and biased, and sh uld theref re be trcatcd ith c cry
PoSSiblC circumspcction;all the m re so sincc- cmanating as they d fronl intcrestcd Partics _ thCy arc likcly to lcan t
ard Pr Paganda and Persuasion, Thcrc
may therefc re be gaPs, cvcn contradictions, bct vccn cxPhcit arguments and
dcmands, n thcnc hand,and actual bchaviour and its rcsults,on the othcr,(luc

Pr

0th to m ccdv

itt ,or cven lack of su 0eltk1 o c(l 1tl t Pa

of those vh ProducCd thc f rmulati ns On occasion,a dehbcratc dcsirc t
rnislcad
and decei c lnay also bc in
l cd E envith rcsPect to the translators thcmscl
cs,
cll llc

intcntions do not nccessarily c ncur

ith any dcclaration of intcnt( fhich is ften
put down post hctum anyway,when the act has allcady bccn c mPlcted);and thC
ay thosc intcntions arc rcahzcd may vvcll constitutc a furthcr,third categ
`

n t

Yct all thcsc rescr ations_ProPCr and scri

ry stil1.

us though thcy may bC should

lcad onc to abandon sclmi~thcOrctical and critical formulations as lcgitirnatc

sourccs for thc study of norms In spitc of all its faults,this type of sourcc still has
its mcrits,both in itsclf and as a Possiblc kcy to thc analysis of actual bcha

the salrlac tiInc, if thc PitfallS inhcrent in thcm are t

Pr nounccmcnts should
aS Pr ^svsr m Fic and gi

and Prccisc iame

Whlc do

ur,At

bc a idcd, n rmativc

ncver bc acccPtcd at facc value They should rathcr bc takcn

en an exphcati n in such a ay as to place thcm in a narro v

v rk,lending

thc rcsulting cxPhcata thc co cted systcmatic status

dd bC made to ch tllc tls f eaCla brmula

,an tcml,t

tion,hovevcr slantcd and biascd it rnay be,and unc

cr thc scnse in vhich it vas

just accidcntal;in ther words how,in thc Hnal analySiS,it d es rcflcd thc
cultural c nstcllationvithin :hich,and for whosc purPoscs it vcas pr duccd APart
n t

fr m

shccr spcculation,such an exphcati n should in lvc thc c mparison f

vari

us

icll as their rePcatCd c nfrontation

with thc Patterns rcvcalccl by[thc Stll oq acatual bcha i ur and tl cn rms recon
stluCted iom thcm~all this with hll c nsiclcmu nf lr thelr contcxtualizati n.(scc
normative Pron uncemcnts to caCh othcr, as

a rcprcscntativc casc in Wcissbrod 1989 )

It is natural, and cry c nvcnicnt, to commcnCC onc s rcscarch int translavcll-dcsncd
tional bchaviour by focussing on jso` Fecf n rms pcrtaining to
bcha i ural(limcnsions,bc

thcy~and the c uplcd Pairs of rcplacing and rcPlaccd

segmcnts rePresenthg them established i m the s urcc tcxt s PersPective(Cg,
translauol)al rePlacelucnts of sourcc )ctaphors)or m the targct tcxt s
antagc,
Point(C g,bin mials f ncar syn nyms as anslati nal rcPlaccmcnts),Howe cr,
translation is intrinsically mufFi-dilucnsiona thc lnanif ld phcnomcna it PrcsCnts arc
tightly intcr
o cn and do not allovv for casy isolation, not c

en for mcthodical

PurposCS Thcrcf rc,rcsearch should nc cr gct stuck in thc bhnd alley of dlc Paradigmatic Phase vhich vould at bcst yield lists of n rmemcs
Rathcr,it should alvays Pr cccd t

syntagmatic PhasC,in `or(liscrcte

ol ing thc i FgJr
rjcln
norms
s
task
blen1arcas,
Accordingly,thc
studcnt
fn rmcmcs Pertaining to various Pr
a

can bc characterized as an attcmPt to estabhsh

vhat

rcFciriclns thCre arc bct

vccn

norms Pcrtaining to various d mains by corrclating his/hcr indi idual ndings and
vveighing then1against cach ther Ob i usly,thc thickcr thc net v rk of relati ns

NORMS IN TRANsLATION

215

thus cstablished,thc morc justisc(l nc woul(l bc in qPeaking in tcrms of a no1 ma

tivc strucFu (cf,JackS

n1960 149-60) rm d

This ha ing bccn said, it should again be n

`,

tcd that a translat

s bchavi ur

cannot bc cxPcctcd to be fully systcmatic Not only can his/hcr dccisi n_n1akln
be differently m tivatcd in diffcrent Pr blCm arcas, l)ut it can also bc unc cnly
(hstributed thr ughout an assignment vithin a singlc Problen1area Consistency in
translational beha iour is thus a rddcd notion

hich

is ncithcr nil(i.C,,total crratic-

ncsS)n r1(ie,absolutc rcgularity);its extent should emcrge at the cnd f a study

as Onc ofits c nclusi ns, rathcr than bcing PresuPPosed

Thc Amcrican sooologist Jay JackS n suggcstcd a Rcturn Potcntial Curvc

ving
sh

thc distribution f appr val/disaPPral am ng thc mcmbers fas cial

grouP o cr a range of bcha

fn rms

ur of a ccrtain tyPe as a modcl for thc rePrcscntation

Tl ls mOdel(rcpr duced as Figure18,1)makcS it P Ss lC

makc a

gradual distinction bet vecn norms in tcrms of inFcnsir (indicatcd by thc hcight of

thc cu"c,i dlstancc m

tl

eh riz latd a s),tllC

ror

FoFcIrlf

ur

d beh
"

`
(that Part of thC1)chavioural di1nension apProvcd by thc group),and
thc r

rio f one

f thcsc proPcrtiCS of thc norn

Onc convcnicnt di

isi

to thC othcrs
n that can bc rc intcrPrctcd vith thc aid f this model

is tripartitc:9

Basic(Phmary)norms,morc or less mmclato

r in

nces of a

c tain bchavi ur(and hCncc thc minimd c mm n denominat r) OccuPy

thc apcx of thc cur e lN/ axi1num intcnsity,n ini1num latitudc f behaviour,

ourablc bcha i ur May

bc PrCdon1inant in ccrtain P rrs fthc grouP Thcrcforc c 11non cnou8h,but
not Inandat ry,frona thc Point f vie v ofthc grouP as a holc OccuPy that

secondary norms,or tendencies,dctcrn)ining h

part of the cur e ncarcst its apcx and thcrcf rc less intcnsivc than thc basic

norms but covering a greater rangc of bchavi

ur

Tolerated(per1mitted)behaviour OccuPies thc rcst ofthe

P siti

P t

of the cur e(i,c,,that Part vhich lics abovc thc horiz ntal axis), and thCrc~
f

rc fn1inirnal intensit

A sPCcial

grouP, detachablc f om(c),sCCms to bc of con dcrable intcrcst and

irnP rtancc,at

least in somc bcha ioural domains

synnPtomatic deviccs Thou8h thcSc dC iccs may bc in cqucntly uscd,

thcir ccurrcncc is tyPical for narro ving scgmcnts ofthc grouP under study

0n thc thcr

hand, their abs lutc 0n-oCCurrcnce can be tyPical of thcr

scgmcnts
Wc may, thcn, safcly assumc a dis

riburi@n , basis f

r thc study of norms; thc

m rc cqucnt a targct tcxt phcnomcnon, a shiR on1a(hyPothetlcal)adCquatc

rcconstruction of a source text, or a translational rclation,thc m
rc ect(in

rc likcly it is to

this rder)am rc pcrmittcd(t lCratc(l)acti` ity,a r nger tcndcncy,a

morc basic( bligatory)n rm,A sCc nd asPect of n rms,thcir discrin,indro cdPdci

is thus rcciProcal t thc rst,s that thc lcss frequent a bchavi ur,thc smallcr thc

group may Scrvc to dc nc Atthe samc dmc,the group it docs dc

nc is n t just

216

GIDEON TOURY

High|y

approve

lndifferent

-3
High|y

-4

disapprove
f

fu s sd1cnlatlc diagram showing thc RctuH1Potcntlal lX/I

(lcl R)r rcPrCSCnting n ,rms (a)

a bcha ic)ur dilncnsi )n; (b)an cvaluation(limcnsion; (c)a rcturn P tcntial

C 1Ir c,

sho ving thc(lstril)ution l aPPr

a disaPPr0 al am()ng thc n cn11Dcrs fa grouP o cr

the vholc range of beha i()ur;(d)the range of tolerablc or aPPro Cd bchaviour

sourcc

Jackson 1960

any grouP;it is al vays a sub~gr up ofthc Onc c nstitutcd by higher~rank norn1s

T bc surc,c en idiosyncrasics(

vhich,in thcir cxtrcmc,constitutC groups-o one)

oRcn mani thcmscl ics as p nJ ays f ali n

Im l gCncrd attittl(lcs
rathcr than dc iations in a comPlctCly uncxPectCd direction,10Bc that as it rnay,thC

rctrOsPcctivC estabhshn ent fn rn1s is alvays rclative t thc section undcr study,
and n aut matic uPward pr cdion is Possible Any t

ttc

mptto m ve

lll that dircc

tion and dra /generahzati ns vould rcquire further study, vhich sh uld be targctcd
tovards

that Particular cnd,

Finally,the cur e rnodcl als enablcs us t redennc Onc additi nal conccPt thC

tud d rcc of

form1 mt n cd by rcnt membt rs f a grotlP tc an rm

that has alread bccn cxtractcd froln a c rPus,and hcnce found relevant to it This
aspcct can bc dc ncd in terms f thc(listancc frolll the Point f rnaxhnun rcturn
(in thCr w rcls, om thc curvc s aPCx)

Notwith anding tllc Points madc in the last kw ParagraPhs,the argument

the distributi nal asPcct of the n rms sh uld n t bc PushCd too far

vn,ve arc in no Positi n to point to strict statistical n cth ds

As is so c kn

r deahngvith translational norms, r cvcn to supply samPhng rulcs f r actual

rcscarch(which,l)ccausc f human hmitati ns,will always bc aPPlicd t saml lcs
f

NORMs IN TRANsLATION

217

nly).At this stagcvc must bc c ntcnt vith our intuitions, hich,being bascd on

kn
vlcdgC and Previous cxPerience,arc learncd ncs, and usc thcn1as kcys f r
c should
sa that
sclecting corPusCS and f r hitting uPon ideas This is not t
cnts On the c ntrary rnuch cncrgy
aband na1lh Pe f r1ncthodological i1nPrOvcl
sh

uld still be directcd to vard thc cr stallization of systclnatic rcscarch mctla ds,

including statistical ncs, csPcCially if vvc

1sh to transccnd thc study of n rn1s,

at a timc,and movc nt tllc rmu~
lati n of gcncral lavs
f translati nal bcha i ur,
vhich
vould incvitably bC

which c alwayS hmkcd t ne

Pr

bczbi

s cietd gr uP

isric in naturc To bc surc, achic cn1ents of actual studics can thcmscl cs

suPply us
ith clucs as to nccCssary and possiblc mcth d logical imProvcmcnts,
Bcsidcs,if xx c hold up rcscarch until thc n st s stematic n1ethods have becn f und,
C lllight ncvcr gct any rcsearch(l

nc

Notes

The cxistcncc of n rms is a sine qua n n in instanccs of labclling and regu_

vithout a n rn1, all dcviations arc mcaninglcss and bcc me cases of

fIcc
a0ation (Vcxlcr1974 4,n 1)
lating;

An adcquatc translati n

hich rcahzes in thc target languagc

is a translation

the textual rclati nshiPs f a SOurce tCxt with n

brcach f its Own lbasicl

(E Cn~zohar 1975 43;luy translation),

The d m th pon0Ples f gmcntation llow uni crs Patterns
hnguistic systcn

is ju a

gmcnt of thc imagination of son e disc ursc and text the rcticians intent on
uncovCling as lllany uni crsal PrinciPlcS as PoSSil)le In actual fact,there ha

bccn ari us traditions (or

rn dcls

) of segn.entation, and the diffcrcnccs

hcther thcy arc takcn

bct ,ccn thcna always havC imPhcati ns for translati n,

n f the targct tcxt or ignorcd E cn thc scgmcnta~

tlon of saCrcd tcxts such as thc Old1 cstamcnt itsclf has oRen bccn tamPered
F cultural
th by its translat rs,normally in ordcr t bring it closcr to rczr

t bea1

n thc forn

ulati

habits,and l)y so(l ing cnhance thc translati n s acccPtability

hcrc the pursuit of adcquate translation is
Thus, for instancc, in scctors
vould also bccon c
marginal, it is highly Probablc that indircct translati n

common, on occasion cvcn prcfcrrcd ver direct translation By contrast, a

norn1 vhich Pr hil)its lnediatcd translation is likcly to bc connectcd vith a
gro 'ing Proxi1nity to thc initial n
if indi1 cct

rn

ofadequacy Under such circumstances,

translati n is still PcrR)rmcd,the fact vill at least be concealed,if

not outright(lenied
i,

And scc,in this conncction,Izrc

el

s Rati nalc

for Translating Ancicnt Tcxts

into a Mo(Icrn Languagc (1994) In an attcmpt to comc uP with a mcthod

f r translating an Akkadian1nyth` hich would be Prcsented to modcrn Isracli

audicnccs in an oral Perf rn1ancc, hc PurPorts t c n binc a fcchng o

o n dcrnity in a tCxt vhich uld bc alt gcthcr

antiquity xx1th a fcchn
siluPlC and casily comPrehcnsiblc by using a h

st of lcxical itcms f

Hcbrcw in rdc,/I Hcbrcw grammatical and syntactic structurcs

liili`ic

Vhcrcas thc`
ukl scr c to givc an ancicnt fla or to thc tcxt, thc grammar
lcxic n

v uld scr c to cnablc mOdern PcrccPti n It n1ight bc added that this is a

218

GIDEON TOURY
PCrkct m r r imagc ofthe way Hcbrcw translators sta cd simulating sPokcn
Hebrc
1s vvcrc inscrtcd in gramlnatical and
`in thcir tcxts:sPokcn lCxical ite
s ntactic structurcs which wcrc marked hr bcl nging to t11c writtcn
arieties

(BCn Shahar1983),which also mcant ncw hto olcl

Scc also luy discussion of Equivalcncc and Non~Equi alcncc as a Funcu n f

N rm (Toury198 63-7Ol

Thcrc is a clcar dif% ncc betwecn an attcmPt t

acc unt rs me

m r

princiPlcs vvhich govcrn a systcm utsidc the reahn f ti1ne, and ncvhich
intcnds t acc unt for h

a systcn oPeratcs both in PrinciPlC and in ti1nc,

Oncc thc hist rical aspcct is adn ittcd into thc ft1nctional aPProach, scveral
ilnPhcati ns must bc(h a vn First, it must bc adn1itted that b th s nchr n
xx

and( achr ny arc historical,but thc cxclusi c idcntiHcation f thc lattcr vith
hist ry

is untcnablc,As a rcsult,synchrony cann t and should not bc cquatcd

vvith statics,sincc at any givcn IllomCnt,rnorc than onc diachr nic setis oPcr_
ating on thc synchronic axis,Thcrcf rc,on thc Onc hand a s stcln consists of

both synchrony and diachr ny;on thc thcr,cach of thcsc scParatcly is obviously alsO a systCm.second,if thc idca

f structuredness and s

sten icit

nccd

no longer bc idcntiHcd vith homogcncity,a scn1iotic systen can bc conccived

as a hctcr

gcncous, Pen structurc Itis,thcrcf

but is,ncccssarily,a Polysystcm

Cf,eg,Vodi ka(1964

(Even-Zohar1990: 11)

74), n thC PoSsiblc s urccs for the studv f hterarv

norm s,and Wexlcr(1974:7-9),

intcr cntion(
Purisn

rc, ,cry rarcly a uni~systcm

n the sourccs for thc study of PrcscriPti

)in languagc

Cf,eg.,Hrus1 sk s

similar di

isi

n(in Ben_Porat and Hrusho isk 1974

9-10)and its aPPhcati n to thc dcscription fthc n rn s f Hcbrcv rhymc

(in Hrush vski 1971)
1O

And see thc cxamPlC f

thc seen ingly idios ncratic usc of Hcbrcvv

~xcn

as a

translational rcPlacemCnt f Enghsh

vcll in a Pcri d vhcn thc n rm dictates
thc use f`u_excn,

s0861

T;

s e f : ;c 1t d

| t:y i :F ; :

of trans|ation research and` especiaHy in Eng"sh-speaking countr

es` nHs the need

for an introductory text in the trans|ation c|assroo|m It is a tilnle|y interVention that

hera|ds the emergence of trans|ation studies as a separate discip"ne` oVer|apping

oth "nguistiCs` "terary criticism` and ph"osophy` but exp|oring unique prob|ems

of cross-cu|tura{ Communication, Bassnett takes a historica| approach to theoretica|concepts and understands practica|strategies in re|ation to specinC Cu|tura|and

sOcia| situations Even though she emphasizes "terary trans|ation` her book rests
on /hat becOmes the mOst cOmmon theOret ca| assu mptiOn during this periOd the
re|atiVe autonomy of the trans|ated text.

Approaches informed by semiotics` disCourse ana|ysis` and pOststructura"st

textua|theory disp|ay important COnCeptua|and methodo|ogica|differences`but they
nOnethe|ess agree that trans|ation is an independent form of

/riting` distinct from

the fOreign text and from texts Ori9|naHy /ritten in the trans|ating |anguage,
Trans|ating is seen as enacting its o /n processes of signincation xvhich anskA/er to
d

fferent |inguistic and cu|tura| cOntexts. This Vie

/recurs in trans|ation traditions

from antiquity on /ard` but noxpvf it iS deve|oped systematicaHy` conceptua"zed

accOrding to the

arious discourses that characterize current academic disciplines,

In sOme theorists` the autonomy of trans|ation |eads to a deeper functiona

isn

` as

theories and strate9ies are "nked to speci c cu|tura| effects` commercia| uses` and
po"tica| agendas.

Denning equiva{ence inevitab|y cOmes to seem a |ess urgent prob|em

"|iam
and
Fra dey questions the notion of equiva|ence as an identity bet /een foreign text
trans|ation` /hether the ident|ty is construed as empir ca| (abso|ute synonymy based

222

198os

on reference)`bio|ogica| (the same organs Of perception and cognition)`or|inguistic

(universa|s Of |anguage), Instead he reminds us that if trans|ating is a fOrm of

con

\there is information On|y in d`ff

municatiOn`

actua"y a
code in its o /n right` setting its o

rel,ce/

so that a trans|ation is

standards and structura| presuppOsitions and entai|ments` though they are necessar"y derivative of the matrix
information and target arameters (Fra
The concept of a \\third cOde
t

ons accord" g to their de9ree of se|

/|

168` 169),

1984
/ey to distinguish among trans|aenab|es"ey
Fra
iotic\

innovation

(ibid,

173-174 H e treats

\new know edge is

this distinction quantitative y` as a matter of how much
produced` sO he stops short of eva|uatin9the trans|ator s production of that knONtl|edge or its illlpaCt on the cu|tura| tradition

/ith n /hich the trans|ation signifes,

A|though Fravil ey s exan p|es are high y|iterary`taken from a poetic trans|ation of

a poem`his thinking assumes the c a m of objectivity in theOreticaHinguistics`which

exc|udes questiOns of | terary a|ue,

shOshana B um-l u ka s study of trans|ation shifts further exp|ores the third

code by de n" g it as a type of discourse speci c to trans|atin9

eXp"citation. In

the essay inc|uded be|o / (1986)` she specu|ates that trans|ating a llJays increases
the semantic re|ations among the parts of the trans|ated text`estab"shing a greater
cOhesiOn throu9h eX

sive strategies

"citness`repetition`redundancy`eXp|anation`and
discurIn cOntrast`
shifts of cOherence` deviations fron1 other
an under|ying

semantic pattern in the foreign text`depend on reception` on reader and trans|ator

interpretations, TO study them B|um

l<u|ka recomlllends ennpirica| research in

reading patterns` psych0"nguistic studies of text prOcessing,

of cOurse the very detection Of a shift hinges on a crucia| interpretive act`

xing

a meaning or structure in the foreign text and then describing a deviation from it
in the trans|ation. NO cOmparisOn bet /een a foreign teXt and its trans|ation can be
unmediated` free of an " terpretant` sOme third term that serves as the basis of the
co|

parison`usua"y a standard of accuracy`but a|so a cu|tura|and ideo|Ogica|code,

To describe shifts` |<itty van Leuven-Z /art (1989` 1990) deve|ops an e|aborate
ana ytica|

method based on the notion of an \\architranseme`

essentia"ya |exico-

graphica|equiva|ence bet /een sOurce and target|anguages`\ identi edth the he|p
/

of a good descriptiVe dictionary in each of the t /o |anguages invo|ved

Z/art1989

(Leuven-

158)

ArChitransemes he|p to estab"sh a re|ation betv een\ nlicrostructura| shifts of

shifts in narrat

a sernantic` sty"stic Or pragrnatic variety and \ rnacrOstructura

ve

fornl and discourse. XA/hen a p"ed tO Dutch trans|at ons of spanish and Spanish-

ArneriCan rose ncti n bet /een 196o and 1985` the |method re ea|s a tendency
to /ard specincati n and exp|anat on - preCise y the nding that B|um-KuH<a
hypothesizes as a universa| of trans|ation.
Other theOrists understand the autononny of the trans|ated text funct ona"y` as
s aCt Vity. Instead
a consequence Of the sOcia| factOrs that direct the trans|ator

of the term trans|ation Justa Ho z-A/lanttari (1984 prefers the broader neo-

|ogism \\trans|atoria| action

( ral,s/a

or`scl,es afTde`l,)to signify various for|ms of

cross Cu|tura{cOmmunicatiOn`not just trans|ating`paraphrasing or adapting`but

edit"

g and consu|ting The trans|ator is seen as an expert who designs a\\produCt

1980s

223

speci catiOn in consu|tation Xnvlith a c"ent and then produCes a \\message transmitter to serve a particu|ar pur ose in the receiving cu|ture, Here trans|ating does

/ith a target text that

/ith the sOurce text` but rep|aces it
not seek an equiva|ence
fu|n"s the c"ent s needs.

Ho|z-pk/anttari`s abstraCt termino|ogy nlay seem to reduce trans|atiOn tO an

assen

b|y-"ne process of teXt production` a FOrdism that va|ues lmere ef

ciency It

/as deve|oped in trans|ator training situations`

gies and so|utions are prized

^/here effective trans|ation strate-

and it does renect actua| practices among trans|ators

of technica` colm anercia` and ofncia| d cuments. It has the virtue of ca"ing attention to the professiona| rO|e p|ayed the trans|ator` his or her aCcOuntabHity` thus
raising the issue of a trans|ation ethics

An action theory of trans ation surfaces independent|y in Hans Vermeer

As the essay be|o/(1989) indicates` ern eer hi9h"ghts the trans|ator
ain1 as a decisive factOr in a tral1s ation projeCt

s wOrk

s sl

/o

os or

He conceives of the skopos as a

comp|eX|y denned intent|on /hose textua| rea"zation may diverge vlide|y from the
source teXt so as to reach a\\set of addressees
of a trans|ation depends on its Coherence

in the target cu|ture The success

/ith the addressees situation, A|though

the possib|e responses to a text can t be entire|y predicted` a typO|ogy of potentia|

audiences might guide the trans|ator s |abor and the histOrica| study of trans|ation,
ermeer/s a proach bears a resemb|ance to conte|mporary trends in "terary
history and cr ticism` na|me|y reader-response theory and the aesthetics of reCeption

(Reze F`or s S lle

/ith partiCu-

the meanings
of|iterary
texts Con
are afn"ated
naunities
s llVords`
\\interpretiVe
|ar audiences or` in`k)`VA/here
stan|ey Fish

(F

sh 1980),

Vithin trans|ation studies` sko osF/7eo'`e mOst resemb|es the target orientation
ng|y innuentia|during the

assOciated lAyith po|ysystem theory`xrVhiCh becOmes increas

1980s,
AndrO Lefevere takes up the sen ina| ork of EVen-Zohar and Toury and redenes their cOnCepts of "terary systen
cr

and norm, Lefevere treats trans|at on`

cisnn` editing` and historiography as fornas of \

refract on or \ re/riting/

Refractions` he /rites|n the1982essay reprinted here`

\carry a
/ork of|iterature

over from one systen into another/ and they are determined by such factors as

\patronage`

poetics` and
ideo|ogy/ This interpretive fralmetvork g|ves a nelA/
|egiti

lnacy to the study of |iterary trans ations by "|u|minating their creation of

canons and traditions in the target cu|ture, Lefevere sees that ROmantic notions of

authoria|origina"ty have margina"zed trans}ation studies`especia"y in the Eng"shspeakingor|d,And so he approaches the trans|ated text

/ith the sort of ana|ytica|

soph|stication that is usuaHy reserved for origina| connpOsitions,

The target Orientation Cont nues to guide |arge sca e research projects At

G0ttingen ni ersity`a tea m of scho|ars studies German trans|ations from the eighteenth century to the present` e p|oring such topiCs as intermediate trans|ation
(Gernnan versions of French versions of Eng"sh teXts) and nnu|tip|e trans|ations of
speci c genres Or an author s enti}'e Ceuvre They subsequent|y fOcus on antho|ogies

of trans|ated "terature`
^/hich oVer t

/o centuries reVea| \\representative historicaI

patterns under|ying Ger| an trans|ation cu|ture (Kitte|1995 277 see a|sO Esslman

and Frank199o),

224

198o$
For many theorists in this period` trans|ation can never be an untroub|ed

communication of a foreign teXt it is rather manipu|ation`as announced in the tit|e

0f Theo Hermans s 1985 antho|ogy` a cOHection of current trends in po|ysyste
an
research.
vn ost sch0|ar|y
concep^`ork on trans{ation st"| harbors an instrumenta
tion of|anguage as prilmar"y communicative` if I Ot of a univOca| mean" g`then Of

a for|ma"zab|e range of ossib"ities It is on|y /ith the rise of poststruCtura"sm

that |anguage beco lles a site of uncontro"ab|e po|ysemy` and trans|ation is reConceived not sinnp y as transformatiVe of the fore gn teXt` but interrogatiVe or` as
\deconstructiVe
Jacques Derrida puts it/
(Derrida 1979

93)

If trans|ation

inescapab|y reduces source meanings` it a|so re|eases target potentia"ties llA/hiCh

redound upon the foreign text " unsett"ng /ays. This idea recurs in the poststructura"st essays cOHected in JOseph Graham s 1985 antho|ogy,
TheOrists |ike Derrida and Pau| de llllan are carefu| not to e|eVate trans|ation
intO another origina| or the trans|ator into another author, Instead they question
the GOncepts of semantic unity`authoria| orig" a"ty`and copyright that cOntinue to
subordinate the trans|ated to the foreign text BOth teXts` they argue` are derivative and heterogeneous`cOnsisting of diverse |inguistic and Cu|tura| rnateria|s /hich
g

/ork of signincation` making meaning p{ura| and divided`exceedil

destab" ze the
ntentions of the foreign /riter and the trans|ator
and possib|y Con icting /ith the

Trans|ation is doomed to indequacy because of irreducib|e differences` nOt just

bet /een

/ithin them.
|anguages and cu|tures` but a|so

The skepticisn in oststructura"st thinking re i es the theme of untrans|ata-

b"ity in trans|ation theory`a|though in a more cOrrosiVe Version than Quine

s, Here

the prob|em is not so |much the inCommensurab"ity of cu|tures` the differences

bet /een conceptua| schemes that comp"cate comllnuniCation and reference` as the
inherent indeterlllinacy of |anguage` the unavoidab|e instabHity of the signify"

prOcess Consequent|y` pOststructura"s inspires |iterary eXperi ments as theoretica"y inc"ned trans|ators aim to re|ease the p|ay of the signiner in the trans|at"

|anguage, At the same time` ho /ever` theorists g ve rene /ed attentiOn tO cOncepts
of equiva|ence` nolltl ref0rmu|ated in "nguistic terms that are at Once cu|tura| and
historica` ethica| and o"tiCa|
Ph"ip E, Le/is s cOntribution be|o / (1985) addresses these issues through
Eng{ish versions of Derrida s inventive French texts, Sett"

g out froll

the 6ndin9s

of connparatiVe discourse ana|ysis` Le /is subn its trans|ation to a poststruCtura"st

doub|e interpretatiOn /hereby

the forei9n text is re /ritten in the \\assOciative chains and

structures of refercritique of representation. Trans|ating invo|Ves a

ence and enunciat on in the trans|ating |anguage, Because\ Eng"sh caHs for|m ore
ex

ons

\respect
determinations
Eand] fu"er`
more cohesive
de"neat
than"cit`
does precise`
French`conCrete
an ear|y
American trans|ator
of Derrida
is inc"ned
to

the use-va|ues of Eng"sh He | aintains immediate inte"igib"ity through current

Eng"sh usage instead of try" g to
min ic the phi1osopher s conGe tuaHy dense
wOrdp|ay

TO counter these tendencies` Lewv/is proposes a \\ne / axiomatics Of fnde"ty

/hich distinguishes bet /een trans|ating that domesticates or fa i"arizes a mes

sage and trans ating that tampers /ith usage` seeks to match the po|yva|encies

1980s

or p|urivocities Or eXpressive stresses of the origina|

225

The |atter kind of nde"ty he

ca"s\ abusive jt both resists the cOnstraints of the trans|ating |anguage and inter-

rogates the structures Of the fOreign text.

Antoine Berman llnakes sinn"ar distinctions the basis of a trans|ation ethics, He

questions\\ethnocentric trans|ating that
deforms the foreign text by ass|mi|ating
it to the target |anguage and cu|ture Bad trans|ation is not mere|y don
esticating`
\generaHy under the c|oak of transn
but mystifying`
issib"ity` [it] performs a
systematic negation of the foreignness of the foreign ork (Berman1984 17`nny

Fo"o /ing German trans|ators and theorists "ke H0|der"n and

trans|ation)

Sch|e ermacher` as \

/eH as French predecessors "ke Henri neschonnic` Berman

advOcates||tera"sn tO register this foreignness Good trans|ation shol

,s respeCt for

the "nguistic and cu|tura| differences of the foreign teXt by deve|oping a

corres-

pondence that\ en|arges`amp" es and enriches the trans|ating|anguage

(Ber man

1995 94`my trans|ation).

For Bernnan/ eVery trans|ation faces the \ tria| of the foreign

//

ral,9er)` and textua| ana|ysis can gauge the degree to

|anguage adn its into its o /n struCtures the foreign text

(/
retlve de
/hich the trans|ating

In the1985essay inc|uded

\deforn
be|o he describes in detaH the
ing tendencies by /Iaich trans|ating
preem ts this tria|` "nviting cOmparison
/ith inay and Darbe|net s innuentia|
methodo|ogy, The |inguists vieXl/trans|ation methods instrunnentaHy` as effective in
cOmmunicating the foreign text`regard|ess of ho /\\ob"que or reduCtive they m
be, In Ber|

an

ciaHy

^/here the
ethiCa| issues.

g ht

s hermeneutic paradigm` such methods recOnstitute the text/ espe

po|ylOgic discourse of the nove| is cOncerned` and so they raise

Berman is particu|ar|y effective

n sho/ing hoXt/the teXtua| ana|ysis of trans-

|atiOns can be enriched through a psychoana|ytic ap

roach

The deforming

|arge|y uncOnscious` he
tendencies at Nltork in conte| porary trans|ation are

observes`
the interna"zed expressiOn of a t /o-mi"ennium-o1d tradition,

Psychoana|ysis Hlum"aates the operation of these tendenCies because the psyche

perfOrms and is ana|yzed through trans|ating proCesses (see` for eXamp|e`

qahony

1980)
The impaCt of poststructura|ism on psychoana|ysis` marXism and feminism
naakes theOrists more a /are of the hierarch es and exc|usions in |anguage use and
thereby points to the ideo|ogica| effects of trans|ation` to the econon ic and po"t-

ica| interests served by its representations of foreign texts

In the 1988 essay

reprinted here` LOri Chamber|ain fOcuses on the gender metaphors that have
recurred "

|eading trans|ation theorists since the seventeenth century/ demon-

strating u e enorn
under\ /ritten

ous eXtent to /hiCh a patriarCha mode| of authorship has

the subordinate status of trans|ation. Cha|

ber|ain suggests hokA/ a

feminist cOncern |th gender identities lllight be productive for trans|ation studies`
particu|ar|y in historiCa| research that recoVers forgotten trans|ating

/omen` but

a so in trans ation projects that are sensitive tO ideo|ogica||y coded foreign writing`

/hether fen
ist or masCu"nist The exper
i

enta| strategies devised by trans|ators

ine(1991)and Barbara Godard(1986)airn to chaHenge \the

"ke suzanne
J"| Le
process
by which
trans ation comp|ies with gender construc .

226

198os

The1980s simi|ar|y
n n trans^/itness the emergence of a postcO|onia|renecti
|ation in anthropo|ogy` area studies and "terary theory and criticism, A|thOugh
trans|at

on ngures annon9the ethn c and racia| representations of the East de| ys-

tised in EdxAlard said

s C,r`e`? a sla,(1978)`

it is not unti| icente Rafae/s 1988

study of Spanish co|onia"s

n the Ph"ippines that trans|ation is compe"ing|y
revea|ed to be the agent(or subverter)of empire

/idespread use Of
cu|tura| trans
ation

"

Ta|a|Asad(1986)questions the

ethnography by situating it amid the

hierarchies that struGture the g|oba} po"tica|ecOnomy, \ The anthropo|ogica|enterprise` he pro oses` \ may be vitiated by the fact that there are asynlmetrica|
tendencies and pressures in the |anguages of do1 inated and dollninant societies
(Asad 1986 164),

Trans|atiOn theOry in thi5period is relmarkab|y ferti|e and vi/ide-rangin9`taken

up in a variety of discourses` fe|ds` and discip"nes
are mOst characterist c of|iterary and cu|tura

Yet the skeptica| trends that

apprOaches to trans|ation have |itt|e

impact on the more technica|and pragmatiG projects informed by|inguistics(and

vice versa). Re|ying on a wea|th of examp|es` inc|uding his o /n "terary trans|atiOns`Joseph Nna|0ne(1988)formu|ates a set of|inguistic\\too|s
practice l/vhich exceed

for ana|ysis and

inay and Darbe|net s in colmp|eXity` precision and abstrac-

tion, Here re|ations bet /een the source and target texts might fa" into categories

zigzagging (diVergence and convergence)` \ recresCence (amp"fcation and

,lll a|one s descriptive
"ke
reduction)`
and \ repackaging (diffusion and condensation)
approach doesn t aVoid va{ue judgments entire}y` since he occasiona"y exp|aiI s his

preference for a particu|ar version by referring to an audience`

the average Ameri-

can reader` or to his OWn

sens b"|ties (Ma|one1988

47`49) These judgments

are unsystematiC` ho /eVer`and far fron the ethica| po"tics of trans|ation imagined

by cu turaHy oriented theorists |ike Berman Or Chamber|ain,

Further reading
BCllJalnin1989,Da

is2001,Gcntzlcr1993,Hcrmans1999,Lanc Mcrocr1998,

Massar(licr~Kenncy 1997, Ne
Inark 1991, N rd 1997, Pym 1995 and 1997,
n
1997
and
1997a,
sirnon
1996, sncll_H rnby 1988, sturgc 1997, /on
R bins
Fl t
v

1997

Chapter 19

Hans J

Vermeer

SKOPOS AND COMMISSION IN

TRANSLATIONAL ACTION
ra s/a eC/by/lnc/rew C es e l,a

HIs PAPER Is A sHORT sKETCH oflnys

oPos the ry(cf

Vermcc1

1978,1983;Reiss and Vcrmcc1 1984;Vcrmccr1986;and also Gar(lt1989)

1 synopsis
Thc sk P s the ry is Part f a thc ry of translati nal action( r ns carorischcs

Ff

ndc`n

~cf Holz~N1 ntt ri 1984; Vermccr 1986 269-304and als 197-246; for thc
hist rical

background sec c g Wilss1988 28),Translation is sccn as thc particular

anslational action ihich is l)ascd on a s u1 cc tcXt (Cf HolZ-Minttori

varicty of tI

:ccg
1984,csPccially P421and N rd198 31),(othc1 varictics
ould in

1t s informati n on arc o11al Cconomic or Political skuation,ctc)

Any form f translational action,includin8thercforc translati n itself,rnay bc
l

a consultt

concci ed as an action,as the namc imPlics Any actlon has an ailn,a purP
is Part of thc vcry de6niti

se (This

n of an acdon~scc Vermccr1986,)The` :ord

s o` s,

thcn,is a technical tern1for thc ahn r Purposc of a translation(discusscd1nn10rc

dctail bclo
) Further an action leads to a rcsult, a nev situation or cvcnt, and
pos bly to a new o ect Translational action lcads t a target tcxF(n t neccssarily a

crbal nc);

translati n lcads t a Frdi,s`drul,l (i c thc resulting translated

text), as a Particular `ariety of targct tcxt

Thc ain)of any translati nal action,and the modc in
hich it is to be rcahzcd,
are neg tiatcd`vith thc chcnt vho conn1nissions the action, A prccisc sPcci

cati n

airn and mode is csscntial f r thc translator,~This is of c urse analogously truc

1989

228

HANs J

ERMEER

f translati n Pr Per skoPos and modc of rcahzati n must bc adcquatcly dchned if

d1c tcxt-translator is to fulsl his task succcssf1111

Thc translat r is the cxPcrt in translational action Hc is rcsponsible f r the

Performance of the c lnInissioncd task, f r thc nnal rr ns` tum, Insofar as the duly
sPCcincd sk P s iS dcHncd n thc translator s Point of vic :,the source tcxt is a
constitucnt ofthc co 1rllission,and as such thc basis f r all the hierarchically rdcrcd
rclcvant hctors which ultin ately dcte nine the rr nsFdr1`nl (For thc tcxt as part of
ac mPlex acu n in a situadon sec Holz Mintt
Onc practical consequencc of thc sk

1984;Vermccr1986)

P s thCOry is a nc v conccPt of the status

f thc sOurcc tcxt for a translation, and

vith it thc neccssity of v rking for an
incrcasing a
areness of this,both am ng translators and als the gencral Pubhc
As regards thc translat r hilnsclf cxPcrtS arc callcd upon in a i en situation
bccause they are nceded and bccause they are regardcd as cxPerts It is usually

v vhat it s all ab ut ;thcy arc

assumcd,rcas nably cnough,that such PcoPlC kn
thus consultcd and thcir
ic
s listcncd t Being cxPerts,thcy are trusted to kn

morc about thcir Particular neld than utsidcrs In s me circumstances one may
dcbatc vith thcm vcr thc l)cst vay of procccding,until a c nsensus is1 cachcd, r
occasionally onc may also consult other expcrts or c
`vayS

nsider further altcrnati c

frcaching a gi cn goal An cxPCrt1nust bC ablc tO say

and this imphcs both

knowlcdgc and a duty to usc it what is what His oicc must thcrcfc,rc bc

r is such an cxpcrt It is thus uP

rCSPCctCd,hc must bc given a say , Thc translat

to hirn t

dcci(lc, f r instancc,

vhat r0lc a s urcc text Plays in his translational

action Thc decisive fact r herc is the PurpoSC,thc sk P s,of the co nnunication

in a given situauon (Cf.N rd1988

9)

2 Skopos and translation

At this Point it Sh uld be cmPhasizCd that thc f llo
ing considerations arc not only

intcnded to bc ahd f r con1PlCtC actions,such as vhole tcxts,but als

as pos blc tO sc8mCnts of adions,PartS of a tcxt(hr the tcrm
scc

crmccr1970) ThC sk P sc nccPt can also bc used

f a

Fr ns`drum, vhcrc

vith resPect t

Scgmcnts

vs us to statc
this aPPcars reasonablc r ncccssary This all

that an action,and hcncc a tcxt,nccd not be c

sk P i

apply as far

scgment (srJc )

arc discusscd bel

nsidcrCd an indi isiblc vholc (sub~

w;cf also Reiss1971on hybrid tcxts)

A source textis usually con PoScd riginally for a situation in thc source culturc;

hcnce its status as sourCC tcxt ,and hencc the rolc f thc translator in dac pr ccss
of intcrcultural c n11nunication This rcmains truc of a sOurcc tcxt :hiCh has l)ccn

composcd sPcci cally vith transcultural c mn1unication in n1ind In mOst cascs thc
original author lacks thc ncccssary kno vledge of thc targct culture and its tcxts If

he did havc thc rcquisitc knowlcdgc,hc

vould of coursc c mPosc his text under

thc conditions of thc targct culture, in thc targct langua:e! Lan8ua8e iS Part

cukure

It is thus not t be exPected that rnerely trans-coding

fa

a sourcc tCxt,rnCrcly

vill result in a scrviccablc rrdr,sf rum (This

anothcr lan8uagc,
ic v is also suPPorted l)y rccCnt rcscarch in neuroPhysi logy cf BcrEstr n 1989,)

transPosing

it int

SKOPOS AND COMMIsSION

229

As its nan1c in1Phcs,the sourcc tcxt is0ricntcd to vards, and is in an casc bound
lrLJm,is oricntcd t
a1 (ls thc targct
t ,thc sourCc Culturc Thc targct tcxt,thc rrdns
culturc,and it is this vhich

ulti11 atcly clc nes

its adcquacy lt thcrcf rc folloxs`s that

sOurce and tar et texts Inay di`Crge frorn cach thcr quitc considcrably, not only
in the f rmulati n and distributiOn fd,c contcnt but also as rcgards thc goals vvhich

arc set r cach,and in terms f which thc arrangcmcnt of thc co11tcnt is in hct
dcht minccl

(TherC may natural bc th rcasons

r a rct rmtlla

vhcn thc targct culturc

crbahzcs a gi Cn phenomcn n in
j kcs~cf Br crman1984;I rcturn to ths toPic bcl
w )
It gocs vithout saying that a rr

on,such as

a diffcrcnt vay, c,g in

jn"nay alS have thc samc function(sk

P S)
cesS iS not rncrcly a trans_

`
as its sourcc tcxt Yet cVcn in this casc thc
translatlon Pr

(unlcss tlus translati n varicty is actually intendcd), Since accordi11g t a

unif rn1 the ry of translati n a rrtIns`Jrun1 of this ki1 d is als Prin1aril) oriCntcd,
c ding

n1cd) dologically,to`vards a target culturc situation or situations Trans-coding,as

a ProcCdurc

`hich is retr

sPectively oricnted to
ards thc sOurcc tcxt,not Pros_

f
PCctivcly to` ards thc tar:ct culture, is dian ctrica y opP scd to thc thc ry
translational acti n (This
ic d cs not,ho vevcr,rulc Outthc P ssib ity that trans~

coding can bc a lcgiti1natc translati nal skoPos itself,oricntcd ProsPcctively to

thc targct culturc:thc dccisivc critcrion is al
T t11e cxtcnt tllat a translat r

ju lgcs

thc rm and hncd n ofa sou1 cc text to

bc basically adcquatc Per se as regards the PretCr

1incd sk pos in thc target culturc,

vC Can sPeak of a dcgrcc of intcrtcxtual cohcrcnce

text This notion thus rcfcrs t

vards

/ays thc sk pos,)

a rclati n bct ccn Frd

bet veen

s`d un

targct and sourcc

and source text,deHned

i11tc1 lus

itaofthc sk Pos For instancc,onc lcgitirnate skoP0sn1ight bc an cxactin

cadcrs
ith
tion of thc s urcc tcxt syntaX, PCrhaPs t providc targct culturc

inforluation about this s ntax Or an exact in1itation of the source text structure,
in a litcrary translation, n1i :ht sCrve to create a litcrary text in thc tar.:et culture

The Pointis that one n1ust kno v hat ne is doing,and vhat thc consc_

h
not
f
vhat the e=tct of a tcxt crcated in this vay ill
qucnccs such action arc, eg
bc in thc ttlrgct culturc and h w much the efcct will dif%ri m that ofthc sourcc
arious
tcxt in the sourcc culturc,(F ra(liscussion ofintcrtextual cohcrcncc and its
tyPcS, Scc lXt0r:Cnthalcr 1980: 138-140; for m re on R/1orgcnthalcr s tyPcs of
thcmc and1 11cn1e,cf GcrzymiSch-Arb gast1987)

Translat"1gi3doi11g somcd1ing
.x riting a translation , putth1g a Gcrn)an tcxt
into Enghsb ,ic af rn of acti n F llo ving
Ha1

Brcnncnstuhl(1975),RChbcin(1977),

as(1978; 1983),LCnk(Cditcd v lumes ioIn1977on),sagC1 (1982)and

thcrs, crmccr(1986)dCScribcs an action as a Particular sort f bchaviour:for an

act f beha iour to bc callcd an acd n,thc Pcrson PCr rming it must(Potthntial|)

9k aCts k docs dtlaou8h he c uld lla c td c,tl erwisc,

Furthermore,gcnuine reasons for acti ns can al vays be f rmulatcd in tcrlus of airns

l,c alDlc to cxPlaln

or statcmcnts of goals(aS an action

, as Harras Puts it) This

`vith a goodKasPa1
rcasOn(198 139): In d1is scnsc
illustratcs a Point madc in another connectio11by
the n

ti n

of ailu is in thc Hrst Place thC reversc of thc n

tion f causc (Cf also

nc(2518)Ciccro also gives a dchniti n ofan

hcn bc sl)eaks f cascs
vhcrc
action
somc disad antagc, or s lue advanta c is
ncglccted in rdcr t ain a 8rCatcr advantagc or a id a grcatcr disadvantagc
Ried11983 I59f)h1hiS D

(Cicc1

o1949 181-3)

rn cnr

230

ERMEER

HANs J

3 Arguments against thc skoPos theory

Objccti ns

tl at ha

c bccn

misc(l against thC

P s

thc

ry hllinto two main t Pcs

1 O Ccti n(1)malntains tlaat not all'cr1ons havc an alm:somc hc vc no m

This is chimed t bc tllc casc with hterary texts,or at lcast somc ofthcm Unlikc
othcr tcxts(!),tl Cn,such texts arc daimc(lto bc%imless In fact,tllc argumel t
is that in certain cases no ai1n cxisrs, not lncrcly that ne might not be able exPhc~
itly to sr Fc an ain

the latter situation is son1ctimes incvitable,

`vir1g to human

irnPerfccti n,but itis irrclc ant

hcrc As mentioncd abo c,thc l)oint is that an ah)1

must bc at lcast P tcntially spcci ablc

Lt

t us claH tllc imP ciSC CxPressi n f acd ns% inr an m

accuratc to sPcak f an airn bein8d

is

rr

bure(f to an action,an author bcf

Itis mo"
c in

that hc

riting to a givcn PurP sc, a rcadcr si1nilarly bc ic9in that an author has s

:ritten (ClCady,it1s Possible that thc Pcrhrn er f an aCti n,a Pcrs n a ected
by it,and an bscr cr, Iuay all havc<hffcrent concCPtS f the ain1of thc action It
is also in Portant to(listinguish bct` ccn action,action chai11,and action elen1ent~

cf
crmccr 1986)
Objct

ti

n(1)can bC answeRd` m y;cic

in tcrms of our vcry de nition of an

an action,it can no longcr bc regardcd as an

action (The vic v that any act of spccch is skopos-oricntcd as ah cady a con11non90f)But it iS also worth cci ing
PlacC in ancicnt Grccce_scc Baumhauer1986
vhich c shall do in tcrms of
thc key c nccPt of the sk P s in more dctad11crc,
action if no airn can bc attributcd t

translation PrOPer as onC .aricty of trans ational action,

Thc n ti n ofskoP s can in fact bc aPPhed in tbrcc ays,and thus ha e thrcc
scnscs it ma refer to

thc translati n Process,and hcncc the goal f this Proccss;

thc translation1 csult, and hcncc the f11nction of thc cr

thc translati nn,odc,and hcncc thc intenti n of this1n dc

Additionally,thc skoPos may of course also ha c sub-skoP

Ol)jccti n(1),tbCn,can

be answcrcd as

nsJcIr1

m;

llows if a gi cI)act ofl)cha

ur has

ncithcr goal n r function nor intCntion,as rcgards its rcahzation,rcsult or rnanncr,

then it is n t an action in the tcchnical scnsc of thc :ord

If it is nc crthclcss clailned that litc1^aturc has n

purposc , this Prcsumably

,hich n
g al,
n1cans that the crcation Of hteraturc inCludcs indiviclual rnomcnts to
no functi n or intcntion can bc attributcd,in thc scnsc skctchcd abo`c,

For instancc,assul c that a ncat rhyn)c suddCnly comcs i11to onc sn1ind (This

is surcly not an action,tcchnically spcaking)Onc thcn vritcs it do vn (Surely an

action, sincc thc rhymc could havc bcen lcft unrcc rdcd) C)l)cc ntinucs vriting
unt a sOnnct is Pr duccd, (An acti n, sincc thc

solncthing clsc

unlcss the PowCr of insPh ation

rritcr could have chosen t (lo

vhich I
xs s silnPl) irrCsiStlblc,

considcr a mcre n vth)

If wc accePt that thc Pr cess f creaung Poc:y alSo indu(les its Publicajon

(and maybc ,CI1negotiations r relnuncraton),thcn becomcs clc

tllat sucl)

bcha i ur as a 'holc docs indeed c nstitute an aCtion Schiller and shakcspcarc

sKOPOs AND COM MIssION

231

und ubtcdly to k int account thc P ssiblc rcactions of thcir Pubhc as thcy vrotc,

ould;rnust vvc aCtually(lcnouncc such bchavi ur(consci us,and

as indccd anyonc
hcncc purposcful),bccausc it vcas in Part pcrhaPs1n
fan

ti

atcd by such basc dcsircs as

c and n1 nc ?

Our basic argumcnt rnust thercf re ren ain

intact

cvcn thc creation of litera_

turc involvcs PurPoScful acti n

Furthcrm rc, it need n t ncccssarily bc thc case that thc ritcr is actually
conscious of his purP se at the In mcnt of writlng~hcnce thc quah6cati

n(ab C)

that it luust bc potcntially Possiblc to cstabhsh a PurP se.

0nc rcccnt a11ant of o ection(1)iS thC dmm thclt a tcxt can only bc called
ork hich

htcraturc if it is art,and art has no PurPose and no intcntion So a

did ha c a goal or intcntionvould n t be art,This sccms a bit hard

n literaturc,

to say thc lcast! In my`ic v it vvould bc silnPlcr to concede that art, and hCncc

n too)Thc o Cc
n a misundcrstancling,Nowadays it is cxtrcme|
u n sccms t l)c basc(l
qucstionablc vhcthcr there is, r has cvcn bccn,an art vith n purposc,Cf,Busch
als

hteraturc,can bc assigncd an intention(and without excePti

(1987;7
Evcr

work of alt e ablishcs its mcaning acstllcdcally [,,J ThC

scrvc man (liffcrcnt functions,but it lnay also
n ofthc ork of art

acsd ctic can of c ursc

bc in itsclf thc functi

Busch P ints ut rcPcatcdly that an object d es n t havc a function,but that a

f11nction is attributcd or assigncd to an

bjcct,according t the situation

Andvhcn Gocthc ackn0 vlcdges that hc has t0 vork hard to achic c thc corrcct
rhythlll for a Poclll,t11is too sho vs that cvcn for l l11thc crcati n of Poctry` as n t

mcrely a luattcr f inspiration

ORmals hab ich auch schon in ihrcn Armen8edichtct,

Und des Hexamcters Mass lcise mit nngerndcr Hand

Ihr auf(lc111R cken gez hlt,
(R mischc F icn15 )

IORCn ha

c I c lnP sC(lP

cms CvCn in hcr arms,

Counting thc hcxamctcr s bcat s ftly vvith ngcring hand

Thcre on thc back f thc bclovcd,]

m vcmcnt C t r t s sakc )must bC undcr

E cn

thc wdl known

st d

as imPlying an intention namcly, the intention to crcatc art that cxists for

drF P ur
`

own kcx and erc

i m

dht,ra

llltcntlollah

s Sen

al1

eady

aPParCnt in thc cxPrcssion itsclf , (Cf, also Hcrding(1987: 689), vh argucs that
fas a kind f dc ant
thc art~for~art s-sakc m
emcnt
Pposition against idcahsm
~i.c it clid indccd ha c a PurpoSC)

3.2 Objcction(2)iS a Particular

ariant of thc irst objecti n It rnaintains that not
e cry Fr nsFdrion

that arc n

can l)c assigned a PurPose,an intention;i e thcre arc translations

t goal_oricnted (Here vc arc tahng translation in its traditional scnsc,

232

HANs J VERMEER

translation
ith no sk P s v uld by dC nition not be a translation at all,in

thc Prcscnt thcory This(locs not1 ulc Out thc possibility that a
translati n 1nay

bc d nc rctrosPectivcly,trcating thc sourcc tcxt as thc

f

n casurc f all things

;but
n in thc scnsc l thc prcscnt thcOry if thc skoposvas

this ould nl bc a translati

CxPhcitly to translate in this

`ay)

Tbis objccd()nt o is usually madc with rc rcncc t htcraturc,and tO this cxtcnt

wc havc already clcalt with it undc1

cc n(1) it can scarcdy bc claimcd d1at

htcrary translation takes Placc pcrforcc,by thc kss fthe rnuse Yct thcrc arc thrce
spcci cations f objection(2)that n.crk hrdler scussi n:

a
b

Thc d m

that tllc anslator docs nc,t havc ally

cc cg al,hncuon r llltt n
tion in min(l:hc st Ja11slatcs what is in d1cs urcc tcxr
The clailY,that a sPccinc goal,ft1nction( r intcnti n ould restri(lt thc trans~
lati n

possil, itics, and hcncc lirnit thc rangc f intcrPretati n of the targct

tCxt ln Con1ParIs nt that of thc sourcc tcxt

Thc clailn that thc translat r has no spcci c addrcssec r sct of addrcssccs in
n1in(l

L'ct us c nsi(lcr cach of thcsc in turn

a Ad crtising tcxts are suPPosCd to ad crtise; thc morc succcssful thc ad crtisc_
mentis,the bettcr thc tcxt c idCntl is II)structions for t1sc a1c supPoscd t
(lCscril)e
h
an aPParatus is to bc asse

nblcd,handled and maintaincd;thc1n re smoothlv

sPapcr rcP rts and their

anslations also havc a PurPose: t infor
l dac reciPicnt, at lcast; thc translation
thus has to bc c mPrChCnsible, in the right scnsc, to the CXPcctcd rcadcrship, ic
this is d nc,the

bcttcr thc instructions cvidcntly arc Nc

t1

thc set f addrcssees Thcre is n qucstion that such

Pra matic tcxts 111ust be g
orientcd, and so arc thcir translati ns

al

It n1igI1t be sai(l that thc Postulate l dchty to the s urcc tcxt requi1 cs that

eg a11c

`s itenl sbould be translated

as it
as in thc Original

But this t is a

goal in itsclf Indccd,it is by lchniti nl)robably thc goal t1 at ln st literar) trans~

lat s tradidonally sct tI1cmselvcs, (C)I the ambiguity of thc noti 11 fl(leht)
, scc
Vcrmcc1 198 89-130)
1

It is somctllucs cvcn Clai1ncd that thc ver

doing anyd1ing clsc than stick to thc s

(lutv f a translator f rbids hi1n fr

urcc tcxt; Vhcthcr anyonc

1ight

c cntuall)r

be ablc t do anything vith thc translati n r not is not the translator s busincss,
Thc Prcscnt d)cOry of translationa acti n11as a111uch idcr c nccption fthc trans~
lator

s task,including luattcrs f cthics and tbc translator s accountabilit

b The argumcnt that assigning a skopos to cVcry litcrary tcxt rcstrjcts its P
b itics

of intcrPrctation Can bc ans

'ercd as f

ll

ssi-

vs
k givcn skopos rnay of course

rulc Out ccrtain intcrprctations bccausc they arc not Part f thC translati n goal;but
nC P ssiblc goal(skoP s)` ould ccrtainly bc PreciSCly to Prcserve thc breadth c)f

n f the s urce tcxt (Cf aIs Xrcrn.ccr 1983 a translati n rcahzcs

sOmething
di rent , not somcthing rn rc or lcss ; f r translati n as thc rcal~

intcrPrctati

P sSil)le intcrPrctad n,sec

in fact rcahzable is n t the Poi 1t herc

ization of on

/er1uccr 1986,)I far such a skoPos is

`

sKOPOS AND COMM1ssION

233

a translat r,is not

c It is truc that in many cases a tcxt-ProducCr,and hencc als

thinklng of a sPeci c addresscc (in thC SCnse of: John sn1ith) or sCt of addressecs

0n the qense oi the mcmb

s oftllc s od

dem0crat P ty),In tllcr cascs,howe er,

the addrcssec(s)n ay indcCd bc prcciscly spconcd ukirllatcly c cn a col

muni

v rld has a sct f addrcssccs As lon8 aS

nc bchcvcs that one is
exprcssing onesclf in a
c mPrchcnsible
vay, and as long as nc assumes, albcit
unconsciously,that PcoPlc ha cvidcly
arying lcvels ofintelligence and cducation,
thcn nc must in fact be orienting oncsclf t0 vards a Ccrtain rcstrictcd grouP of
cation to thc

addrcssces;not nCccssarily consciously~but unc nsciously,Onc surcly oftcn uscs

onc s own(sCl cvaluc tccl)lCvCl as an imPlicit c"tc11on(the acl(lrcssccS care(almo
)
as intclligent as onc is oncsclf,

,) Rccall also thc(liscussi

ns about the best vay

f rmul ing ncws items fc,r radio an(l tclcvision,so that as many rcciPicntS as
PosSiblc vill undcrstand

The Pr blen ,then, is not that there is n sct of addrcssccs,but that it is an

indetern1inatc,fuz7y sct But it ccrtainly exists,vague in outhnc but clcarly prcscnt,
And the clarity or other vise of the c ncePt is n t sPCci ed by thC sk P s thc ry
A fruitful linc of rcscarch might bc to cxPl

rc the cxtcnt t

vhich

a gr uP of reciP

ients can t)c rcPlaced by a tyPe of rcciI)icnt In many cascs such an addressee_tyPc

may bc llluch more clcarly cn isagcd, Lnorc r lcss conSCi0usly, than is assumcd
by acl ocatcs of the dailu that transladons lack spcci c addressees (Cf als
lVlorgcnthaler 1980

94on thc possibility f dCtcrn1ining a diffuse Pubhc m rc

closely;on indctcrminacy as a gcncral cultural Pr

blCm scc QuinC1960)

Thc sct f addrcssccs can also bc dctcrrnincd indircctly

for examPlc, if a

PubhShCr sPCciahzing in a particular rangc of Pubhcati nscomn1issions a translati n,

a kn
lcdgc of
hat this rangc is vill gi c thc translator a good idea f the intended

addressee grouP(cf HCin ld cF dF 1987: 33-6)

3.3Ol,lccti n(2)can also be interPretcd in an thcr way,In tcxt hngLllstIcs and
htcrary theory a distincuon is ftcn n ade bct
ccn tcxt as potcntial and tcxt as rcalization If thc skop s theory lnaintains that c cry tCxt has a gi Cn goal,functi n or
intel

tlon,and alsO an sumed set of addKssccs,0 Ctt n(2)can bC undcrsto d

as clain1ing that this aPPhes t tcxt as reahzati n;f r a tcxt is also Potcntial in thc

SuPersuI 11nati

scnse(PacPcke 1979:97),in that it can bc uscd in differcnt situ-

ations vvit11diffcrcnt addrcssccs and(li

trcnt functi ns

Agrccd;but vhcn

a text is

actually comPoscd, this is ncvcrthclcss doncvit11resPcct t an assumed function

( r

Small sct f functi ns)ctc ThC sk pos thcory does not(lcny that thc same text

n1ight bc uscd later(alS )in s,'ays that had n t bccn foresecn originally, It is` cll
kn wn that a Frdnsf Fum is a tcxt in its own ri8hc (H lz Mnttari cF d` 198 5),
/ilss (1988 48). F r thiS

vith its

vn potcntial of usc aP int o crlookcd by

rcason not c cn potential tcxts can bc sct up iith no particular goal or addrcsscc
_ at lcast not in any adcquatc, Practical r signiscant vay

This brings us back again to thc pr

blcm f

thc functional constancy

bct vecn

sOurcc and target tcxt Holz-NA nttiri (1988) ri8htly insists that f ncti nal
constancy,Pr Perly undcrst d,is thc cxccPti n rather than thc rulc Ofrcle ance
t tl c ab vc
cct ns lll gcncrd is al h fcDll wing comment(ibi(l:7):

234

HANs J

ERMEER

n practicc and thcOry so

Where is thc ncuralgic point at vvhich translati

Rcn(h crgc?In my iew it is Pre0scly whcrc tcxts are liRcd out of

thcir cn ironmcnt for c mParativC PurPosCS,

VhCrCby

their Pr cCsS

asPect is ignorcd, A dead anat n1ical sPccirncn docs not e adc the
clutchcs of thc dissccting knifc, t

bc surc,but such a proccdurc nly

incrcascs thc risk that ndings vill bc intcrPrCtCd in a vay that is trans_
lati nall

irrelcvant

3.4 I havc agrccd that onc lc umatc skoPos is ma mally R thhl imitauon f the
original, as commonly in literary translati n Truc translati n,
vith an adcquatc
skopos,docs not lncan that thc translator I,,usF adaPt to the cust ms and usage f
thc target culturc, nly that he c n so adaPt. This asPCct of the skoPos thC ry has
bccn rcpcatcdly n isundcrstood, (PCrhaps it is onc

f thosc insi8hts vhich d n t

sprcad like vild re but rnust rst bc hushcd uP and thcn fought o cr bittcrly,bcfore

thcy bccomc acccPtCd as scl c idcnt~cf.Ric(l11983:147,)

Vhat wc have is in hct a

harc~and~t

rtoisc thc ry

(Klaus Mudcrsbach,

hether
pcrsonal collalnunication): thC sk Pos is ah ays (already) there, at once,
thc translati n is an assilnilatin8onc Or dehberately markcd or vhatc cr What thc
skoP s states is that onc must translatc,consciously and consistcntly,in accordancc

vith

s mc Principlc rcspccdng thc targct tcxt Thc thcOry docs not statc vhat thc
principlc is: this must bc dccidcd scParately in cach spcciHc casc ptirnally
`n thus onc
faithful rcndcring of a sourcc tcxt, in the scnsc of a trans-coding, is

PCrfCctly lcgitirnatc goal Thc skoP s theory rnerely statcs that thc translator should
bc a varc that som goal exists, and that any gi cn goal is only onc among many
ncs.(How many goals c actually rcalizablc is anothcr matter,XVe m ht
P SSiblC

assumc that in at lcast somc cases thc numl)cr of realizal)lc goals is one only)
Thc important Point is that a given sourcc text docs n
translation

t havc Onc corrcct or best

nly(V meer1979and198 62-88)

Wc can maintain,thcn,that cvery recePti n r

Pr ducti n of a tcxt can atleast

rctrosPccti cly bc assigned a skoP s, as can cvcry translation, by an observcr or

htcrary scholar ctc,; and als that every action is guided by a skoPos. If vc n
v
turn this argumcnt ar und vc can Postulate Priori that translation~because it is
an action~ah ays PrcsuPposcs a skoP s and is dircctcd by a skoP s Itf llo :s that
C Cry

translation co 1Fnission sh uld cxPhcitly or imPhcitly contain a statemcnt of

skoP s in order to be carried ut at al1, Evcry translation PrCsupposes a co 1rnission,even though it rnay l)c sCt by thc translator to hi1nsclf(JT11FF rr ns` rc
cFos

FO rf,e or i

Ffl s c

PiIaJ

statcmcnt of skopos impIies that it is not ncccssahly

idcnticalvith thc skop s attributcd to thc sOurcc text:thcrc arc cascs vvhcrc such
idcntity is not possiblc

4 The translation cOn nission

Somconc /h translates undcrtakcs to do s as a mattcr of dchberate choicc
(I Cxclude the P ssibility of trans1ating under hypnosis),
to do so One translates as a result of eithcr onc
h both cascs,that is,cll,ct C h aCcor(lancc

r bccausc hc is required

so vn initiativc Or sOmeone else

tla

a cc,mn on

lJ r

SKOPOs AND COMMIssION

235

Lct us dcsne a c n11nission as thc instruction,gi cn by onesclf or by somcone

clsc,t

carry out a8iven action~hcre:to translatc,(Thr ugh ut the Present article

translation is taken t include intcrPrctati n.)

N wadays,in practice,commissions arc normally gi cn cxPlicitly(Pfcdsc Fdnsrc Fhc dccon2Pdn

inJ rcxr),although seldon1 vid1rcsPcct t thc ultin1atc PurPosC of

tl,c text I11 rcal lifc, the sPcciicati n of purPosc, addrcssccs CtC is usually suf
`

cicntly aPParcnt frolrl thc c lnrnission situation itsclf unlcss thC1

xx

l be a8sun)cd in our culturc that for instancc a technical articlc about s

non1ical discovcry is to bc translatcd as a tcchnical articlc for astr

isc indicatcd,it

mc astro-

nomcrs,and thc

actual placc of Pubhcati n is rcgardcd as irrclc ant; or if a c rllPany vants a l)usi~

ness lcttcr translatcd, thc natural assumPti n is that the lcttcr vill be uscd l)y the

company in qucstion(and in most cascs d1e tl anslator will alrcady be sumcicndy

hmilial 'ith d1c company s own in h use sole,etc) To thC cxtcnt that these
assumPtions arc vahd, it can bc maintai11cd d1at any translation is carricd out
.c can still oRcn sPcak of
accordiI1g to a sk Pos, In thc abscnce f a sPeci cation,

an imPlicit(orimp ied)skoPoS It nc
clthelCss seems aPProPhate tO strcss herc thc
ncccssity for a change of attitudc alla n many translators and chcnts: as far as
PoSsible,detailcd information conccrnil)g the sk P s sh uld al vays bc gi cn

it9rccs m curcs or hdeed hdu

With cc c on

cm, co1 dhg

j

t11ec nccPtion f con11alission

f bil)hcal

(cf, the rolc of so~callcd insPirati n in t11c case

tcxts) thc abo C dc niti n, xlith thc ass ciated argumcnts, all
s us

to statc that c cr translati n is bascd

Ac n1n1ission colnPrisCs(
P ssiblC n thc f

ll

nac nunission

r sh ukl co1up1 isc)as rnuch detailcd inF rluation as

:ing (1)thC goal,i c asPCci

cati

n ofd1e ain1ofthc c

Si n(cf,thc schcmc of sPccincati n factors in Nord1988: 17O);(2)thC c

l,alnis-

nditi ns

undcr hi<Jh thc intended goal should bc attained (naturally includinE: Practical
mattcrs such as dcadhnc and fec) Thc statcmcnt of goal and thc conditi ns should
mmissioncr)and tllC anslator,for

bc cxplicitly ncgc,tiatcd bctwecn thc dicnt(c

thc chcnt1nay occasionally havc an imprccise

1ight

r e en

falsc PicturC fthc

ay a tcxt

1nakc
uld) nly bC binding and

be rccci cd in thc targct culture Herc thc translator sh uld l)c ablc t

argumcntati c suggestlons A commission can(and sh

c nclusivc,and

acccPted as such by thc translat r,ifthe c nditi ns arc clcar enough

(Iam a`va1 e that tl)is rcquirel ilcnt

somcthi11g to st

in

olvcs a dcgrce of ishR l thh1king; yct it is

c r)Cf Holz M;ntt ri1984:91f and113;Nord198 9and

284,n tc4
Thc translator is the cxPert in transladonal actI

n (H lz N1 nttari 1984 and

1985); an exPc hc is therc re rcsP nsiblc br dcciding whcthcr,when,h w,

ctc,a translation can be realized(thC Lasswcll rmula is rclc nt here~scc
Lass
c 1964:37;Vcrmccr1986;197and re rcnccs thcrc)
.

ofa cmmission dcPe11ds on thc circumstanccs of tllc target

Vhat is dcpcndcnt on thc sourcc culturc

s urcc tcxt A Con1

ission is only indircctly dcPcndCnt c)n thc source cul-

Thc rc,u/izdbi

culture,n t on th sc fthc s urcc culturc

is thc

turc to thc cxtcnt that a translation,b

dc6niti n,rnust in

ol

c a sourcc tcxt Onc

mi8ht say that thc rcahzability of a con1n1ission dcpcnds n thc rclation bctvveen thc
targct culture and thc s urcc tcxt;yet this vould only bc a special casc ofthc gcneral

dCPCndcnce n thc targct culturc a sPecial casc,that is,insofar as the c Inmission

is basically indcPendcnt of thc s urce tcxt function If thc cliscrcpancy is too grcat,

236

HANs u VERMEER

h
ve cr,no

translati n is Possil,lc~

at m st

n t discuss this hcrc But it sh uld bc n

a re

vritten text or thc likc,

c shall

tcd that a targct culturc generally ffcrs a

vidc rangc of PotCntial, including c,g Possiblc cxtcnsion through the adoPtion f
PhCn mena fr m ther culturcs Ho v f1r this is P sSiblc (lcpcnds on the targct
culture (For thiS kind of adoPti n scc c.g Toury 1980)

I have becn arguing~I hoPc PlauSibly~that c cry translati n can and must bc
assigncd a skoP s Thisidea can n0 vl,c linkcdvith the conccPt f conunission it
is prcciscly by mcans of thc c mrnission that thc sk Pos is assigncd,(Rccall that a
trcanslator may als SCt his Own c

mmisson,)

Ifa c m1nission cannot bc rcahzcd,or at lcast not oPtirnally,bccausc thc chcnt

is not fan iharvith thc conditi ns of thc targct culturc,or docs n t acccPt thCn1,
thc c 1nPctcnt translator (aS an cxPcrt in intcrcultural acti n, since translati nal

action is a Particular kind of intcrcultural acti n)rnust cntcr into nc8otiations vith

thc clicnt in rdcr t cstabhsh vhat kind of optilnal translation can bc guarantccd

under thc circu 1stances. llVe sha not attcmPt to dC nc

optimal

hcrc ~it is

prcsumably a suPra^individual conccpt Wc arc si1nPly usin :thc tCrrll to dcsi :natC
onc f thc bcst translati ns P sSiblc in thc given circu 1stances,one of thosc that

bcst rcahzc thc g al in qucstion, Bcsidcs, Pti1nal is clcarly als a rclativc ter

optillaal undcr certain circumstanccs rnay mean as good as Possil)lC in vie v ofthe
1

rcsourccs ava able r in

ic v ofthc vishcs of thc chcnt ,ctC -and al ays nly
in thc pinion f the translat r,and/or of the rcciPicnt,ctc.Thc translator,as thc
exPCrt,decides in a givcn situation vhethcr t acccPt a col l1nission or not,under
hcthcr it needs to bc modi cd

vhat circumstanccs, and

The skoP s
f a translati n is thcrcf rc thc goal or PurP sc, de ned l)y thc
commisslon and if neccssary a ustc(l by thc t1 anslator In or(lcr rd1c sk PoS to
bc dcHncd Prcciscly,thC c mn ission must thus be as sPccinc as P SSiblc(H lzM nttil 11984) If thC c mmission is sPcci c Cnou h,aRCr possiblc a(lju mcnt
by thc translator hirnsclf, thc dccisi n can thcn be takcn ab ut h
t translatc
Ptirnally,ic `vhat kind of changcs vill be nccessary in the rr nsF tt`n with rcsPcct
"

thc sOurcc text

This c nccPt f the con n1ission thus lcads t thc same result as the sk P s
thcOry outhncd abovc a trdnsF Fuil, is Pri1nar y dctcrn1incd by its skoPos r its
co 1rnission,acccptcd by thc translator as bcing adcquatc t

thc goal of the action

As wel a al c,d,a dJ s` rum is nOt iPbO f cro a f;ith imltauc,rl d thc sOurce

hatC cr thc intcrPretati n or dc nition of

tCXt, Fi(lchty to the source text (
ndelity)is ne P sSiblc and legitimatc skoPos
rc mn ission, Formulatcd in this

vay,ncithcr sk P snr corn1nission arc ncvc conccPts as such~b th si1nPly n1akc

exPlick S mcthing which h always c cd Yctthcy d c0IS mCtlllng thclt haq
hid1crto eithcr bccn irnphcitly Put int PracticC m re unconsciously than

consciously,or clsc l)ccn ncglected or evcn rcjcctcd alto cthcr that is,the fact that

one translates according to a Particular PurPoSC,

vhiCh irnPliCs translating in a

c cry imPulSc;the hct that therc must

certain manncr,without giving way ccly t

alvays bc a clcarly dcHncd goal The t :o conCcPtS also ser e to rclativize a vie v_
ften bccn sccn as thc nly vahd ne that a s urcc tcxt should be
P int that has

translatcd as litcrally as P ssil)lC

Ncgccung to

e tllC c mmission

or tlle p has onc htal c nscqucncc:

there has bccn littlc agrcclllcnt to date ab ut thc bcst rncthod of translating a givcn

sKOPOs AND COMMIssION

237

tcxt In thc context ofthe sk P s r thC Conuuission this rnust no v be Possiblc,at

lcast as rcgt rds the macr stratcgy (As rcgcards in(li iidual tcxt elements we still
kn0vt little

ab

ut the functioning ofthc brain,and hcnce of culturc and languagc,

CCn different
n much m rc than intuition vvhcn ch sin8bCt
ariants vhich may aPPcar to the individual translat r to bc cqually Possiblc and
aPProPriate in a gi cn casc,h
c er sPCci c thc skop s)ThC SkoP s can als hclp

t detcr1 1inC
vhcthcr the sourcc tcxt nccds t
bc translatcd ,
Paraphrascd r

c mPlCtcly rc~editcd such stratcgics lcad t tcrn1inologically diffcrcnt

arictics
f translati nal action, each based n a(lcHncd sk Pos
t

bc ablc t

rcl

^/hiCh is itsclf bascd on a

sPCciHCd c mn ission,

Thc skopos tlleory thus h n

way d ms tllat a janslatc(l tcxt tlld

conforlll to thc target culturc beha

alvays

vell

JPso` cF@

ur or cxPcctations, that a translati n must

thc thcory cqually

adapt to thc tar8ct culturc This is just onc Possil)ihty

acc n11nodatcs thc oPP sitc tyPc of translation,dchberately marked,

vith the

intcntion of cxPrCssing source~culturc fcaturcs by targct-culturc n1cans,Evcrything

bct
ccn

thcse tvo cxtrcmcs is likc

isc PossiblC, including hybrid cases To kno v

hat thc P int f a translation is,to l)cc nscious of thc action~d1at is thc goal of

thc sk P s thC ry Thc thcOry camPaigns against thc bchcf that thcrc is no ai1n

(in any sCnscvhatever),that translation is a PurPosClCSs activity

Arc wc notjust mahn8a lot of hSs ab

llowing

claims are ju

i c(

ut n thin:,tlacnP N ,ins hr as tllc

(1)thC tl C ry makcs cxl)lick and c

ns0ous some

thing that is t
ften dcnied;(2)the sk P s, vhich is(or should bc)de ned in thc
C0 11nisSion,cxPands thC P ssibilities f translati n,incrcascs thc rangc f Possiblc

translation stratcgics, and relcascs thc translator fr

rn the corset of an cnforced -

and hcnce Rcn meanin81eSs~htcralncss;and(3)it incorP rates and enlar:es the

accountability f thc translat r, in that his translati n must function in such a
that thc gi cn goal is attaincd This accountabilit in fact lics at thc `cr

the thc ry:vhat vc are talklng about is no lcss than thc cth

va

hcart f

s f thc translat r

By ay of c nclusion,hcrc is a snal examplc illustrating thc imPortancc of the

Sk P S r

con11nlssIOn

An kl Frcnch tcxtb k
of consklcrablc valuc S

n e

had a piccc about a la vsuit conccrning an inhcritancc

nc had bcqucathcd a ccrtain sun

to tvo

nePhe vS ThC

will had bcen bldcd whcn thc ink was st l wct,so that a numbcr ofsmallink l)l ts

had aPPearcd in thc tcxt, In onc Placc,thC tcxt could rcad either as d
ix t vo or

d cux of thcn
Thc la suit
vas aboutvhethcr the scntcncc in qucstion rcad a
cfldcun d ux c nr m1
dncx Cach,tw hundred thousand ancs,
r a ch cun d cux

ceraF rl,i dncs` `c

ca h ofthcm,onc hun(ll c(l th usand an6 Assumc thc t the
`/
casc =as bcing hcard in, say,a Gcrman court ofla v,and that a translati n f the
will was rcquh cd,The sk Pos(and c m1nission)vvoul(l b i usly be to translatc in
:a :,SO thatthc judgc would un(lcrstand the ambiguity Thc trans
a documcntary
lat

r rnight for instancc pro idc a notc r con ment to thc cffcct that t

ere

Possil)lC at thc I, int in qucstion, according to

intcrPretcd as an inkblot or not, and exPlain thcn

rcadings

hcthcr thc ap str phc as

(rathCr as I havc clonc herc) _

Nov assume a ch rcnt contcxt,

vhcre thc same stor occurs as a
inor incidcnt
narrati

nl

surcly n tvish to interruPt thC fl

v f the
c ith an exPlanatOry colnmCnt, but rathcr try t nd a targct languagc

in a no cl In this casc a translator

solution ith a si1nilar nd f cffcct, c g Pcrhaps introducin: an an11)iguity

238

HANs J

ERMEER

conccrning the Presence or absence of a Crucial comn a, so that 2000,00 francs

ry is bcing
n1i8ht bc interPrctcd cithcr as 2000or as 200000francs Hcre the st

uscd instrumcntally ;thc translation does not need to rcPr duce every detail,but
ahns at an cquivalcnt cffcct ~Thc tvvo diffcrcnt solutions arc cqually PossiblC and
attainablc bccausc cach Conf rms to a different skoP s, And d1is is Prcciscly thc
P int fthc

cxamplc:onc d cs

not translate a s urCc tCxtin a

oi(l,as it
crc,but

ays acc rding to a gi cn skoPos Or c 11nission,

The ab ve examPle als illustratcs thc fact that any changc of skoP s fr m
sourcc to targct tcxt,or bCt ccn difFcrcnt translations,givcs risc to a scParatC targct
tCXt,C,g as rcgar(ls its tcxt aricty,(On tCxt val lcties( xrs rFcn),sec RCisS and
Vcrmccr1984;but cf als Gar(lt s(1987 555)ol9sCr auon that anslatlon st1 atc_
al

gics arc bound to tcxt varictics only in a strictly lirnitcd vay )The SOurce text
aricty dcter_
does n t dctcrn1inc thc
aricty of thc targct tcxt,nor does thc text

mllle so~/ccr

tl

e rm d thc ta ct

skopos, cithcr); rathcr,it is thc sk

tCxt e te nocty docs not dctcrminc tl c

l

Pos of thc translation that also detcrlalincs thc

f
aricty , in the sensc
appropriatc tcxt Varicty A text

a Classi

catory sign of a

is thus a c nscquence of thc sk Pos, and thcrcby sccondary to it, In a

hich tcxt ariety a r'dnsFdFum sh uld
gi cn culturc it is thc skoPos that dctcr 1ines
rr

nsF rum,

c nf rn t

For Cxamplc:

An ePic iS usually dcnned as a long narrati c pocrn tclling of hcr ic dceds But
a cty has th
H mcr sOs h also been alldated into a n ve s text

changcd fiom cPic t n vcl, bccausc of a Particular sk Pos, (Cf Schadc valdt s
eS thCrc for this change;als
(1958)tranSlation into German,and the reas ns hc

c Vcrmeer198 89-130)

Chapter 20

Andr Lefe ere

MOTHER COURAGE'SC CUMBERS

TEXT'SYsTEM AND REFRACTION
IN A THEORY OF LITERATURE

T1

i I flr :r{f cf \i: ;l : i

J

Il

lJ

r;

P sSibihty ofthcir rclcvance to litcrary theory has oftcn been denicd sincc the heyday
f thc rst gcncra on of Gennan Ro 1antic theo1 lsts and translators This artldc

vill

n studics can make a signiH~

try t sho v ho a certain aPPr ach to translati

v translati ns or, to usc

thcOr as a vvholc and h
a Inorc gcncra1tcrn , rc acti ns, Play a vcry imP rtant part in thc e olution of
litcraturcs

cant contribution to htcrar

H, R Hays, thC Hrst An erican translat r f

Brccht

s il urr r

Cour c und i rc

Kji,dcr,translatcs Da ist cin ganzcs Mcssbuch dabci,aus Altottlng,zu1Einschlagcn

on Gurkcn

as Thcrc

s a wholc lcdgcr om Alt tting to the st rming of Gurkcn

(B26/H5),in which the PrayCrbook Mothcr C uragc uscs to wrap hcr cucumbcrs
bccomes transformed into a ledgcr, and thc inn ccnt cucumbcrs thcmscl cs gro
n,(Jurkcn,suPposCdly thc Point at vhich thc last transaction

into an imaginary t
`

vas Cntered into that Particular lcdgcr, Eric Bcntlc

Courq ch bccn thc most wic1cly rcacl so hr,translc

vhoSC translati n

tes

of/lr
Jler

Jetzt kanns b0m rgen

abcnd daucrn,bis ich irgcnd

o :as Warmcs in Magcn krieg as NIay it last until

tomorrow c c ng,so Ican gctsomethingin my bd

mcans something likc Irnay have t
vait

(B128/B65),whcrcas Brccht

until t nnorrov

cvcning bcforc I gct some_

thing hot to cat B th Hays and Bentley Painfully miss thC P int vhcn thcy translatc

ci
crdenvollen,hat dcr Konig kcincn spass gckannt as

`vcnn
cincr
nicht
hat
s
if therc had been n b d
vh needed frceing, thc king vouldn t ha c had any

SP rt (B58/H25)and if n
ne had ll
nrcd to bc frcc,thc king vvouldn t ha c had
1982

240

ANDRE LEFEVERE
(B58/B25)rcspecti cly The German means somcthing bittcdy ionical

any flln

hkc thc kin8did n t trcat lightly any attc npts to rcsist bcing libcratcd

, E cn

the

Manhcilla translati n nods occasionally,as vhCn dic XVciber rcisscn sich um dich
(the
mcn

hght o cr you)is translatcd as thc vomcn tcar each other s hair ut

you (B37/M143) ThiS bHCf cnumcration cotlld c ily be suPPlcmClltc(ll)ya

numbcr of thcr h vvlers,somc quitc amusing,such as Hays
if you scll y ur shot

to buy rags for Ihr

verkauRs dic Ku8cln,ihr LumPen (you arc sclling your bullcts,

nary aS ra8s (:51/H19)

in vvhich Lumpcn is also listed in the dicti
I ha c n desire,h
c Cr,t0
ritc a traditional Brccht in Enghsh type f trans~
lati n~studics PaPer,

vhich
v ukl PurSuc this stratcgy to thc bittcr cnd, such a

you fools

stratcgy
vould inc itably lcad t

t vO stcrcotyPcd conclusi ns: cithcr thc

riter
decides that laughtcr cannot go on rnaskin8tcars indcHnitcly,recoils in h rr r fr 1n

sO many n1isrcprcsentations, (lamns all translations and translators, and ad

rcading litcraturc in thc Original only, as if that

ocatcs

vcrc P sSiblc Or he adn1inistcrs

hhusclf a k c cong1 atulatory pats on d1c back(aRCr a ,hc has bccn ablc to sP t
thc n1istakcs), rCgrcts that c cn good translat rs arc oRcn caught naPping in this

way,and suggcs

that wc must traln bcttcr and bcttcr

tl

anslators if wc want t

have bettcr and bcttcr translations, And therc an cnd

0r a beginnin for translations can bc uscd in thcr,rnorc constructi

c
ays

Thc situation changcs dramatically if vC stoP lamenting thc fact that thc Brcchtian

cra

in England sto d undcr thc acgis not of Brecht hirnsclf but of arious sccond-

hand idcas and conccPts b ur Brecht, an irnagc of Brccht crcatcd

om

nccPtions " and, quitc sirnply, acccpt it as a fact f

Hov many li cs, a cr all,ha c l)ccn(lccply affcctcd by

lllisundcrstandings and lmisc

hterature~ or e en

li

translations f thc Biblc and the Cd`ird`P

A vritcr s vvork ains Cxposurc and achicvcs in uence mainly through

n1is-

understandings and n isconccPtionS/ or, to usc a more ncutral tcrn

/riters

and their

v rk arc al

, rcfl acti

ns

vays undcrst od and c ncei ed against a ccrtain back-

ground or,f you will,arc rcf1 actcd through a ccrt n sPcctrum,just as thcir w rk
i usvorks thr ugh a ccrtain sPectrum
An aPPr ach t litcraturc vhich has its roots in the Poctics of RoIuanticisln,

itsclf can rcfract Prc

hich is still
and
crv much vith us, l

n t be ablc t

adrllit this rathcr b ious

factvith ut undcr 1ining its o :n foundati ns It rcsts on a numbcr of assumptions,

among thcn1,thc assumPtion oFthc gcnius and originahty ofthc author vho crcatcs
cx ni/,1`o as oPposCd t an author likc Brecht, vh is dcscribcd in thc 1969cdition
of thc BrjFdnnic

as

2 As if

a rcstless PiccCr togcthcr f idcas not al

ays his
vn

ShakcsPcare didn t havc s urccs/ and asifthcrc had not bccn s mc vriting on d1c
Faust themc l)cforc G ethe AlsO assumcd is thc sacrcd charactcr f thc tcxt, VhiCh

is not to be tamPcrCd vvith~hcncc thc h rrorvith vhich

bad translations arc
r ectCd An ther widcsPrcad aSsumPtlon is thC bchcf in thc Possibility f rccovcring thc auth r s truc intentions,and thc concon1itant bchcfthat

should bc judged on thcir intrinsic mcrit only:

Brccht

v rks

of htcraturc

s ultimate rank will%

bc rcconsidcrcd vhen thc true quality of his plays can be asscsscd indCPcndcntly of
pohtical afhhati

ns/

3as if that

vcre PosSiblc

A systcn ic aPProach to litcrature,on thc Othcr hand,tcnds n

t to suffcr fron1

such assumptions Translations, tcxts Produccd n thc b rdcrhnc bct ccn

systems,Pr idc an idcal intr duction to a systcn s approach to litcraturc,

t vo

MOTHER COURAGE S CUCUMBERs

241

First of all, lct us acccPt that rcfractions thc adaPtati n fa v rk of litcraturc to a diffcrcnt audicncc, Vith thc intcntion ofinfluencing d1c`vay in ,hich that
audicncc l cads thc rk~havc

alva s bccn vith us in litcrature Rcfractio11s arC

to be f und in thc bvi us for 1of translati n,or in thc less obvious f rms of crit

icisln (the
holcsalc allegorizatlon of thc litcraturc of Antiquity by thc Church

Fathers,cg),commCntcary,h ori()graPhy lofthc Plot summary of fam us w rks

cun1c aluation tyPe, in vvhich thc c aluation is unabashcdl bascd n thc currcnt
conccpt ofvhat g od literaturc should bc), tCaching, thc collccti n ofv rks in
anth l gics,thc Production of Plays T11csc refractions ha

cl)ccn cxtremcl inrlu~

cntial in cstabhshing thc rcPutation of a ritcr and his or hcr vork Brccht, eg

achicvcd his brcakthr ugh in England Posthu1 usly ` itl) thc 1965 Berhncr
Ensemblc s London Pr ducti n of Hrr1Jro t/ , vhen the Britis11critics bcgan t ra e
vcSs and general cxccllcncc f it all
about thc PrCcision,the Passi n,acrobatic Pr
N1crcifully,as nonc ofthc 1undcrstands Gcr1nan,thcy coul(l not be Put off by the
actual contcnt f this Playr +
It is a%ct that thc g1 cat majority of I caders and d1catrc-gocI s in thc Anglo-

saxon orld

has bccn rathcr

assiduousl rc actcd in b th Gcrn1a11ics anyway,and in Gcrman) They havc to
d not ha c acccss t0 t11c

ori ina1

:rccht ( vh

aPPr ach hjrn through rcfractions that run thc vvhole gamut(lcscribcd abo

e,a fact

occasionally Pointcd utvithin thc Romanticis bascd aPProachCS t litcraturc,but

hardly c cr allovcd t uPsct things: a largc measure of crcdit f r thc vider rcc g

nitiOn of Brcc11t in the unitcd statcs is duc to thc drama critic Eric Bcntlcy,

ho

translatcd scvcral of Brccht s Plays and11as :rittcn sc cral s und critical aPPrccia~
; It is adn ittcd that Brccht has rcachcd Anglo-saxOn audicnccs

tions of hiru

isconccPtions this imPhes,and not

icariously, ith all thc lnisundcrstandi11gs and n

through son1c lond of slnOsis 'hich cnsurcs that gcnius al a)s triumPhsin thc end

ho :does rcfraction rcally opcratc?

But no furthcr questions arc asked, such as

and vhat imPhcations could it ha e for a thcorv f literature, once its cxistcncc is
adn1ittedP

Rcfracuons,thcn,exist,and thcy are in uenual,but the)11a`c not bccn much

studied At best thcir cxistcncc has been lan1e11tcd(aRer all,thcy arc unR
the original),at``

n thc cry

Stit

thftll t

has bccn ignorcd vitbin thc Ron anticis1 -bascd aPProachCS

ob ious grounds that

hat

should n t bc cannotl)c,cven th0ugh it is,

Rc acti ns ha c ccrtainl not bccn ana yscd in any way that docs justicc to thc

immen Part thcy play,not just in thc

ssemlllltion

but als in the(lc cloPment of a Ccrtain litcrature M

of a ccd n attthor s
ork,
c ntention

is that thc

ha c

n t

bccn studicd bccausc thcrc has n t bcen a framcv rk that c ul(l luakc analvsis
of rcfractions rclcvant vithin the idcr c ntcxt of an altcrnati c theor ,That framc~
: rk cxists if rcfracti ns are thoug11t of as Part f a systcn), if the sPcctrun1that
rcfracts tllcm is deschbcd
Thc hcuristic

odcl a systCms aPProach t litcraturc makes usc oF,rests on thc

fc,llowing assumPtions:(a)litCraturc is a system,embcd(lcd in the cnvir

nmcnt of

a culturc Or societ It is a contri cd s stcn1,i c it consists of both bjccts(tCxts)

and peoPlc
h
titc,rcfract,(listributc,read th

se tcxts It is a stochastic systel

l,

indctcrn1inatc and only adn1its of Predictions that ha ca

ccrtain dcgree of Probability,
ithout l cin abs lute It is P ssible (and GCncral

ic ne

that is rclativcl

systcms Thc ry11as()one ths,as ha c somc Othcrs vh

ha

c bccn trying to apPly

242

ANDRE LEFEVERE

a systcms aPpr ach to litcraturc)t Prcsent systcms in an abstract,f rmahzcd vay,

vould be gaincd by such a stratcgy in thc Prcsent statc of literary
but very littlc

vhilC much unnccessary a Crsionvould bc crcatcd, sincc Ron1anticis1nstudics,

bascd aPPr achCs to litcraturc havc alvvays resolutcly rcjcctcd any kind fn tation
that leavcs natural languagc too far bchind
Thc litcrary systcm Possesses a rcgulatory body: thc Pcrson, pcrsons, institu-

tions (NIaccCnas, the Chincse and h1dian ElnPcr rs, thc sultan, ari us l)rClatcs,
n blen cn,Provincial

govcrnors,rnandarins,thc Church,thc C urt,the Fascist or

vho
r vhich extend(s) Patr nagc to it Patr nage consists f
Comn1unist Party)
at least thrcc c mPonentS an idcol gical nc(htcraturc should n t bc all
vcd t
gct too far out f stcP vith thc Other systclus in a gi cn socicty),an econo111iC onc

vritcr

(thc patron assurcs thc xl'1iter s livchh od) and a status co1nponent (thc

achic cs a ccrtain Position in sOcicty) Patrons rarcl in ucncc thc litcrar s stem

dircctly; criticsvill d that f r thcm, as vcriters of essays, tcachers, mc nbcrs f

acadcn)ics Patrona8c can bc undi erentiated-_in situations in vhich it is cxtcndcd

by as ngle Pers n,grouP,institution characterized l)y the samc idc

l gy

or

diEcr-

vhich different l)atrons rePresent difFcrcnt, connicting

cntiatcd, in a situation in
fS cicty in hicb thc
idcol gics Diffcrcntiation of Patrona:e occurs in thc tyPc
idc logical

and thc cc n n c comPonCnt of Patr nage are n longcr ncccssar y

hnkcd(thc Enlightcnmcnt Statc,c,g,,as pPoscd to :ari us absolutist1n narchies,

vritcrs more or lcss in

vhcrc thc samc institution dispcnscd pcnsions and kcpt

o6t

stCP) In s cictics with di crcntlatcd patronagc,cconomic hctors such as thc P1

motive are liable t achic c t11c status f an idcol g) thclnselvcs, d n1inati11ga11

drje0, 1 c iC ving thc 1963Br ad ay Producti n f

thcr considerati ns Hcncc,

s translation), can ask

id10ut c

J orher

Co1Ird (in Bcndey

sh uld

anyonc think it1night1ncct thc PoPular rcquirCments of Br

be c nu11crCial?

mPunCtion:
ad vay~

Why

that is,

Thc litcrary systen1also PosScSSCs a kir1d ofc de of bchavi ur,a Poctics This
nsists fb th an in cnt ry con
P Ctics c

1)onCnt(gCnrc, Ccrtain syn1bols, charac~

litcraturc
c n11)oncnt,an idca fh

tcrs,Prototypical situati ns)and a functionar

ith undiffcrcntiatcd
has to,()r may bc allo cd t ,function in socicty In systcn1s
Patronagc thc critical cstabhshmcnt vvill l)c ablc t
ill

ith diffcrcntiatcd Patr nagc various poctics

cnf rcc thc PoeticS In systclt1s

c n1Pctc,CaCh

trying to don1inatc

vholc,and cach
ill havc its o vn critical cstabhshmcnt,aPPlauding
nP eticS and dccryi11g vhat thc

v rk that has been Pr ducCd n thc basis ofits o

thc svsten1as a
c lnPctition

has t

ffcr,relegating it to thc lirnb

of l htcrature, vhilc clairning

P

thc high gr und for itsclf, The gaP l)ct vCCn high and

p9

idcns as colnn)cr_

cializatic)11 incrcascs Litcrature Produccd f r b i usly con n1crcial rcasons (thc

Harlcquin sChCs)will tcn(lto bc as c nscl ati

c,in tcnns ot poctics,as htcraturc
produccd R)1 ob
d cs 11

usly idc l gical reasOns (l)1

Paganda), Yct cc non1ic succcss

t ncccssarily bring status in its

akc nc can bc highly succcsslul as a

commc1Cial writcr(H ld R bbins)and be held in c ntcmPt by the hig11)r ws

at tl

c samc umc
A Hnal constraint oPcrating

vithiI

thc systcm is that f the natural language in

hat
rittcn,both the f rmal side of that languagc(

vhich a xs`ork of hterature is

in grallal ars)and itS Pragmatic side,thc vay in vhich languagc rcflccts cu

is

turc This

MOTHER COURAGE s CUC MBERs

lattcr asPcct iS

243

cn most tr ublcs luc to translators sincc diI1 rcnt languagcs

ill ncarly al /ays c ntai11attcmPts t natu-

rcflcct diffcrcnt culturcs,translations

ralizc
lati

nf rm

thc diffcrcnt culture,t rnakc it c

n is uscd to Bentley, cg, translatcs

m rc tovhat thc rcadcr ofthc trans

as Chccsc n

K s aufs Wcissbrot

chccsc On v hitc bread,

Pun Pernickc (B23/B3), rathCr than the more litcral
n thc assun11,ti n that an American audic11cc VV0uld cxPcct Gcr1 1ans to cat thcir

chccsc n Pun1pcrnickcl, since Gcrn1any is

sirn arl

h1dc1n schclncn Flandcrn

hcrc Pun11)Crnickcl caIuc fr

bcc mcs thc rnuch1n rc fan)ibar in Flandc1 s

ckls (B52/B22),hnklng thc Thirty Years

Var of thc sc e11tccnth Century with

/ar
l,
as
d
Workl

cs Bcndcy s use of Kaiscr, :hich he leavcs untranslatcd

:ay,Hays
changcs
thr ughout.In the samc
Tillys sieg bei N a:dcburg to Tilly s
Victory at LciPsic (:94/H44),on thC assumPj n that the Anglo-AmeHcan audi
cncc xxill bc rn rc h1uiliar ,ith LeiPzig than xl ith N agdcburg,It is ob

us that thcsc

changcs ha c n d1in:at all t do vith thc translator s kno :lcdge of the lan8uagc hC
is translating Thc cha11gcs de
straint,and the als

nitely P

t to thc cxistcncc f anothcr ki11d ofcon~

sh
v that thc translators arc fully a

varc ofits cxistcncc;thcrc

v uld bc11 earthly rcas n to changc thc tCxt othCrVvisc Translati ns arc produccd
undcr c nstraints that go far bcyond th

se of natural languagc

in fact, thcr c n~

straints arc oftcn n uch

1orc in ucntialin thc shaPing of thc translati n than arc thc
sen antic

or linguiStic oncs

A rc action(w11cthCr it is translation,critiosm,histohogml)hI')whch thcs t

ork of htcraturc o er on10nc syStCtn into another,rcPrCSCnts a comPromise bet

ccn t vO s stClus and is, as such, d1cl)cr ct indicator of thc(lon1inant
een thc t v l)icl rchies of constrai11ts
constraints i111x)d) systclns Thc gaP lx t

exPlains
h) ccrtain vorks do not takc, r cnjoy at l)cst an a nbiguous Position
carry a

in thc systen they arc importcd into,

Thc(lcgrcc of compr n1isc in a rcFIaction vill dcPcnd n the rePutation of thc

.ritcr bcing translatcd ithin thc systcm on1 vhich thc translation is n1adc XlVhcn
us a litdc kn wn Gcrn1an immigrant,
Hays translatcd Brccht in 1941, Brecht
ccrtainly n t among thc can nizcd titcrs of the Gcrmany of his ti111c( vhich had
burnt his b ks cight )cars l)cF ,rc) Hc did 1 ot cnjo) thc canonizcd status fa
Th Inas
ann By thc tin1c Bcndcy t1 anslatcs Brccht, the situation has changcd

Brccht is n t et canonized in the

cst, but at least hc is talkcd about W11cn

anhcirn and
illctt start bringing out Brccht sc llcctcd orks in Enghsh, thcy
are translating a can nizcd auth r,
vh is nov translated m rc n his
vn tcrlns
:n PoCtics)than n th sc f thc recciving system A historio~
(acc rding to his
8raphical refraction in thc 1 ccci ing systcn1appcaring in 1976gt ants that Brccht
N

unquCstionabl)can be rcgardcd, ith justice,as onc ofthe

t
cnticth ccnturV,
Thc dcgrec to which thc lc,rcig11

it e1

classic authors of thc

is acccPtc(li11to thc nati

c system will,

on the thcr hand, bc dctcrn1incd b thc nccd t11at native s stcIln has of hin1in a
ccrtain PhaSC f its c lution l hc nccd k r Brcchtas grcatcr in England than in

thc us Thc cnthusiastic rcccPtiOn of tbc Bcrhncr EnscmbIc by a largc scgment

f the British audiencc in 1956,should also l)c sccn in tcrms ofthc in11)act it lnadc
n the dcbatc as to vhcthcr rn t a statc-subsidizcd Nati nal Thcater should bc

sct uP in England Thc opposition to a National Thcatcr could

at last be cffccti cly

244
s

ANDRE LEFE ERE

cnccd l,y Pointing to thc Bcrhncr El scmblc, lcd by a g1 cat artist, c nsisting ol

young,vigorous and anti~estabhshmcnt actors and aCtrcsses,vvholly cxPcrirnental,

vcrHo`ving vith idcas~ and statc-subsidizcd t thc hilt s VVhere thc nced f r

thc rci8n writCr is lt,tl)c

critical cstal)lishment will be sccn to sl)lit m

That is, part of thc cstabhshmcnt will bccomc rccCPtive t

rc easi y

thc forcign modcl^ or

Tynan bccan c dran1a critic of thc L nd n ()bscr,cr

in 1954, and cry soon madc the nan1c of Brccht his tradcmark, his yardstick f

9In the uS,that

valucs.
le as Hllcd by Eric Bcntlcy,but hc did ha c t trcad

hghtly fc)ra
hilc, His 1951 antho ), T eP` l, docs not contain any v rk by
Brccht;hc als statcs in the intr ducti n that unduc PrcOccuPati n ith contcnt,

vith thelne, has bccn charactcristic of lXdarxist critics,

") In 1966, n thc othcr

hand, series Thrcc f From r/,c rl od rn RePcrr ir , Cdited by Eric Bcntlcy, is dcdi
ll All this is n t t i
uPly any moral
catcd to d1c mcn1 ry of Bert lt Brccht,
l gical c nstraints

rcal
cxistence
ofi(lc
ut
the
cr
iudgmcnt Itjust scrvcs to Point
e cn

P Sitively chan

Pi n it:

in thc Productl n and disscn ination of rcfractions

ho nccds
Rc actions of Brccht s vork a ailablc to thc Anglo-Saxon rcadcr
lst
riograPhy,
I havc
them arc11 ainly f thrcc kinds: t1 anslation, criticisln, and l
l
ked at a rcPrcsentati c8amPlc of thC last txl:ok"1ds, and rcstrictcd translati n
analysis to il

clrh r Ccl1`r

uc Brechtis n

t1 ePrCSCntcd

at all in thirtecn of thc intro-

duct ry(l1 an1a anthol gics PubhShed bct eCn1951 (

`hich iS n

t all that surPrish1g)

and 1975 ( vhich is) ThcSC anthologics, uscd to introducc thc studcnt to dran1a,
P1ay an imPortant Pa1 tin d e Amcrican litcrary systcm In effcct, they dctcr~
cld, r thc
inc
hich authors are to l)c canonizcd Thc studcnt entcring thc
cducatcd layman, ill t1.nd t acccPt thc sClecti ns,olltrcd in thesc ant11ologics as
d
n

classics/^`vithout qucstioning thc ide l gical,ccon n1ic, and aesthctic constraiI1ts

hich havc in ucnccd the sclcctions As a rcsult,thc PlayS frcquendy anthologj`cd

achicvc a P sition of relati c hcgcmony The cry n ti n of an altcrnati c listing is

n l ngcr

an oPtion for thc lay readcr Thus, forn1al cducation PcrPCtuatCs thc

canoni'ati n of ccrtai11 v rkS0f literature,and scho l and collcgc anth

an i 11ncnscly

l gics

l)lay

imP rtant Pa1 t in this csscntially conscrvativc n 0vcmCnt Vithin thc

litcrarv s stcrn,

Whcn Brecht is rePrcScntcd in anthol gics of thc tyPe just(lcscribcd,thc Play

cd
be C9ood
%m n gfsczu n r%cC
to bc cithcr

ch scn is111orc likcl)

'nC^l,d`

Circ`c From thc Prcfaccs t

thc antholo8ieS it is ob ious that a ccrtah1kind ofpoctics,

hich cann t be rcccPtive t Brecht,can still comn1and thc allcgiancc of a substan~

tlal gr uP f rc act rs `ithin thc Amcrican systcm Hcrc arc a kw samPlcs,each

f vhich is diamctrically oPPoscd to thC p ctics Brccht hilusclf tricd to claboratc:

thc story must come to an iI1c

itablc cnd;it d cs not just stoP,L)ut it c mcs to a
complction 12Opcn~cndcd Plays,such as/lf
sohloquy and asidc arc adn1ittcd t

rflcr Courd c, vill ob`iously not Ht in

thc invcnt ry con1poncnt ofthc drama

s poetics,

but vith rcscrvations; botll of thcsc dc iccs can bc usCd vcr cffcctivel in thc
thcatcr, but thcy intcrruPt thC action and must thcreforc be uscd sparin l) ; ^

vhich docs,ofcou1 sc,rule utt11c ahcnati n cdect The an )unt ofstor)Presentcd

is forcshortcncd in a play thc action is initiatcd as closc as P

ssil)le t

thc nal issuc

4
ith,and thc tcnsion incrcases rapidly
Thc incklcnts arc of high tcnsi nt start
~vhich Precludcs the cry Possib ity f epic dran1a 1^hc imPo1 tant P int herc
is that these statcments arc PasSCd as dcscribing t11e drama as such, om a

MOTHER COURAGE

S CUCUMBERs

245

Position ft tal auth rity This Poctics also Pervadcs thc 1969Brirtinniccz cntry on
Brccht, vhich states quite l gically and c nsistcntly that hC :as Rcn bad at crcating
h ing

charactcrs or at gi ing his l)lays tension and scoPe

Brecht did not makc rcfractiOn any casicr/

1s

nP0Ctics,
by insisting on his o

vhich challenged traditi nal assun Ptions about drama Rcfractors Vho do ha c a
reccPtive attitudc to vards Brecht hnd thcn sclvcs in thc uncn iable P sition of

dcahng ith a PocticS ahcn to the systcnn thcy arc opcratin:in Thcrc arc a numbcr
of stratcgics for(lcahng :ith this Onc can rccogni'c thc valuc of thc Plays them~
cs, vhile disluissing the P etics out of hand: thc the ry of ahcnad n vas only
16
so1nuch nonscnsc, (lisProved by the sheer theatricahty of all his bctter

v rks

scl

Onc can als go in for thc Psych logical coP~ ut,acc rding tovhich Brccht s PoeticS

can bc dis 1isscd as a rationahzati n f csscntia1lV irrational factors

theory d es

not conccrn mc I an1con inccd that Brccht vrites as hc docs,n t so muCh from
a prcdctcrn1ined calculation bascd on hat he bchc cs to l)c thc c rrcct g als for
17 A third
thC Present revolutionary agc, as fr m thc dictates f temPCramcnt.
strateg for adaPting a rcFracti n to thc nativc systcm is to intcgratc thc nc

vP ctics

into thc old nc by translating its conccPtS into the more fa 1ihar tcrn1inol 8y of

thc old Pot tics if tl crc is dn n s0tdicS mhe)in

rJ,cr C ur c, doesn t
take Placc On sta8C,as i11thc Arist tchan traditi n,but in the auditoriun1of Brccht
ePic thCatre

lS Thc nal strategy is to cxPlain thc nc v poctics and tO sh vv that the

can,in fact,accomn odatc it,and can allo v it t cnter into the in entory

and functional comP ncntS fits P eticS,

ithout ncccssarny g ing to PiccCs s0mC
systen

critics havc interPrctCd ahcnation to n

ean that thc audicncc should bc in a constant

state of cmotional detachn ent,butin actuahty Brecht1nanipulatcd acsthctic(hstancc

to hvol 'c

tl e

sO that hc mt

cn jar him ut f his cmPhadc SPo e

judgc chtically what hc has cxPcricnccd, 19

sPcctt tor emt,tionally ancl tl

x

Thc same strate eS Surhcc agaln in inttrP tations of Ir Fher c urqJ Scl (i)

soPh mor cally ob ious,

I%rje9 s rc ie of the 1963 Broadxsay Producti n:
20

is imaginau n and his

n lovc
cynical,sclFconsciously drab and tircsOlnc(ii)
f hfe created a v rk that transccnds any thesis, , ,Hc could n t take a vay Mothcr
21
Couragc s humanity;c cn rigidl) Mar st c dcs sti saw hcr as human(iii)
Thc Z rich audicncc f1941 1uay ha c comc a vay xsith nly sympathy
f r C uragc thc NIothcr vho, likc Ni bc, sccs hcr childrcn dcstroycd
by norc P
crful f rces but strugglcs on rcgardlcss But t scc thc play
solcly in thcsc tcr 1s is to turn a bhnd cyc to at least half thc tcxt,and
invol cs c mplcte

disregard for Brccht sn cthods of charactcrization,22

/1other Couragc lcarns nothing and foll

s thc tr ops,' he theme,in lesscr hands,

n1ight :cll ha c led to an idcahsation fthc Po r and thc ignorant, Brccht made
no conccssions, sho ving N Other Courage for nothing bettcr than shc is, cunning,
23
=dy(iv)r
stubborn,ba
0f thc thrcc translations,Manhei1n s is situated bet vccn iii and iv.Both HayS
and Bcntlcy`vCavc in and out ofii and iii The rnain Pr blerll seems to bc t accom-

m datc Brccht s(hrcctness of dicti nt the Poctics of the Br ad :ay stagc Hencc

the tcndency in b th Hays and Bcntlcy t

rnakc clcar

thC sPCctat r or rcader

,hat Brecht vantcd that rcadcr or sPcctator to piccc togcthcr f r hirnsclf, Brccht

246

ANDRE LEFEVERE

stagc dircctI
aus

Dic stummc Kattrin sPringt omVagcn und stosst rauhc Lautc

is rcndcrcd b Ha s

c ducFi n (B3

asDumb Kattrin l11akcs a h

' bccdusc s/,e noFiccs

arsc utcr

/Hl,~Italics minc)MothCr c ura sw rds

e

bist sclbcr ein Krcu': du hast cin gutes Hcrz

arc translatcd b Ha s

Cross yoursclf, %dr s rr d cFr rcD mc ouP Hnd d

rhc s mc

Du

to Kattrin

as You

rc a

what a goo(l heart

you havc (B34/H11)and by Manhcim as you rc a cross

ourself becdusc vou

ha c a good hcar (B34/M142)

vhat is italicizcd is n tin thc German Bcntley

tries tO sol c the Problcm frnaking Brccht con1Plctcly lucid b l11cans of cxces~
si e

cr sci(l

you?

usc of hyphens and itahcs

instcad of Plain
h arc

is turned int A fat l

bccomcs Who d
ou think

(B25/B4), Aber zu csscn habcn vir

ihrP

t of diffcrencc that makes, ll'

r u

areP

auch nix

havcn t got anythin

to Cat

t ha c an thing to cat eithcr and (lcr

(B39/B13), instCad of
don
FeldhauPtrnann
vird Ihncr l dcn `ve
K Pf abrcisscn, cnn nix aufm Tisch stehF is

rcndcrcd as I kn
vy ur ProblCn if ud n t nd sOmcthin8t cat and quick,
the Chief will cut our ht hcad~of ( 4o/B14)instCad f thc caPtain will tcar
ur head offif thcrc s nothing on thc tablc,
cithcr

'

Hays and Bentley also clo thcir bcst to intcgratc thc s

ngs fully int

the Play,

aPproxirnating thc model f thc musical For cxamplc, Bcntlc adds transitional

hncs bct /een the sPokcn tcxt and thc s ng in Das Licd v m XVcib und dem

S ldatcn,

thus,als ,giving thc song morc of a musical rlav

r:

T as ldicr lad c mes

an old sh :ifc
and this okl sh vifc says shc(B45/B18)
In dle translation therc is a tcndcncy to` ards thc vague, thc abstract, thc chch

Thc nccd to rhymc, morc er, lcads to cxccsSiVe padding,

jarring and concrctc,as in

Ihr HauPdeut,Curc L cut rnarschicrcn

Euch hnc Wurst nichtin den T d
Lasst die C uragc sic erst kuricrcn

NIit Wein n Lcib und Gcistesnot

Corrl ndc

von t lnarch to their

ut sausagc
Lct Coura :e heal thc 1first
hthvine ofthc Pains of body and s ul),

vhich Ha s translatcs as
B ncbare

this land and picked of mcat

Thc famc is ours but whcrc s thc breadP

s hcrc I brihg you f
d to cat

Andvine
Bentle
tl

c rei

als

t slake and s
thc

your dread(B25/4)

lnakcs thc tcxt fthe s ngs thcmsclves c nform m re to the stvlc and

istcr f tllc musical Thc lapid y,an(l tll cfo

nal

vhcrc thc original is

,MOTHER COURAGE s CUCUMBERs

247

In einer trtlbcn Frtlh

Begann mcin Qual und Muh

Daq Re mcnt and im Gc ic

Dann ward getlommdt,wies dcr Brauch

Dann ist der Fcind,ll cin LiCbstcr auch

Aus unsrcr stadt1narschiert

(onC drab n.0rning
:l)c an
my pain and sorr0

thc regi1ncnt stood in thc squarc

thcn thcy bcat thc drunrls,as is the custon1

Thcn thc encmy,n1y belo cd too

n1arched out f our t
n)
is Paddcd ut vith a string of chch
Thc SP1 lngtimc

s soJ

s int

amour
t

Through sun1mcr rnay endurc

But s iRl comcs the hll
And wintcr cncls it all

Dcccmber can e All ofthc mcn

Filcd Past thc trccs
hcre nceve hid
Thcn quickly rnarched a ay and did
N t comc back again(B55/B23)
Littlc f Brccht is left,but thc scasons and thc sad rcn1inisccncc,so oftCn de ri

ur

for Br ad :ay,arc ccrtah 1y in c i(lcncc Thc luusical takcs cr C0mPletelyhcn

Bcntlc translates
cin schnaPs,wirt, sci{:: SchCit

Ein Rcitcr hat kcinc Zcit

N1uss f r sein Kaiscr stt citcn

(A schnapPs,kllinc host,bc quick

As ldier on horscback has n

tllllc

hc has to ght for his cmPCror)

as

Onc schnaPPs,1uinc host,bc quick,rnakc haste!

As ldier s got no time to wastc

Hc rnust bc sh ting,shooting,shootlng
His Ka^er s enemies uProoting(B101/B49)
Othcr rcfrain lincs in thc song arc trcatcd
M hrcn reitcm

bccomes

He rnust be hating,hatjn{::,hatin{::

hc cannot kccP his Kalser w ting

Vith grcat consistency:

Er muss gcn

248

ANDRE LEFEVERE

instcad of thc11)ore Pr Saic he11as to go hght in Rjora

tcXt,
h C Er muss forn Kaiscr stcrben

ia

vhich is in the Gcrman

is turncd int

Hc rnust bc dyin :,(lying,d ing

His Kalscr s greatncss or" in:(B101/B50),

vhcrcas the German1ncrely n1cans he11as to(hc for his ernpcrorr Thc lcast that
can charitably be said is that Bcndcy bviously orks t a(liffcrcnt PoCtics than
Brccht;he must ha c behc cd that this(liffcrcnce ould make Brccht rnorc accePt
hcsc cxaInPlcs again lnakc it clcar that the Pr blem
al)lc than a straight translati n
hcs n t 'ith thc(licti nary,that it is not onc of semantic cqui alcncc,but rathcr
hich thc P ctics of thc
one ofa c rnI)ron isc bct vccn t`Vo kinds of poctic3, in
rccei ing systclla plays thc(lon1inant Pa1 t

Thc tcrsc,cPisodic Structurc of Brccht s play and thc stagc dirccti ns designcd
to givc somc hi11t as t thC -ay actors sh ukl act arc t

`o morc fcaturcs oF the

Brcchtian poetics not scCn as cas y transfcrablc ll 1 ne s)stCn to anothcr,Hays

thcrcf rc rcdividcs Brccht s tcxt into acts and sccncs,in accordance vith the n rn s
vh c gi ing each fthcm a
of rcccivi11g Poctics Bcntlcy kecPs Brecht s sccncs,
tide,vhich turns ut to bc thc rst hne of Brecht stcXt B0th turn a laPi(la1 y sta e

Vcnn dcr Koch komn1t,sieht cr vcrdutzt scin Zcug

dircction likc

(
hcn

the cook

cnters,he starts as hc sccs his thi11gs)intO SOmething Iuore claboratc,n1 re fan1ihar

to a gencration of actors brought uP on Stanisla

Thcn thc C ok returns,st

and A gust of`vind Entcr thc

sky

catin8 Hc stares in astonishmcnt at his bclongings

Cook,still chcwing Hc sccs his d1i11gs (B192/H72/B72) E`cn MaI111cim(lc cs n t

hcn Kattrin is dead, NIothcr Couragc says

Iaybc I can8et hcr t slccP R othcr

Couragc thcn sir1gs the lullaby and adds Nosx shc s aslceP (B153/N 209)~thc
hcn pv1 thcr Couragc dccidcs not to

additi n is not in thc Original silnilarly,

comPlain t the captain aftcr all,but si1nPly to gct uP and lCa c, thcrcby Cnding

Thc scl^iVCnCr looks aRcr hcr, shaking

d e sccnc, Bentlcy adds a sta:C djrccti n

al

ays truSt Brccht on his Ov")

Vielleicht schlaR sie Thc transladon rcads

his head

(B90/B44)

m rc ifit is to
Brcchtian dialoguc is anothcr Problcm It Inust bc lnadc to fl
t in

xx ith

thc P ctlcS of thc rccciving systelu As a rcsult,hncs arc redistributcd

actors should obviousl) not bc allo vcd to stand around for t long, ithout
anyd ing to say Consequently
'vctte Dann K nncn vir ja suchcn gchn,ich gch gcrn hcrun1und such

n1irvas aus,ich gch gcrn n it dir hcrun1,Pokli,das ist ci11Vergntlgcn1

nichtP tInd cnns z ci

chcn(laucrtP

(ThCn ve can go look,

Il
c

lovc vvalking ab ut vith

v u,Poldi,it

vvalking about and lookin

r things, I

s sO nicc,isn t itP Even ifit takes

tWo Wccks )
bec mcs

vc can CCrtainly l k ar und for so1uething, I lo c8oing

Yvettc: Yes,
,
vith y u, P ldv
around looking,Il
`c going around

MOTHER COuRAGE s CUCuMBERs

249

The Colone ReallvP D

uP
Yvctte: C)h,it sl vel ,I coukl take t

`vccks of it!
Thc Col nc ReallyP C uld youP(B76/B36).

1: e
: :Fl

:y
yrl : : FF
F
:

ll

&n ti

=

1

: l1

l:y

i 1

:c

nt

:l

scduccrr (B125/B63) ThC stagc dircction and

vhat f

ll

/; :1iai
vs it have been added

Brccht s ide l y is trcatcd in the san1c va)aS hiS P ctics in critical rci acti ns

had M thcr

: :

C
urage

ll1

ith

; W |l11

11

r1i!

}i

t llfI; l

i i i

W,

(f

l
i: :
26

d1e mOI aI strai ackct hC dCspcrattil)11cc(lCd at this omc

(r

u: f r lTllJ

cIi

:
:lh I

acted od1cr
isc (XVhat could shc havc doncP Estabhshcd

:
i

:;il

lf :}l!l ll

his a1tistic Producti ns;

ljrr

u:
t l

jl

Jt! :!{ ;

iI;

Ne crthclcss, Brccht111aintai11s a ncutral stance, That is,

I:
i=:F
ti y: t ur

plays and instcad (lcclarcs that thc audicncc n1ust n akc uP its 0 vn n1ind

:Thc

C:

logically thc latest,is cas y thc

1)est

;lr

of thc thrce translations cxan1incd hcrc,sincc

l
lftW

a:l

rl :
l)I

sr
cJ

:lh

T=
Pr
t

J;

e}l IIl

so(l ing,thcy got thc(lcbatc going If they had translatcd Brccht

n his o vn

tcrms

:}ll11

in other v rds, nccd n

vn longer bc translated Bod1thc natural la11guage and

250

ANDR

LEFE ERE

11F
t
J

c T

if

hat
at htcrary stCms arc st cRastic,not mcch~
n

Put this b1 lcny in a s lue

d hC

dns aPP0ach
{}11: ;IsF;c lr

a
l rlifi :!ji j :
:`JT
lf li
J
W

I
t h :

: ::t

: 1::

'l

fl;

:l

ll

vorm Fricdcn ic(lic

rncr
rn Au lnrJrcn, cd(lann I11tlssCns
zahlcn,
vas sie
=crIoren habcn Abcr 'ucrst schreckc11s
` zurtlCk v rln
Kricg,Er ist ihncn as Ncucs
zur ck

l LIkc go

ng`

n ca;

l
j

f 1r

tc
|f

T 1, :

t&

ht

l iHP11

schafft C)rdnung Dic Mcnsc J1eit sc

:|| i

1I
si1nply bccon1cs

ukl d

`vhat thcy c

lJ
:

ith hcrc is a good var (B22/B3) In addi-

s F:$
::l

$ J 1~ 1 ~

(thC t`vo of us v l go out1nto that cld and scttlc this busiI1css like lncn)bcc
lncs

thc t v of us vill no`v go and scttIe the aB%i1

n thc nckl fh n r (B30/B8)and

MOTHER COURAGE

s CUCUMBERs

251

mit sPicssCn un(l Kanoncn (with sPcars and guns)is rendered as with re and
swor(l (B145/B76),Not SurPr in y,Manhcim, anslating latcr and in a morc
Brccht-fricndly chmatc,takcs thc oPP sitc dircction and makcs thc Pacinsna m re
CxPhcit,rcndcrin{:
So n1ancher xx

llt s

manchcs habcn

as cs ftlr n1anchcn gar nicht gab

(so many wantcd so much

that was not a ailablc ft)r many)
as

sonile PeoPle think thc) d like to ridc ut

Thear,lcavc(langcr to thc bra Ic(B113/lN/I185)

Comprchcnsi n of the text in its semantic dirncnsion is not thc issuc;thc changcs
ca11bc accountcd f r only in tcrms ofidcology
Finally,both Hays and Bcntlcy cschc v Brccht s pr fanities in their translati ns,
subn1itting t the codc f thc Us cntcrtainmcnt industry at thc tirnc thc translati
ns

:crc
rittcn, albcit
ith s mctirncs rathcr dr ll rcsults
fuhrt scinc Lcute in die
Scheissgass/ cg, (lcadS his Pe

Ple uP shit crcck)l)Ccomcs lcads his PcoPlC int

thc smokc of battlc and lcads his s ldicrs into a traP

hast rnich bcschissen is turned int

A stinkng trickr

(B45/H17/B17);and
Du

and Y u
c f ulcd luc uPr

(B33/H9/B9) Evcn Manhcim,yCars later,gocs easy on thc swcar wor(ls: dcr

erdammte Hun(I on cincm Rittmcister is toned down to that stinkin8

gott`
ct

lDtt

in

(B83/M170l

Thc cc n n1ic aspect of rcfracti n is touched on in sOmc ofthe Prcfaccs to thc

anth l gics in

vhich Brccht is n t rePrcsCntcd, and i11 somc of thc 1

c ic

s of

An crican Pr ducti ns ofi f rhcr CourdJc Thc cc n n1ics of inclusion r cxclusion

b i usly

ha e s mething to do with coPyright;it is not all thtlt easy(or chcaP)t

c uP~thC
gct Pcrmission to rePhnt Brccht in Enghsh,and certain cditors just gi
economic hct r in its PurCSt rm Lcss b i us,l)ut no lcss powcrhl,economic
considcrati ns arc alludcd t by Barnctin thc introducti n to CFdssic TFlc rrc,a collcc~
tion of plays dcsigncd to bc thc con panion olumc t thc Pubhc Broadcasting
systcn1

s scriCs of thc san1c namc,and thercf rc doubly undcr cc non1ic prcssurc,

First, thc rder in

vhich the Plays arc prcscntcd

is ncarly chronol gica thc fe v excePtions

vcrc made to scrvc the
balancc f tele isi n programnrling Thus,bccausc the Produccrs vis1 ed

thc scries to bcgin

vith a :c ~kn
n play, ShakcsPcarc

(written about1605-6)PrecedCs Marl

carly1s90s)29
It furthcr turns out that t vo of the

classics

thcatrc at all, but that they vere

ritten

ccrtainly for telc ision

tclc isi n, ne

wc s Ed rd

s Il
cbcFfl

JI(writtCn in the

havc nc er becn vvrittcn for thc

n orc or lcss directly for thc scries, or

of thc thirtecn Plays in this b

ok, t vo

of thcse is an adaPtati n of
ltairc s prosc ncti

vvCrC
rittcn for

n,Cdndidc,and the

othcr is a Play ab ut the lifc f thc Enghsh Poct John Milton 30It is hard t scc

252

ANDRE LEFEVERE

hat these Plays c uld P ssil)ly ha e t do

vith cithcr classic or theatrc, and
thcrc v uld ccrtainl ha e bccn roon for Brecht if nc or thc thcr f thcln had
becn lc out Thc c nclusion must bc that Brccht as still, in 1975, consi(lcrcd

commcrcially and poctically too unsa (ancl ma)bc als t o cXPcnSi e) r indu

sion in a scrics on classic thcatrc Thc samc introducti n clailns that

thc most
vital theatrc in the sec

nd l alf of thc txs

cnticth centur is a fairl uni cd bod f

drama nead labe ed thc Theatre f thc Absurd,

;l h

hng Artaud as the mOst

asi e

inHucnce n thc modern stagc

PCr
The ricF rC ic v ofthc1963Br adxx ay production of lforJ,cr C our c asks thc
milh nd llar qucstion:
vhy sh uld anyonc think it rnight rncct thc P
Pular rcquirc~
ments of Broad 'ay~that is,bc c nuncrcial, thus pointin: ith brutal h ncsty to
an imP rtant elcmcnt in American Patr na8e Brccht ncvcr luanagcd to ct on his
sidc,In1963,Brccht s PatronS c uld not guarantcc a rnorc Or lcss comPletc produc_
tion of his v rk undcr Prcvaning ccon n1ic re8ulati ns:
Thc Original tcxt contains11inc songs I havc thc imPrCSsi n that scvcral
of thcsc ha

c bccn cut~Pr bably

bccause, if the

xs

crC rCtained, the

dme allowcd to sing and phy thCm m ht excCed twenty llc)ur minutc s

and thc Musicians Union

oukl list the Pr ducti n as a rnusical
According to regulati ns,this classi6cation vould cntan the emPl
of t vcntv~four

ymcnt

musicians at hca cOst32

An(l yct,t
hC Broadway gocr with no Gc1 man, or c Cn to thc Broadway gocr

with German,who Prcft rs t watch Plays rather than tO I ca(ld1cm,that was Brccht s
c,c urqge The rc acu n,in ther words,is thc rigind to thc grcat maJ rity
f PeoPle 110arc nly tangcntially cxP scd t literaturc Indced,it , uld hardly

I r r

bc an exaggcrati nt say that this kind f reader is innucnccd by litcraturc Preciscly

ugh leiacu ns,and httle clsc,In thc us,hc r sllc ill ll you tllat
D c

is a grcat novcl,onc of thc mastcrpicccs of AlnCrican literaturc Hc

vill tcll
u so
bccausc hc has bccn told s in school,bccausc she has rcad c n1ic striPs and cxtracts
tl r

in anthologics,and bccausc caPtain Ahab ill

fore er loOk likc Gregory Pcck as far

as hc
r shc is conccrncd It is through critical rcfracti ns that a text cstabhshcs

itsclf i1)sidc a

n sFtem( m thc arddc in lcalnc(l magazines to that m

`
,cdly commercial
of all criticism,thc blurb,
a o
hich is usuallv much morc cffcc~

tivc in sclling thc book than thc forlncr) It is through translations combincd
critical rcfracti ns(intr ducti ns,notes,con1

st

vith

nentary accomPanying thc translation,

articlcs on it)that a
ork of litcraturc ProducCd outsidc a gi cn systcn1takcs its
ncw
systcm,It
is through re actions in the socid s stcm s cduca
Placc in that
tional sct-uP that canonization is achic cd and,rnorc imP rtantly,rnai1 tained
is a direct link bet vccn Collcgc syllabi and PaPerback l)ubhShCrs

cs(Mann sJac' ftiJic lrotInrd1n and Dr Fd rus mth

tl

Tbcre

backhsts of clas_

an JosePh nd H

BI
ers)

mcansintendcd t bc moralisuc;Iam n t lamcndng an existlng

statc of affairs,I am rncrcly dcscribin it and suggcsting that it is cminently vorthy
All this is b n

f dcscription,since refractions are vhat kccps a litcrary systc 1going Thcy ha c

bccn ignorcd by R manticis1u-bascd aPPr achcs t litcraturc,but they ha c bcen

longcr bc

there a along Thcir rolc should n t bc o c1 csti1natcd,l)ut it should n

underestilnatcd cithcr

MOTHER COURAGE

s CUCUMBERS

253

Brccht(lcHncd his P cticS against thc(lon1inant poctics of his tilnc in Gcrmany,

and hc mana:Cd t0 vin a ccrtain dcgrce of acccPtancc for thcIn by thc ti1nc11c(licd
Hc ha(l achicvc(l this d1rough a combinad n f original work (thC tCxts of thc
Plays,thc thc retical
th sc pr

:ritings)and re

acti ns

producti ns of his plays,rcvic vs of

ductions,translati ns,thc cnsuing critical industry Thc functional con1Po~

ncnt of hs P cjcs(what thc thccatcr is r)was a 1 1y radical dcPa urc ()m thc
PrC ading Poctics of his ti1nc(though PCrhaps not so radical vvhcn c mParcd t the
PoCtics f a Prcvi us hist rical rnanifcstation of thc systcm hc vorkcd in, namcly
mcdic =al morality Plays),dCspite thc hct tlaat many of tl

c devices he used existed

in non-canonizcd forms f thc thcatcr of his ti1uc (Valentin s cabarct, eg)or in

thc theatcr of othcr cultures(ChinesC oPCra,cg)
0ndcr, then, that a R manticis1n-bascd aPPr ach to litcrature should
small

ask thc
vrctchcd question in ho f far is all this nc v? It is a vretched qucstion
bccausc n thing is e er new; thc nc :is a con11)ination ol` ari us clcments iom
thc ld,tlle n n noni d,il11l)o s fl m other sFtcms(at ab ut thc samc dmc
Brecht vas cxpcrirncnting vvith adaptations m Chinesc Pcra,thc Chinesc Poct
Fen Chi rcfractcd thc EuroPcan s nnct into Chinese)rCarrangcd to suit altcrnati

e functional
icws f litcraturc This h lds true f r l)oth thc imPhcit and thc

CxPhcit c nccpt of a Poctics,dnd for indi idualv rks f litcraturc vhich arc,to a

ccrtain cxtcnt, rccombinations of8cncric ClCmcnts, Plots, n

0tifs, symbols, etc -~

in fact,csscntially thc PiCcin togcthcr f othcr pc Ple s idcas/ butin such a vay

c thcn1a novel in Pact

Thc qucsti n of originahty is also
rctched because it Prc Cnts sO many adhcr-

as to gi

ents of Romanticism_based approachcs to htcraturc fron1 sceing so many things

Originahty can nly exist if tcxts arc Consistcntly iS latcd fr n1thc tradition and
thc cnvironmcnt in which(agalnst which)thCy vcrc Produccd,Thcir,cshncss and
tirnclcssncss, thcir sacrcd and racular status arc achieved at a Price the loss of
history, thC continuun1

f vhich

thcy arc a Part and vhich thcy hclP to(rc)shaPc,

Literaturc in gcneral, and indi idual

v rks, can, in the nal analysis, bc contcn

Platcd, c mn ented on, idcnti ed ith, aPPhcd t lifc, in a nun 1)cr of csscntially
su0jectivC ways;an(l thcse acti itics t re all re acti ns dcsigncd to influcnce thc way
in
hich

the readcr rcccivcs thc rk,concertizes it Prescnt-day rcfractions usua v

PCratc n underlying PrinciPlcs cSSCntially ahen to litcraturc and iluP
rted int it,

such as Psych analysis and ph osophy In othcr ords,thc

natural framc ork()f
in csti ation that
as lost f r litcrary studies
vhcn originahty l)ccamc the ovcr~
riding dcI and,has to bc rcl)laccd by

amcworks impolted i m othcr disciPlinCS,

a state of affairs rcndcrcd PcrhaPs ln

st glaringly obvious in the vcryvay in vvhich

rks f htcraturc arc PrcscntCd to studcnts vho a1 c bcginning the task ofstudying
htcraturc syllabi,rcading lists,anth logics,rnorc oftcn than n t offering disparatc

tcxts and Pieccs f texts, brought togcthcr in a m re or lcss arbitrary manncr to

scrvc thc dcmands f thc imposc(l amcw rk

Thc v rd,thcn,can nly be said to rca y crcatc thc rld,as thc Romanticislnc it,if it is carc ully isolatcd om thc wodd in which
inatcs And that is,in thc cnd,imPOsSil lc;thc v rd docs n t crcatc a vorld

based aPPr aches would ht

it ori

ex niJ,1f
i

Through thc gri(l of traditi

n it crcates a countcr

v rld,one

that is fasl

ncd undcr thc c nstraints of thc

orld thc crcat r livcs and
v rks in, and
nc

that can bc explaincd,understo d bcttcr if thcsc c nstraints arc takcn into account

254

ANDRE LEFEVERE

If n t,

all cxPlanation becomcs 11cCCSsarily rcducti nistic in charactcr, csscntially

subscrvicnt to thc dcmands fimP rtCd frame

orks
A systcms aPproach to litcraturc, c1 phasizing thc rolc Playcd by refractions,
or rathcr,intc rating thcn rc ahdatcs thc conccpt of litcraturc as son1Cthing that
is rnade,not in thc acuulll of unfcttcrcd gcnius,for gcnius is nevcr unfcttcrcd,but

ut f thc tcnsion bct vccn genius and thc c nstraints that gcnius has to oPcratC
undcr,accePting thcn10r sub crting them A scicncc oflitcrature,a tyPc of acti ity

that trics to dc
ra 1i cations,

isc an imaginati c Picturc of the litcrary Phcn n cnon in all its

to dcvisc theorics that luakc m rc scnsc of m rc PhCnomena than

Pre(lCcCssOrs lthat arc m re or lcss u fl l,n tm re or lcss uc),and that

fthc meth dol gy that is currcntly acccptcd l)y thc conscnsus
ofthc scicndnc con11nunity, vhilc dcvcl ping its ovvn sPcci c1ncthods suitcd to its
t11cl1

d cs so()n thc basis

ovn

sPcciHc domain,

ill

also have t study1 cfracti ns It vill ha c tO study thc

Part thcy Play in thc cvolution f a litcrary systcn1,and in the cvoluti n f htcrary
systems as such It ill als have t study thc la
s govcrning that cvoluti n thc
constraints that hclP shaPc thc PocticS that succccd cach othcr

vithin a givcn systen1,

and thc poctics of diffcrcnt systcms as cll as individual vorks Pr duced n thc
basis f

a gi

en P Ctics,or combinati n f Poctics

A syste 1s aPProach d Cs n t try to in ucncc thc c ludon f a

systcn1,thc ay critical

i cn litcrary
rcfracti ns and many translations a o
rittcn in thc
cdly

scr icc of a ccrtain Poctics tcnd to d

It d es not try to influcncc thc rcadcr s
concrctization of a8ivCn tcxt in a Ccrtain clircction Instcad, it airns at givin thC

readcr thc Inost comPlctC SCt of matcrials that can hclP hin1 r hcrin thc c ncrctization f the text,a sct of matcrials hc r shc is cc t acccpt or rcjcct
A Systclxls aPPr0ach t
t

hterary studics airns at making htcrary tcxts acccssiblC

thc rcader, by mcans of dcscriPtion, analysis, hist

Produccd n

riograPhy, translati n,

t n thc basis f a gi cn,transicnt P Ctics( vhichv l,of c

ursc,takc

grcat pains to cstabhsh itsclf as abs lutc and etcrnal),but n the basis of that dcsirc
t

know,which is itscr blcct

to c ns aln not dis milar tcl thc

ncs p cnthg

in thc litcrary systclll,a desirc to kno vn t as litcraturc itsclf kn

vs,but to kn
v

the ways in vhich litcrature offcrs its km

vledgc, `vhich is s
sh uld

iI

portant that it

bc sharcd to the:rCatcst possiblc cxtcnt

Notes
The tcxt f Brccht s

Jrur cr c

urdfc und iJlrc Kinder rcfcrrcd t in this articlc is that

PubliShed by Au au Vcdag,Bcdin in1968.H,R Hays translatIOn was PublishCd

by NcvE)irccd ns, Nc York, in the anthology for thc ycar 1941 It
as ob
ously l)ascd n thc rst crsion of l orhcr C urdJc,and I ha c takcn that int acc unt
i

in my analysis Thc Bcntlcy translati nI1 cfcr to is thc nc PubhshCd l)y Methucn

in London in 1967, Thc Manhcin1translati

f thc

n is thc onc pubhshed in = lume c

collcctcd Plays of Bcrtolt Brccht,cdited by N anheiln and J hn WillCt,and

Pubhshcd by intagc Books,Ne vY rk in 1972

1 M
2

un Esshn,R9 cnons(Ncw Y rk,1969),p79

ncrcF Pcdi Brjrdnnicd(Chicago, 1969),IV, 144a

MOTHER

A C

255

Var(l, cd,, TJlc nJn, n c mPdni n ro CnrjCrh CcnFu, jrer Ir

(L ndon,

1970),P, 88a

4 Esslin,R cc jons^P,83
5 s Kunitz,cd, cnricFh Cc,,F
P 116a
6

COURAGE S CUCUMBERS

Quoted in K H SchicPs,Bc

2cnr(NCw

, 1urh ^,FirsF s

Y rk,1965),

fr Brcchr(Ncw Y rk,

1977),P,265

7 A.Nicoll,cd, " rFd Drdil,d(NC .York, 1976),p 839.

8 Esslin,R% t,rls,p75-76
9 Esdin,Rg ct rI ns,P76
10

E Bcndcy,ed, T`

11

E Bcndc),cd,Fr

ood Ch , 1951),P 6
m rhc fotfc`n RcPcrro re,Scr,cs
cc,(Bl omington,1966),

cP`dI (Englc

l,

P
12

I3
14

s. Barnct, NI Berman and XlV Burt

, eds, CFdssic TJ, dFr ;

Jlc Humcznirjcs in

Drdn,d(B st n,1975),p v
L Pe c,Cd,D n"ons gfD d(New Y rk,1970),p,4,
ll

I,,

L Altc11bcrg and L L,Lc

is,cd,fz,rrodL`crion ro[

l J
rcr zr

PFd (Nc

1969),P 2
15

16
17

n9'c
Pcdid Br

19

20

nnjcd,IV, 144a

M,Gott ied,C)cnii,JN Fs(Nc

H Clurn an, Bcrtolt Brccht in

(B st n,

1s

`York,

Y rk,1969),P,239

Ess9s in Il odcrn Dr mtz,

cd M Frccdn1an

1974),p 152

K,A Dickson,

"drJs(Jr

() G Brockctt, Pc`sPccrirc

d( x%rcl,1978),P 108
on ConrcrnPorcz9

TJlc

rrc (Baton R ugc, 1971),

P216

dr1c9 revie v of thc 1963 Broad ay Production, quotcd in schicps, Bcrrofr

p 265
M ymotll smith,fun dnd I111gndf/ s Cuide ro1Ii rF(F LiFcIt,rurc(New York,

Br chF,

21

1973),P 642
22 M Morlt,) ,Brcchr(L
23

K Richar(ls n,cd,

nd n,1977),P
I

cnFicF Ccnrt

58
1ninJs(L

ndon,1969),P 89

24 E, Bentley,ed , TJ,c GrcczF P ql Il rjJl rs(NcfY rk, 1970),P 2169

25 J A Bt d lld W B,Edg ton,cds,TJnc CoFumhd Dicrjond /lr d rn urPc n
t

ircrdFvre(Nc Y rk,1980),p,116a,

26

B d and Edgerton, C

27 Esshn,R9

ccrlons,P

cz Dicrion IJf,P

28

Brockctt, Pcrs`cc j;cs9 p, 125,

29

Barnct,C

30

114b

77`umb

c Tl,e rrc,P,

`(1ss
Barnct, C`dssjc
T/,c rre,P, x ii

31

Barnct,CF ssic Tl,cdFrc,P XViii

32

H Clurman,Tl,

Nd ed fi,,qJc(Ncw Y

rk,1966),P 62

Chapter 21

Ph E LeWis

THE MEASURE OF TRANSLATION

EFFECTS

Diffcrcnce in translation

:
sJ

en1arks vas
it n)attcr that,undcr a quitc(hfferent titlc,l the rst ersion()f thcsc
chP2In
xx
hat rcspcct
corllPoscd,Prcsentcd,cventually revised,and pubhshed in Frc1
n1igl tk bt
ni callt tlaat thlsl l,lcce r Itl Cl b ok,D ncc in dns`dhon,cn

c rd c t

|tl Fr

thc Proccss0F translation, is a l)crf rmancc of translation7

We shall never I

call

hat cllll)arrasscd
leavc thc terrain nvhich thcsc s n e

qucstions lie F r thc rnomcnt,hovvc cr,lct us n t Prctcnd that c can taCklc then1
cly Lct uS bc c ntent vid`
hcad- n, r indccd that xxc can cvcr addrcss thcm dccisi
ith hich :c arc
rdcr to introducc the Problcn of translati n
dc eloPi11g9 in
trying to reckon,a si11 le conu cnt conccrnin thc changc in titlc,The li inal cssay

borc a res lutcly tcntati c title,

crs la traduction abusivcr and had a s mc vhat
Pro rammatic cast;it sought to set hrth iu n10rc or lcss thcOrctlcal tCrms a stlatcg)
that a tra11slator f Derhda might wcll considcr aclol,tlng :y contrast,t11c tidc Thc

RrIcasure f Translation Effects disPlaccs thc cmphasis so as to takc int

and rcaPPropriatc the ambivalcncc of d1c P

1

tcntous hcading

ranslati n In thc rst PlacC, mcasurc rckrs t

account

E)iffcrencc in

the mcans or Pr cCss by w11ich

C can PcrCcivC thc aCtion f di"crcncc thc r ngs of a l,rinciPlc of fra8n1cn~

tation_ in translati n In thc scc nd Place, cffccts shiRs thc stress a vay fron1thc
f r

strong translati n to vard a considcration ofthc rcsults Or c

Pr gran
f translati n

1985

Puttin thcsc t v rcferences togcther,the PrcPosition

nsequcnccs

of

discrcctl)

THE ME ASURE OF TRANsLATION EFFECTS

all

vs

an alternati

lati n~to

e scnse of n1easurc~as a statc of lnodcration,rcstraint,regu

comc into Play,just as thc prcPosition

dlo vs di renc e

in in Diffcrcncc

tt, tht r thc ac c Ph iPlC

translati n, Of

257

in trc

in Translati

n,

lldauc,n r tllc Prc,duct

and in arc chargcs of discursivc dynarnitc,In titlcs, vhcrc thcy

arc parts fn n1inal Phrascs that initially apPear underdctcn incd(since thc titular
function is Prccisely to inaugurate thc clab
stealthy littlc PrcPosit rs arc
ti n

ration of a contcxt as) et unsct), these

ersat c and indecisivc;thcy readily cnable a

ac la~

bct
cen t Vo modes, activc and Passive, transitivc and intransitive, on cithcr

sidc f thc rclati n thcy sPhcC

non inal for 1s~ diffcrcncc/

natc n ffc nrI

Of and

in

arc intcrPositi nal yokcs all

translation
n easurc`

and cvcn

hc a ate cll accomPhsl ed d,tllere al

tat

effect

ving the

~to

dcsig

d 0ol oPcrad c

principlc so t11c nc v titlc backs a =ay fron1 thc lcan int thcOrctical Prcscription
/crs la traducti n abusi c (by contrast vith of r in/ thC prcPofthc Frcnch
sidon 'c^is unequi ocall) (hrecdonal);it shiRs the accent away iom thc tcntadvc
f r translating Dcrrida and t

vard re cction nvhat translation actually

cs,on ho ,cn ight rncasurc~undcrstand and c aluate_ its cffccts But

in
vhat scnsc docs this shiR entail translation? Is
Thc casure f Translati n

Progran

is and(l

EfFccts

indced a translationP

Thc literal rcndcring

To vard Abusi c Translatlon :ould doubdcss l)c a
possible title in Enghsh Yct that titlc fails t

ring truc In Part thC 1 CasOn is that

tl c English ord abusivc

(mcaning wronghl,i urious,insulung,an(ls
,rth)
d cs n t iInmcdiatcly Pick uP an ther c nnotation of the Frcnch cognatc: falsc,
f

dcccpti c,lnislcading,and so forth Yct thisis by n

n1Cans thc only conSidcrati

undcrlying thc rcc urse to a differcnt titlc and vith it an i 1lllcdiatcly altCrcd slant,

l
ith thc Enghsh languagc and conco1uitantly

vith thc Anglo~Amcrican intellcctual en ir nn1cnt that is circumscribcd by thC

The shi11in qucstion hcre has t

languagc I11translating thc Frcnch tcxt,I vant to achic

c rn rc than a stiltcd transfcr

f rncanings,to luakC it : rk in Enghsh,to endo v itvith the tcxturc of a Piccc

vrittcn in Enghsh for an Enghsh-sPCaking audicnce N :,my intuid c scnsc as a

nativc sPeaker of Enghsh
ho teachcs in an Amcrican uni crsity is that a(hscussi n
cn1phasizing thc Practical Pr ccsscs and concrctc rcsults

translati

n l
vork

bcttcr, t in bcttcr, (lo n and o cr bcttcr,than a s mc vhat lnrc thc rctical

cxcursus on shall xx c say, translati
rk c)f translati
go crn thc

ity

nd1cc nditi ns that Iuakc possiblc and

This initia y subjccti e hunch ab ut

vhat will sit ell :ith an AngloPhonic
audicnce - and 11o :, theref re, the Frcnch original of this PaPer1night bcst be

carricd ovcr(tranSlatc:fr m thc Latin rrtins+fcIF1Is, Carricd acr

vcrsion_ is stron:ly rci11f rccd by ennPirical rcscarch in c

ss

)int0an Enghsh

ntrasti e li11guistics A11

cxccllcnt casc in point is a Po

erful bo k by thc Frcnch hnguist Jacquchnc
c mPdI du
n2cs dc dducFi n,3
/rdnfdis dc f dn
of aPPhcd discoursc analysis, a comParati `d^;ProbF
C Study of scvcral transla-

Guillcmll Flcschcr, ; nFdx

In this

v rk

tioI1s of Flaubcrt s lf ddr C BoI'd,scr CS as thc Principal basis br idcnti

nun11)cr f

in11) rtant(liffcrcnccs

ing a

bct :ccn FrCnch and Enghsh Follo ving thc lead

of Antoinc Cuhoh, Guillcn in-Flcschcr scts hcr con1parison of Frcnch and Enghsh

ithin a con1plcx systcm f linguistic connnunication that includes thc uttcrancc,

thc enunciation or act of uttcrancc,thc intcrlocutionary relations

f an cnunciator

258

PH1LIP E LE

/Is

and a cocnunciator, and the dilncnsion of rcfcrencc Tl is

J iJ
sc p:t

: J :

allo fs f

r a nun11)cr f

lli ;{ l
k J d rm tc lldm b

Jr1:J

I;y l

s=::

jjI

languages is all thc m rc imPrCsSi c, sincc shc carrics it out

:;1

vhilc n ncthcless

PurSuing excccdingly lneticulous analysis f rninutc details Ths intcrPlay f rnicr ~

scoPic analysis and largc~scalc comParison is Onc advantagc that aPPcars to dcrive
dircctly fron

thc Purvic v of discoursc analysis; thc sPccisc,

n1teS

: Ill 1s

aPPCar t

SJ

c nstitute

tcT

Rcm quitc dehcatc

ct
;I

ec;
l:11

thc structural orders r articulatory framcs that all /cxtcnded

tcxtual constructs to dcvcloP cohcSivcly As Gu lcn1in_Flcschcr s study Procccds,

Vo suCh structural ordcrs acquirc o er-arching importancc (1) m des of cnunci
modcs,
bservati n as distinct
fr ln c nnentary,(lircct discoursc as distinct from indircct discoursc;and als
,in
t

ation/ that is, bcsidcs thc traditi nal gra 11uatical

as sdnct iom d c u c;an(l(2)mcans r flJrms of

c,that
is,thc
framcs
of
rcfcrcncc or Pr cCSsCS0fC ntextual binding intcrnal

tllc la analy s,narr c

rcPJr
t

disc ursc, or, to Put it a bit lcss abstruscly, thc divcrsc rclati

ns~oRen madc

PcrcePtiblC by deictics,scqucncc oftcnscs,itcrativcs,pcrsonal Pronouns,Positi

nal

advcrbs,and s n~vhercby terms rckr to nc anothcr s as to lnark thc liI1ka8c

bct vecn thc cnunciativc situation and Predicati
n,bet:ccn thc subjcct and cOInple_
ment hnkcd by Prcdication,and bct vccn scParatc pr
Positions Or scntcnccs It is,
fc ursc,ncccssary to takc st ck of the detail and()rdcring of Guillcn1in~Flcscher s
analyscs in ordcr t

aPPrCciate thcir Po vcr and soPhistication adcquatcly For ur

vc er,
=c can dcri c the gain vvc nccd to n akc sin1Ply fr n
PurP SCS hcre, h

wcighing a handhl f malor P

in

thc

t hcr widc swecPi11g comparison establishcs

dclnonstrativel

Hcre,thcn, are s mc of thc characteristics of En8hsh that ser e to contrast it

vith Frcnch
A str ng tendency t

%v r

dcFt`d`i7drI

n (this

ord mcans roughly concrctc

occurrence in a context ;actuahzati n is thus dc ncd in oPP

notion, so that, f r cxamplc, thc abstract tcrn1

IljfT t

hcart

siti n

to abstract

is actuahzcd in thc

:
:F ,
%1 J
l

of dcgrcc,and its r lc is to l)c understood in rClation to arious or1ns of dis~

actuahzation/ such as usc fa tcrm in conditi nal or hyPothCtical ProP siti ns,

`fT

in statcmcnts that posiuon it as having alrcady ccurrcd,and so f rth)

A tcndcncy to PrcfCr dircct r constati e rclations t thc rcfcrent o cr

commcntary(this lattcr tcrm is uscd h a tcchnical scnsc t
designatc thc
PCration vhcrcby the disc ursc rcfcrs back t an elcmcnt or set of clcmcnts
or to a statement Prc iously intr duccd in some manncr; in othcr
rds,
thc c nstativc/c m11 entar distinction bcars a certain resen11)lancc to thc

THE MElAsURE OF TRANsLATION EFFECTs

259

fan1ihar Pposition f narrati c to dcscriPti n thc lattcr con11ncnts On elc-

mCn

P Sitc,d by thc

rm )

A strong tcndcncy to tighten thc nctv

ork f intcrnal linkagcs that bind thc

m -

elcments of disc urse togcthcr and thcrcby to Prcfcr a strict,PrCcisc,h

gcncous sct of rclati ns to thc l scr,lcss f rcefully dctcrn1incd rclati ns that

PrC a in Frcnch.

As a corollary of point3,a tcndcncy to rcquire c

nsistcncy and comPatib ity

of tcrllls that arc rclated in rcPrcSCntations of rcahty(notablc lnanifcstations
of this tcndcncy surfacc in statcmcnts invol ing PercePti n: (a)the tendency
to oricnt thc prcvailing

ie vPoint around thc catcgory

ahve/Jlun,

; and

(b)thC requircmcnt of clcar df%renthtion betwecn obscr cd and ima ned

rcality)

What do contrasti c obscrvations such as thcsc,arising frorn thc comParison of

original texts to translatcd texts, tell us ab

ut thc problcm f translating Frcnch

into Enghsh?Clcarly cnough,thcrc is a m tif con11n n to thc f ur P intS sun1Lnarizcd ab c In b th of the kc domains ~ cnunciativc rclations and rcfcrcntia1
opcrations ~ that Guillen1in-Flcschcr highhghts, Enghsh calls for n10rc cxPhcit,
PrCcisC, conCrCtc dctcrn inations, for fullcr, morc cohesivc dehncations than d

cs

Frcnch,
This diffcrcncc,Guillcn1in-Flcschcr lcm nstratcs Inassi ely,n akcs f r innumcrablc Pr blCms in translati n,Thc pointis no longcr lncrcly thC hackncycd though
d ubtlcss

scnsiblc clailn that translation is imP ssible because the lcxical c rrcs-

ndCnccs bctwccn languagcs arc imPrcosC(br cxamplc,becausc ld PorFc in Frcnch

docs n t ha c cxactly thc samc mcaning as door in Enghsh); n r, indccd, is thc

point thc much m

rc dccisi

e ne that translati n is (loomcd to bc inadequatc

bccausc attcmPts t c nstruct contrasti c gra 11nars Po verful en ugh t support

f translation, caPablC of
n achine translati n havc rc calcd that a str ng thcory
PrCScribing c rrcct choiccs,is not vithin rcach Thc Point n is alS that translation,whcn it ccurs,has t m ve whate cr n1canings it caPturcs f1 m thc ooginal
into a framc rk that tends t illaposc a diffcrcnt sct of discursi c rclations and a
/hcn Enghsh rcarticulatcs a Frcnch uttcrancc,it
diffcrcnt construction of rcahty,
Enghsh;it sirnPly cannot
Puts an interPrctation on that uttcrancc that is built int
lct thc original say vhat it Says in Frcnch, sincc it can ncithcr allo v thc translatcd
uttcrancc to relatc to Prc ious uttcranccs in thc samc chunk

thc Frcnch statcmcnt docs n

r allo v

f disc

ursc in thc ay

thc Enghsh substitutc to rclatc t thc v rld

it positions r describcs in thc ay thc FrCnch riginal d cs

What c mes into Enghsh s om Frcnch vill thcrcf rc bc sOmcthing diffcrcnt

This diffcrcncc that dePcnds n thc dissirnilarity of thc languagcs is thc diffcrcncc
ahvays alrcady in translation As thc
cry grund oft1 anslati n~its raison d trc
and its PrinciPlC~it cannot bc vcrcome Thc differcnce that blockcd or dcfcrrcd
comn1uniCation in the lnythical Babehan situation1nay be glosscd o
c mPlCtCly(lisappcars;translation

cr,butit nc cr
ne cr supPresses it totally Thc ProblCn1for thc

Enghsh sPcaking htcrPreter f the Flench text mlboht tllcn bc,in

al

,to cci

in Enghsh vhat lost r modiHcd cnunciati c and discursi e relations arc functi n~
ing in the French and hat c nstruction of rcahty is cnacted by thc French For
thc translat r,hoxx c Cr,thc Pr blCm is n t thc samc;it is rather t

rcinscribc thc

260 PHILIP E LEWIs

French messagc so as to make it c rllPly
vith thc(hscursi c and l^cfcrcntial structurCs of English,t

put on thc Frcnch tcxt thc particular intcrPrCtation inhcrcnt to

Enghsh,
Or is itP For in fact thc c n cntional
ic f translation Puts thc translator

c
sion of thc Original that rcads
vcll
or sOunds right in t1 e target langua:e but alsO to undcrstand and il)tcrPret the
ll nal n1aste1 hlly so as t reProduce its mcssagcs R"thhlly,Thc very tlanslation

under Pressurc not shuPly to Producc a

that imP ses the interPretation attendant t

its languagc should also offer an accu-

ratc intcrpretation, a rc_PreSentadon of thc original, This c

constitutcs thc classical translat

ntradict

ry exi8ency

s Prcdicamcnt a good translation sh uld l)e a

doublc intcrPrctation,faithf1 l both to thc languagc/mcssagc of the riginal and to

thc mcssagc oricnting cast of its o vn language To say that translation is al

alrcady intcrPrctation is thcrcf

ays

rc n t cnough an adcquatc translation 'ould bc

al vays alrcady t
o interPretations,a doublc intcrPrctation requiring,so to sPcak,
a doublc
vritil g; and it is the insur1n untablc lhct that these t vo interPretations

arc lnutually exclusi c that c nsigns every translation to inadcquacy

Thc thrust of this col nncnt on our qucstion concerning thc l)l acticc of trans~
lati n

bcing undcrtaken herc,in this cssay,shoukl bv n

bC fairlv c idcnt Thanks

the Pportunity to translatc frccly and cxpansivcly, a translator vho is alsO thc

auth r
d e

hat is n t P ssil)lc for

f thc original can undcrtakc to do PrcciSCly
r ho
rks On the tcxt f anothcr author in thc Prcsent casc, thC

translat

author~translat r can l)oth interPrct acc rdh1g to Enghsh and acc rdh1g tO Frcnch,

ccn Conve11tional tra11slatio11that has t0 iolatc thc o

igi11al and
con11ncntary t11at attemPts to c n1pcnsatc for the inadcquacy f thc translation
can shift at xs dl bct

such, it v uld scclll, is thC rcady oPtion f a translat r dctcri 1incd not t allo

'

the incidcnce f thc translating languagc to assumc a subtle priority, to do in the

intricacies of the translated languagc Evcn this Ption,
e shall sce, has insur_
mountable dra backs But by oPenjng it up,Pcrhaps e can aPPrcciate l)ctter the

lot f thc translat r

ho cannot ha e rccoursc to it,
ho is b gcd,for cxamPlc,
rcProduce,f r bcttcr or for orsc,an Enghsh crsj n oFI)crri(la s ultrancd Frcnch Thc qucstion for thc translat r dcpri cd of thc c n1n1cntarial
option is lx,hcd1er, and to
hat cxtcnt, anything can bc donc in translati n to
sirnPly t

rc

f thc Frcnch that Enghsh

ould o erns
of
thc
Frcnch
ride In the Hrst instance, as I bcgin actually translating porti

version of this essay,I shall Put thC qucstion to Derrida hat indicators rnight his
PreSCr e thc tcn r or tcxturc or ta118CntS

vriting offcr us conccrning thc conduct of translationP subscqucntly,I shall rcapply

the questi n,al ng
idl thc ans vcr,to thc Enghsh translation of

ne f

Dcrrida

n1ost influcntial cssays, La n ythologjc l)lanchc.

Abuse in translation
rk
Translation c uld
vell, fc ursc, be trcatcd as a lcitmotif in L,crrida s
Indeed,f r initjatcs it is surcly all to b ious that translati n,as a conCcpt and as

a Practice,hlls within thc larger amcxx ork of reprcscntation and mimcsis,of

anal gy

and mctaPhoricity,that Derrida has ushcrcd thr

ugh dcconst1 1ctivc analysis

THE MEASURE OF TRANsLATION EFFECTS

261

in his Pursuit of a xxiclc~ranging critical/hist rical acc unt of1nctaPhysics

samc initiatcs vill alrcad

Those

have n ticed a ccrtain allusi n to that analvsis in m frce

introduction to this frcc translation:I ha c positioncd translation as a forn1of rcPre_

scntation that11ecessarily cntails interPrctati
daat this re~PresCntation must seck fut

n; and furthcrm rc I havc bscrvcd

cins ofintcr~

cly to minc t vo contradictor

prctation Such Probiug int rePrcsCntation and its(lcrivatives could hardl fail t
re ed,in its Outlincs,thc Pr cd of dCconstructivc anal sis that Dcrrida s ca1 l

vork PersistCntly brought to bear on rcPrcscntation and that11is rcccnt

vork has
Rcn Pursucd spcciscally vith rcsPcct to translation

ButI am n t prctending to Pcrform or rcproduce Dcrridcan deconstruCtion

hcrc in an scrious or sustaincd
va F r to attcmPt to rePeat or rcsumc or
translati n vould surcly lead to
v rcconstruct that analySis as it aPPhcs t
s mch
prcciscly d1c forln of fa urc ~ incomPlction, distortion, in dclitv ~ that is the
incscaPablc l t of the translat r (Ve n1ay1 cckon,thcn, that if thc oPPortunity to
disclain n1akes thc c

rCPCtiti

lll n cntator

s l t rclativclv lll

re con1fortablc than the trans~

mcans an adequate solution:thc nly dehty iS cxact

n _of thc Original,in thc riginal;and cvcn that,it can vell l)c argucd,is

lator s,c n1n1Cntar

is by n

nally a suPcI1icial sdchty)AS I ha c suggcstcd, undcr n rmal circun1stanccs thc

translator,c nfrontcd vith thc imPossibnity f ilnporting si:ni crS and thcir ass _

ciativc chains frorll onc lan uagc into anothcr, and

1th thc i1nP ssibility of

transfcrring thC originars structurcs of rc cncc and enunciation,n1ust try and fail
1

to cludc inHdchty so granting this dePlorablC in1PassC

to d the iluPossd)lC

sioncd b differcncc in translation,h

thc risk and11cccssit of inHdcht

,I

an no

` asking,`

cca-

ith
oul(l1)e ida deal
1

Lc rctrait (lc la m taphorc/ an cSsay tranSlatcd h1t Enghsh undcr thc

4Dcrrida has occasion to
daringly transliteral titlc f The Rctrait of MctaPh r,

v rd rerrd1F,
vith thc adjccti c good in
asscrt ParcnthCtically, concCrning thc

quotation n1arks, unc bonnc traduction d it t uJours abuser - a go d trans_

In

lati n

must alwa)sc mmit abuscs 0r Pcd1aPs ag od translation must always play

tricks,

v, the Point hCrc is b) n n1cans to rcvahdatc a suPcrhcial oPP

N

sition

of good to bad translat1on (t do s

`ould l)c to fall prcy to thC ki11d of critical

that arc struck on thc PPositi n good and bad n1etaPhor in La rnythol gic
blanchc ); thc l)oint is rathcr t make clear the sensc of a translation crcct _ thc
bl
vs

rcnclcring,i11Dcrricla sc mmcntary,ofthc
rcFr iF~that,

Gcrman

nFzichun l))thc French tcI

in rclati n to thc tcxt f Hci(lcggcr that Dcrrida is(hscussing, (locs

not result frona a sirnPle concern f r hdchty or adcquacy but that,additi nally,Plays
a strategic rolc in unvciling the P

ssibiht)conditi ns that undcllic Hcidcggcr

s statc-

mcnts On mctaPhor and d ubtlcss undcrhc as

vcll Derrida s cxtrcn1cly scruPulous

cridcisrn f Hcidcgger In any casc,thc`crr ljr

lu11ctl ns

not so n1ud1asa hrm c)f

2p
0f translation in a l)r ccss0f gain as vcll
ss that has to l)c concci cd quantitatively rathcr than quahtativcly,cncrgctically

cqui alcncc l)ut as a fact r in an cco

as l

ill occasion a kind of controlled tcxtual disrup

busjve, it excrts an unPacking and disscn1inating c"cct, and

translation,

rathcr than toPically, Thc rcrrdiF

tion

insofar as it is

PrCciscly that cffcct

justihcs tlac tlanslt
has t

f thc rcr' iF as a textual oPerator rnakCs it a

t r

good

s work on thc rigiL1al Thc P ssil)ility that interests us hcrc

fc takc it
do vith the usc f abusc that is ePit luizcd by this cxamPle can

262

PHILIP E LE

/IS

as a modcl?Can wc rcasonably cxtraP latc m it a kind of abusc PrinciPlCP Can

ve Pr cCCd lcgiti1uately to usc such a PrinciPlC to mcasurc effects

rought by thc
translation f Dcrrida s rkP
Behind cxamPlcs f caPablc translations such as thc rctrait or Dcrri(la s cclc_
lm d HcgCl s bun a term,F rc` e,th mn actually lDe

bratccl Kll

incorPoratCd tnto dircct translations of Hcgcl

s vork,an

inchoatc axiology of trans~

n can PerhaPS bC ghmPscd n thc Onc hand,the imP ssibility of a fully faithful
translation points to a risk t be crc mc, that fveak, scrvilc translati n, fa
latl

tcndcncy t

Pri

ilCgc`vhat Dcrrida calls,in La lnythol gie blanchc/ the us-syStclll,

alucs linking the usual,the t scful,and c 11non linguistic usagc,

To accrcdit thc usc_ alucs is inc itably to oPt f rhat d n1csticatcs or lan1ihari'cs
a rncssagc at thc cxpcnsc of vhatc cr n ight uPsct or forcc or abusc languagc and

that is,thc chain

thought,rnight scck aRcr thc unthought or unthinkablc in the unsai(l

On thc ther

r unsayablc,
hand, thc rcal Possibility of translation ~ thc translatability that

cmcrgcs in thc movcment of diffcrcncc as a fundamcntal ProPcrty of languagcs~

P intS

to a risk to bc assumed that f the strong, forccful translati n that alucs

cxpcrirncntation,tampcrs vith usagc,seeks t

atch the P lyvalencics r plurivoc_

itics or cxPrcSSi c strcsses of the original by Pr ducing its ovvn,But,it

l quickly

bc asked,suPP scvC c nCCdC that thc strcngth of translati n lics in its abuses~in
thc Pr ductive differcnce c nsisting in that t vist or skc ing signaled by thc Prefx
tzb that is attachcd t thc don inant c(h) rd f usc h
far can thc abusc l)c carricd?
d cs

an abusc principlc not risk sacriHcing rigor t

transluission of rncssagcs to Playful tinkcring

N Thc basic scruPlCs of c

n cntional

facilit)

P sacrincing thc faithful

vith stylc and c nn tation?

translati n~Hdclity and intelligil)ihty

rcmain intact and arc indecd,in a scnsc,rcinforccd Hcrc is vhy If thc Play of
signiscrs and the rnaniPulati n of cnunciativc and rcfcrential rclati ns sccn1to lnakc
translation an activity of constant,incvitable c

mPron1iSC,this is n ts lely bccausc

thc imP ssibility of transfcrring the linguistic substancc of thc

riginal, as graphic

r Ph nic clcmcnts On
chich b th thc highcr~le el rclations and thc effects f

rcccp

tion clcPcnd,1nakes f r an incscaPable differcncc in thc translati n Thc translat r

c mPr n1iscs als

result froln a tcndcncy, sPcci ct the translati n ofexP

sit ry

riting,to Pri Cgc thc capturc f signi eds,t give Prilnacy to l cssagc,content,
or conccpt vcr lan8uagc tcxturC No v this lucans that thc translating text vorks
Principa y and Princil ially by substituti n and gives Pri rity to rc-PrcsCntational
Pr ceSSes to the idcnti cati n f substitutc signiHers,to1netaPhoricity~vvhcrcas

rdcr f syntax r1nctonymy,in :hich

the signiHcrs of the riginal are linked to nc anothcr and in hich that m re or

less P ctic acti ity that ,cn1ight tcrm

it tends to sub rdinatc or losc sight of thc

tcxtual vork is carricd n,

N w,on thc horizon traccd by Dcrrkla,whcrc thc metaPhoric c

nccpt of

translation is throvcn into qucstion and vhcrc thc clcar~cut scParability of signi cr
ancl signi cd,of fc,rcc and mcaning,is(lisl antlcd,what wc hcc is nc :er~ncver

Possibly~an uttcr collaPsc f(liStinctions or a ithclrawal9olll the intelligil)lc w rk

f CxPrcssion and translation; it is rather a nc v axion atics of dehty, ne d1at
rCquircs attcntion to thc chain

signi

ers, to syntactic proccsscs, t0 diScursivc

structurcs,to the incidcnce oflanguagc rllcchanisms on thought and rcahty f

rma-

tion, and so f rth, No lcss than in thc translati n of poctic tcxts, the dcmand is
f

r dclity t

much morc than scmantic substancc,

dchty also to thC modahtics f

THE MEAsURE OF TRANSLATION EFFECTs

263

CxPrCSsion and to rhctorical stratcgics A Practicc f abusc l)clongs,Part and Parccl,

to this t ughcned

cxigcncy PrCcisCly bccausc that abusivcncss,in its mult")lC f rn1s

1i8ht call it an
`hicb this hdchty
`vc

an(l functions, constitutcs a n1odahty ")

ab i 1itative

dchty to an analytic PracticC tllat is bound t

a ncccssarily st1 ati-

ncd,d uble~cdgcd vriting Practicc can bc pursucd,F r thc translator,thc Problt:rn

hcrc can no l n8cr be ho /t avoid thc failurcs~ thc reductivc and rcdirccti
c
intcrPretations ~ that (lisparity am ng natural languagcs assurcs; thc Problcn
is
ratllcr hOw t c ml)cnsatcx r losscs and to j ti (in a8mphcJl
cal
sense)tllC

di trcnccs~h
k)rcncw thc cncr8y and signf ng bcha`iour that a translau()11
is hkcly to diff11sc In tcrms morc gcrn1ane to Dcrrida sn1 vC to displacc the translati n

ProblCn1a ay fron1al gic ofidcntity or cquivalcnce,thc qucstion is h

xx=t

suPPly for thc incvitablc lack

S

hat is cruciallv at stake herc is vhat t11c translation itsclf c ntributcs, is

that abusc,c n11nittcd by the translator, vhcrcby thc translati n gocs bcyond~- slls

r~thc Original But again, can this l)c just any abuscP The absurd qucstioF1

i11f

vc havc uscd, thc

rd rc rcIj In
PoiI1ts uP the sahcnt fcaturcs of the exa111Plc
the rst place thc abusivc mo c in thc translati n cannot bc dircctcd at just any
objcct,at just any clemCnt of tllc

iginal;ratllcr,it will bcar uP n a kcy oPcrator

ra(lccisi e tcxtual knot that vill bc rccognizcd by dint olits o vn abusi c fcaturcs,

by its rcsistancc to thc PrcPondcrant alucs of thc

usuar9 and thc uscful that

arC Placcd undcr intcrrogation in

La n1ythol gic blanchc and Lc rctrait de la

n1

taphore Thus the abusivc vcork f the translationill be oricntcd by sPccihc

nubs in thc Ori8inal, l)yl)oints or l,assagcs that are in s luc sc11se forccd,that stand

out as clustcrs of tcxtual cnergy

vhctl)cr thcy arc constitutcd by vvords,turns of
phrasc, or n orc claboratc f

rn ulati

ll

ns In the sccond Placc, thc abuse itsclf

takc f rm in thc t1 anslati n in an anbivalcnt rclati n both xxith thc tcxt that it trans-

latcs and with thc language f the translation(thC lattcr incorport tes its Own systcm
f use vducs t bc1 esisted ll m within No d ubt thc Pr ject wc arc cn agi11g
hcrc is ultimatel) innP sSiblc: the translator s airn is to rcarticulate analogically thc

abusc that ccurs in thc riginal text,thus t takc On the f rcc,thc rcsistance, thc
n habitat,vet,at thc samc tin1c,also

dcnsj cati n,that this abusc Occasions in its o

`

disPlace,ren1obdize,and cxtcnd this abusc in an

it vill

havc a dual
ncti n~on

concePtual System

f vhich

the nc

thcr 11ihcu vhcrc, ncc again,

hand, that f forcing the linguistic and

it is a(lePcndcnt, and n thc Othcr hand, of dirccting

nt0
vhic1 it
bccomcs a kind f unsctthng aRcrmath(it is as if thc translati n sought to occuPy
thc Original s alrcady1111sCttled h mc,and thcrcby, far
om don csticating its to
a critical thrust back t
vard thc tcxt that it translatcs and in rclati

turn it hto a Plttcc still more foKign to itsclD

Hcrc again, given this strained rclation bct vccn origiI1al and translation, an
risc docs nottllc ddnand br Kpr ductlt,n fthe0Hgnal abusc,
n thc Onc hand,and f r adapti c and rcacti c transforn1ation of thc abuse, n the
ther,sirnPly conStitutc an untcnablc c ntradicti nP Is this n t just a radical crsi n
f, r rc crsion to, the irrcsol ablc tcnsi n bct vecn Frcnch and Enghsh thatc

o Ccdon is sure tc,t

ha

c alrcady unc0 credP Is n t thc Practicc oF abuse(lo med to givc in to thc Pre-

clusionary don)inion f usc in and undcr ks hich it oPcratcs If y u can abusc

nly by resPccti11g and thereby uPholding the

cry usages that arc c ntcstcd,if thc
aggrcssi c translator mcrcly falls into a classic f rm
f con)plicity, :hcrcby, for

264

PHILIP E LE

/IS

cxan11,lc, dCviation scr es to ground and sustain thc norn1, thcn

vhy all thc fuss

about abusc?Maybc this is jtlst tl c san1c ol(l tlaP,wCll lu o n to thc mc)st Con
cn

tionaI thcOrics f translati n,that Bcnjannin(lchdcs in

Prcciscly in this imPasSC,up a8ai11st an aPParCnt c

Thc Task fd1c Translat

ntradicti n,onc rcdisc vcrs

that plurahzed, dislocutory, l)aralogical

thc ncct)ssity 0f a doublc articulati

n, oI

vriting Practicc that Dcrri(la has s

oRcn culti atcd and cxPlaincd In rclati n to

thc tcnsions vithin translati n~as-rcPrcsentation that vc11ave disccrncd,vvc n`ight

cll situatc Derrida s cxPcrilncnts

vitll a doublc~cdgcd
vriting as, PrecisCly, a
rCsP nsc t thC prcssurc for t
o intcrPrCtations-

the onc in c

mPliancc :ith

thc

target language, the thcr in reahgnment xs.id1the riginal tcxt_ that I11ave becn

undcrscoriI1g Tbc resPonsc

ould c l1sist in assun ing thc contradiction and

attcmPtin8to111akC sOll cthing ofit Ifsuch a1 csPonsc Pro es ncccssary in colun en-

n thc pr blematics of rePrcsCntation,thcn a f

tar)

rti ri it vould l

el)cccssary in

thc translation f that col,,1nentary In terl,,s of mcth

d, thc qucstion
voukl,

cus
on
a
Paradoxic
in1PerativC:ho
vt
say
t
o
things
at
oncc,ho
Predictably,f
`
0intcrPrctati ns sirnultane usly? 0r in thc amevvork of our inquiry
to cnact t

hcrc,ho 't translatc in acquicsccnce to Enghsh vhilc noncthclcss rcsurrecting a

ccrtain idchty to thc original French
In Principlc,thcrc v uld be a great dcal to say hcrc ab ut thc cnc untcrith,
or rccoursc to,or usc and abuse of, Perat rs f undccidabihty sufRcc it to rcfcr
t

) and to add just ne

thc intcrvic , cntitlcd P sitions/

analytic as vcll as cliscursi c,is groundcd in thc caPacity

cmark thc st1 atcgy,

f discoursc to say and d

many thi11gs at oncc and to makc s mc ofthc rclations among thosc things said and
donc indctcrYninatc; rccourse to such a stratcgy obviously luakes cc

tah) tcxts of

Dcrrida excePti nally rCsistant to translation To(lcny thatlanguagc has this caPacity
is den10n trably foohsh,and t clairn that Phil soPhy or lin:uiStic thcOr)Sh uld n t,

or nccd not,reckonvith thc incidence f untranslatability scen s hopclcssly defen~

ve Fa1 9om arguing this Point,ho icvcr, let mc suck with my quitc limited
pr ect of dCIincating the clcmcnts of a translt ti n Practlcc that dc
l cs ma
clisruptive or(lcconstructivc vvriting practice, sO as to suggcst that, in translation,

culty ofan alrcady complcx pcrf rn1ance oflan uagC is aggravatcd,and vith
that hcightcncd difhculty thc ,cry abusivcncss that is made morc(lifHcult bec n1cs
thc dif

that rnuch luorc ncccssarV,

n, i11 a rclati n of thor ughgoing
`o tcrn1s, original and translati
n;
and
tvv
rcgistcrs,
usc
and
abusc,
in si1nultancOus rclations l
Phcati
contrarincss and comPlCmcntarity;and a translating Pcration that orks in thrcc
zoncs, the languagc of thc original, thc languagc of the translation, and thc sPacc
CIiven t

coin

bct
cen thc t

comPhCatcd airns, rst t rcProducc thc usc and abusc

;and t
f thc riginal in thc translation and second to suPPly for :hat cannot in fact
be rCProduccd
ith a rcmob izadon of usc and abusc that further quah es thc ri~
:

v,aftcr c di cation f thcse givcns, vc could

construct lo:ical and mathcmatical schcmcs to aCCount for thc m dest nun11)cr f

ginal as uscd and thus disabuscd,No

combinations that c mc into Play hcrc; ) Ct it is c idcnt that, in the translat

cxpcricncc, thcsc con binati ns arc clusive, that it is l gistically i1uPracticablc to

conduct thc translational oPcrations h1 a systcn1atized or Pr gran1rncd fas1 ion,

and thus that, in tbc v rk f translati n, the integration that is achieved cscaPcs,
in a ital ay, i n1re ection and cn crgCs in a cxPcrhuCntal ordcr, an ()rdcr f

THE ME

sURE OF TRANSLATION EFFECTs

265

vhere succcss is a functi n not only of the immensc Paraphrastic and

Paronomastic caPacitics oflanguagc but als f trial and crr r,of chance,Thc translation xs'ill be essayistic,in thc str n8sensc f thc vv rd
disco ery,

use in translation
Wcn0 v
f r

ha c in PlacC, ia

somc abusivc usc ofsnatchcs f Dcrrida,am dcst schcmc

rncasuring thc cffccts()f translatin:Dcrri(la,h

a nutshell,thc Proposal is(1)t

conccntrate evaluati c attcntion on moments of dcnsity and intcnsity vhcrc thc play

f conccpts and exPressi n is affcctcd by thc disruPtive, (hsscn1inatory Po vcr f

n carrics out, not
language; (2)t insist on the transformations that thc translati
just on thc semantic,but also n syntactic and discursi c lcvcls;(3)t ask vhethcr
the translati n articulates

its o
n tcxtual cffccts that arc conscqucntially and

hcthcr and h
tclhngly abusi cvith resPect t thC original In rdcr t scc
v guidclincs such as these n1ight illuminatc translation Practicc,it is of c

ursc necessary t

cxan inc a translati n through thc lcnscs thcy Pro idC ThC rcmarks that f llovv arc

bascd n a reading of a translati n f La myth logic blanchc/ sclcctcd f r this

purPose because it aPPcars to ha c had,f r circu 1stantial rcas ns,a considerable

influcncc n the recePtion f Derrida s vork in this c untry Thc translation,

hitc
Mythology, aPPearcd in Nc ircr Hisr Il in19746Thc analytlc w rk,which is
cxtrcmcly tcdious, vas conccntrated on ne Porti n of thc essay,thc nal Pagcs of
vhCrc Dcrrida undcrtakcs a co nnCnits sccond sccti n, Thc ElliPsis fthC sun/
tary on Aristotlc s disc ursc on mctaphor Thc vcry sirnPlc ad hoc proccdurc
ad Ptcd :as to corllPare the translation t thc riginal, hnc by linc and v rd by

rd, and t

sti ns f differcncc I shall n list s mc ofthc

isiblc to a strictly amatcur analyst,
n,dr crs, Dcrrida haPPens t bc Cxcccdingly and quitc trans-

n tc di ersc mani

kinds f diffcrcncc that arc

1 PtIncrudrion nd

parently careful ab ut textual gcograPhy It is thercf rc surprising to obscrvc that

o
s thc itahcs that sct off certain tcrms to bc dr ppcd;puts quotan marks ar und very imP rtant terms such as n2 rdPhoroFoJ e that do n t havc

thc translation a
ti

thcln in thc Frcnch tcxt;and gocs so far as t

inscrt in parcnthcscs translator s notcs

that arc not clcarl idcnti cd as such Thc cffcct f these alterations is subtracti

c;

thc translatcd
ersion Hattcns r softcns thc Original

2rr nsF Fi no/ rrunsFd o , La m holo e blanch h its wn tlanslr

stratcgy, indicated not nly in its claboratc exPlanations about tcr

ti

`s in Aristotlc

thc(hfhcultics f translation l)ut a1s l)y its use f thc

wcll cstablishc(l practicc whcrcl)y a givcn Grcck or Gcrman w rd thatis bcing tans
and its exPhcit allusions t

lated is givcn in brackets aftcr thc Frcnch tcrm,At tilncs,moreovcr,Dcrrida clccts

rcfer only t thc foreign
ord, set in itahcs Thc tcxt f Whitc Mythology
sOmctimcs droPs thC w rds in brackcts,makng do withjustthc English word One

crcct fthis kind of n1issi n is to rcducc thc attcntion to translation that is sustaincd
in thc Original

3sxcs At tllc lcvd f scmcs, that is,dcmental u ts of s ni catll,n,we

cncountcr~o cr and bcyond a Prcdictablc Anglo-Saxon resistance on thc part f
the translator t forms ending in is and srn(as in c ntinuist,continuisn1,and so
forth)-_a curious hcsitati nvith rcspcct to the suf6x 1tlue(-ic in Enghsh) Thus,

266 PHILIP E LE

/IS

for examplc,the wi(ldy used Frcnch term F

f,,
Phoriquc,1ic)r which the English

be rnctaPhoricS/ s n1ctiIues bccomcs in

White Mythology
ml)ly metaphor, Or agaln,the c0ncd tcrm F nFJ,roPoP
rehlly b t
"que,cc
fP

is
anchts
antithescs
bchrc
k
is
adoPtcd,is
grou11dcd by Dcrrida i11analyscs
Cqui alcnt v
uld

si

11Ply r CctCd il)h

r f

a paralDl1rasc that1 c rs to

ho1nmc Phy quc xxithout

suggcsting that an abstract concePtuahzati n that takcs systcrllic uthncs is at thc

nub fthc argumcnt,A still rnorc disquieting and cry frcqucnt casc is thc suPPrcssion of thc sufnx_ mc, as in thc vord Ilaim mc and esPecially in Phi`

mc Thc

SPCcial c nccPtual

aluc of this tcr 1,as a basic unit in a structured systcn1,is

`h triv
iahzc(l in thc translation,
vhich rcscts it in common Parlancc as an
clcmcnt of

Phil soPhy

4 "ords Thc
c a1 c innumcrablc cxamplcs in this category, Lct us thcrcforc

notc Only a%w tcrn1s that rdatc to imPoltant DCrridcan moti ,to bcgin with,thc
reHcxivc vcrb s suPP`JCr, In the n0 v~fan1ihar l gic of suPPlemCntarity so brilliantly

analy7cd and rcmobilizcd by Dcrri(la, this verb is convcmient for articulating thc

ns f lack and suPPlCmcnt Prccisely bccausc it can con ey a t o

sidcd a1 ticulati n, hcrc n1caning to add to, to suPPlemCnt, there meaning to

:ith
this(l
ublc funcsubstitutc for, to cPlace Thc srst th11c thc tcrn1aPPcarS
dual rclati

tion,thc translati n chooscs thc scc nd oftbcsc l lCanings(rather than,f r cxalnPle,

ch osing

to adoPt the somevvhat archaic Enghsh

a ca1 rier

of thc tw

thc crucial tern

mcanings) Am

hich

crb suPPly/

can scr e as

ng otllCr imP ltant cxalnPlcs,lct us n te:(1)

c oct/ although a key Part of its c nnotational

forcc clcarly

dcPcnds n the ctiological c ntcxt from 'hich it is takcn,is oRcn translated by thC

v rd
ocabulary);
Phcn mcnon ( hich is rcscr ed for guardcd usc in Derrida s
cry insistcnt cliscussion of thc meani11g it
(2) thc crucial tcrn1 ,

`cur, (lcspitc
a
acquires in Saussurean hnguistic
thcOry,
is Ren translatcd by notion ; (3) thC
Cqually vital tcrm clrFicu`

Fion, e

en though it is P intedly( ouPled vith the tcrm

drFic/c in a statcmcnt that alludcs to thc syntactic function of articlcs,is nonethclcss

translatcd l,y thc ord joint, In the casc that I mention hc1 c, :hCrc a rclativcly
htcral altcrnati c is availablc in Enghsh, thc selection of scn1antic neighbors (l cs

not ncccssarily mo(li

tlle mcaning of a statcmcntin a radical way,butit does Occa-

si()I1an unncccssary loss of precision

5 PJ,rciscs In this/onc of constructions still smallcr than full scntcnccs, there

can fc ursc l)c cry dif cult translation ProblCms The questi n is again, in thc

case ofvitally imP rtant Cxprcssions,ho v far to dc iatc fro11aa htcrahst rcndcrh1g
Let us note t 'o cxamPles First, the Phrase 1am taPh ricit par anal gic, the
ProcCss that is c nstituti cf thc Ordcrs f sirnilarity and Pr P rtionahty,bccolncs

analogy Producing n1ctaPhor

This c nversion d es n t si1nPly Cntail a shght

disPlaccmcnt of rneaning;it scts asidc a kcy ternn(lcsignating thc gcneral status and

PCration f rnctaPh r, both a statc and an cncrgctics; latcr on thc gcncral tcrm

vill Pro c indisPcnsablc enough for thc translation t dcPl y thC vv rd lnctaPhor~
ry choicc,sincc by at1alogy with ords hkc musicality it
a quahty, than thc n10rc hteral altcrnative,

n1ctaPhoricity Second,thc s mcwbat tl lcky PhrasC /cI condirion d in,P ssj jrJ
icality (a lcSs satisfact

: uld

sccm

to

dcsignatc

becomes Fh c ntliFions hic i,,dkc ir in PrincjPfc imPoss bF to carry

out such a Pr jccF(thc Pr cct of constructing a hturc mctaPh rics) so DCrrida
(l

un td prc,Jct

is not looking for a set f Conditlons(it

uld be intcrcsting to kno

/ vhy

thc Plural

THE MEASURE OF TRANsLATION EFFECTS

267
n

'as adoPtcd in thc translati n)that arc constitutivc of the oPcrativc PrinciPlC;

the contrary,he is in foct ProP sing tO SCarch out the Pri11ciPlC undcrlying a singlc
imPoSsibility con don that disables thc Projcct om the utsct,Ultimately at stakc
in thc shPPagc that this passagc allo vs is thc trans1nission,in t1

anslati 11,of DCrrida

discourse on Possil)ihty conditions,

hiCh haPPcns t bC thc vcrital)lc armaturc of
a dcc nstructivc analytic Practicc in general,
6 D sc e This is f coursc thc broad catcgory on vhich vc f cuscd a o d
dcal f attcnti n h1 thc hrst secti n of this essay thanks to thc dccisivc invcstiga1

tions of Gunlclnin_Flcscher Thc rangc of Phcn mCna encountercd in this

d

ast

luain is so vidc as to PrccludC a systcmatic accounting, ExamPlcs coul(l be as

discrctc as thc intr duction of a si1 glc advc1 bial n1arkcr r asl`r-rcachil)g as a serics

of ntactk a tmcnts C cn(ling over a hll P

c or n 0 Btlt hcrc agall

,a

handful of cases v ill sufncc t givc us a sense of thc stakes

d Frcnch origina

C cst dcPuis l

au-dcl de la(li rence cntrc lC lDroPrc Ct lc

nOn^Pr Prc qu il faudrait rendre comPtc des ects dc pr P1 i to ct dc non-proPri t

(P 273) EnghSh vcrsion

Account has t be givCn of thc cffects f that vhich is
=hich
is
not
by going bcyond that di"ercncc itsclf (p 28) Hcrc
Proper and that

c n,ol

coursc,idcnti many changcs syntactic in elsi()n, iR hvm thc condl-

tlonal
crb(ifj%udrd F)t thc asscrdvc has t bc (an inStancc of English h oring

actuahzati n),dClCti n of thc ParallCls bct ccn

Prc/Pr P iJrJ and nc,n~PrclPr /nLDn~

j
PriJr ,togethcr ith(lilution fthc c ncePtual SPCcincit) f thCSC tcrms,and so
f

rth Thc shift at the start,ho /c Cr,involving the opcning PrcPositi nal Phrase of

the Frcnch, dcPuiS l au-dcl (lc la di" rcncc/ is PcrhaPs n1ost tclling The English
ish to l,1 otest
0uld
adoPts t11c Prcscnt ParticiPial lorn1 (n d ubt so nc Purists
that thc ParticiPlC,a 'k va1 (lly aPpcnded to a PasSi

incd su0jcct,danglcs),which has tw

vho is abscnt in thc French

dcPuis l au-del (indicating

cts
c

C construction and lacking a spcc

it implics the PrcsCncc of an agcnt

crsion,and it substitutcs lor the sPatial l)ositi ning of

a locus fron1 vhich thc cxplanation vould riginatc)

a mo cmcnt,an acu n f tl e agcnt r su ect vve might then say tht t thC rcst tesit a m
ting of Dcrri(la s theorctical commcnt in tl)c tl anslation
1

eimmc(liatc,

actical tcnor

b ConsOnant vith thc tcndcncies Gudlcll in-Flcschcr ascribcs to Enghsh, thc

translator takcs the libc1 ty ofaddh1g conjunctions,conccssives,and advcrsati

cs that

tie scntcnces togcthcr much n1 rc tightly than docs thc Frcnch, vhich ftcn lcavcs

hCrC thc translation adds substan~

thcn1crisPly seParatcd,Thcrc arc also instanccs
cll~R)1 l cd sentcnccs
`ith
Cd and verbal c mplcmcnt(This cllamc tcristiC is moK surPosing tllan it m ht

tial Phrascs so as to transforn1clliptical1Ittcranccs into

s1d

bc in thcr Frcnch-t -Enghsh convcrsions bccausc La mythologic blanchc`

third m
r scction L clliPsC du s lci
al)lc/

in its

n mc,rinc n11)r hcnsiblc,l imPrcn_

cOntains forccful c llln1cntary on the cf ccts of clliPsis There can hardly bC

any doubt,thcrcf rc,that Dcrrida is rnaking a dehbcrate,PointCd usc f clliPsis in

his tcxt)0vCrall,tllc syntacuc and Pr grammatic adjustmcnts tllat the translat r
allo s hilnsclf t 111ulJply rad1cr ccl)(l sccn1to Conf n)to al)ias oPCnl)statcd
1

in thc translator s notC, vhcrc vc arc told that natural,intclligiblc Enghsh rcndcr~

ings ha c becn prefc1 rcd exccPt in a fC

cascs
vhCre thc argun1cnt required

rctcntion of morc straincd, literal forlns By and largc, the tcndcncy

rCsPCct thc sc_valuCs of Enghsh.

vas thcn t

268

PHILIP E LEWIs
c, In his studicd vriting Pracucc, Dcrri(la plays masterfully n thc ass ciativc,

P Ctlc rcs urces of Frcnch,generating articulatory structures that a rcadcr

Frcnch can hardly n1iss Hc thus creates,to l)c surc,n1any a ProblCn1f

lat r,To

f thc

r the trans~

putit aPPr xin1atcly, vc rnight say that thc global pr blem is to dctcrn1inc

what t do about anaphoric structurcs(asSo adon of tcrms

ia ParallCl placement
in scntcnccs,PamgraPhs,and so rtlll and an emic brmati ns(association of

scmcs or terms in scHal rdations,oRcn via word Play),whethcr t

thc1 ort let them laPsc as En8hsh in

stress rctaining

e ordcr A couPle of cxan1_

1)oSCS its discursi

Plcs ll w
1In this Passagc,D oda is wcdin ac mmcnta on tllC Klati nJP /s s

and mi,nesis in Ar^t dc t which

e havc rc rrcd nce be rc Le n,imcsis Cst le
Pr prC de l hon11uc,scul l h 11nc illlitc ProPremCnt scul il prcnd Plaisir;in

iter,

scul il apprcnd in1itcr,sculil aPPrend Par in1itation Lc pouvoir dc

rit ,c nuue
do olcmellt dc la n uK(P si Pc r la n11i,,csis,aPPardCnt cong talcmcnt la

Physiquc dc ho nnc, l anthr P Physiquc (p, 283) N w, thc translati n

r`mcs

s is thc proPcrty of rnan (Dnly man Pr PCrly spcaking in itatcs Hc alonc

takes pleasurc in in1itating, lcarns t

in1itatc, and learns by in1itation Thc P

vcr

trutll, all un ciling of naturc lP

/ s)by

m1m s,is a congcnitd ProPcrt) of

n1an as a physical bcing (pp 37-8) AttCntion to thc anaPh ric dhncnsion hcrc
lcads us at ncc to t vo

remarks

First,at thc lc cl fthc Passagc s intcrnal dynan ics,a sahcnt feature is thc rePc~
tition,in thc t v nliddle scntenccs,of sc1``and f imiFcr/

Fdrion The Enghsh kccPs

thc lattcr l)ut (lrops thc former, thcrcby (lin1inishing thc rhet rical cffcct f thc
scrics, vhich is by n
hn)itati

thc c

cans just a mattcr of clcgancc or s nority RcPcating thc

c adverbs Scul

scu1

, scul

scr

cs to sct off thc thrcc n1cn1bcrs of

mpound scntencc as parallcl proPositi ns and thcreby t

c nfcr

n thcn1a

ccrtaim equivalcncc,to l ark thc thrce Pr P siti ns ofthe second scntence as rc nc~
mcnts that hl ther cci tlae nsc f the rqt sentcnce Thc l lnt,toric is ucid tcl

thc placemcnt of thc t

scntences in an intcrlocking clc nitional rn dc,and s mc
fthe igor vith
vo sentcnccs and t11cir f ur Pr P Sit ons arc thus imbri~
^:hich thc t

catcd is draincd off in the translation

Scc nd,at the lcvcl f thc PasSagc s conncction vith thc m

ti

f thc essay at
/ith
ati cs

largc, a Particularly dccisi c11 arker is thc tcrm ProPrc and all its deri

good causc thc translator s notc calls attcntion to`roPrc and Pro`r JrJ,obscrving that
in s lnc

cascs the use of Propcr instcad of distincti c or othcr cqui alcnts sccms

straincd,but that this literal rcndc1 ing is noncthclcss justi cd s that thc stratcgic

(P 6)

hcn thc Passagc

in qucstion vas translatcd,this s und rcmark vvas(loubtlcss rcn1cmbcred But h

r lc of

thc Pr Per in thc argun cnt rnay rCn1ain1nanifest

far is its aPPhcati n carricdP In thc context,it is clcar that1nirncsis is thc de

quality that disdnguishes man

adjccti al n un`c ProPr

om

tla

andpollt(an

howevcr,bc clo r

thc standard Enghsh noun

altt

rntltl1

e, mimCsis

to thc a cct al/dcs ti nd

wh

Pr PCrty
is Pr Per

mca ng mimes

proPosition,

is the P SSCs 0n

scul l h lnn

vhich

of man ThC di ctll

c in1ite ProPremcnt/

Seen1s acccPtable
to man, wotlld,

form and wottld cut back on thc

ambiguity of thc asscrtion n1imcsis is thc ProPerty ofIuan`

ning

m animals,and the shiR in thc translau ni n1thc

can also bc rcad

c mcs

with thc ncxt

and vith its sense in rclati n to thc

THE ME

SURE OF TRANSLATION EFFECTs

PrCcCding onc and t thc(liscourse on thc F,r

Prcn,cnr,thc translation gi

than
`r

269

in the cssay atlargc F r the advcrb

cs us Pr Perly sPcaking/
`
Placed l)cf rc the verb rather

aRcr it,as in the Frcnch,sO as to suggcst that in thc Propcr scnsc of thc

i 1itate,

v rd
only lllan docs it Thc troublc is that thc sentcncc vith Pr

nF,sct
uP
P'en

Ti
T rJ

F: r IJ FT

;1I p f 1 W
T: :
:cs

1 tj

11lFj;
rN
$
imi tion is aPPropriativc and scl
acti cly

dc6nin9 ThiS capaci,to 8111

htt

ral|and

in thc(hsc ursc On thc ProPcr c uld also l)cc nfcrrcd upon thc Enghsh

Pr PCrlyr

thc h0 : : s:lIc
dra v

Jr F : l

:j: s:1 1

:Tc

uPon as they arc rcarticulatcd

2 Thc passagc considcred hcrcafter conccrns thc n etaph r extcrnal to Phil~

s Phy that Prcsides ovcr thc systcm of mctaPh rS
vithin it, that is, in sun
thc
metaPh r f1nctaPhor
Cettc m
taPhorc en Plus, restant hors du chan

P qu clle Permct de
circonscrire,s cxtrait ou s abstrait cncorc ce chamP,s ys ustrait donc

con11nc1u taPh re cn moins En raison(lc ce quc nous Pourrions inti

tulcr, Par con n1ic, la suPPlemcnta1 ito troPiquc, le tour dc Plus
dc cnant lc t ur dc moins, la taxinollaic ou l

Philos Phiqucs n
d

y ouv t

hist

irc des m taPhres

jamals sOn coml,tC Al intcrmlllable

hiscencc du suPPl mcnt(s il est PcrmiS dc jardincr cnc rc un pcu cettc

m taPh

botal lquC)s atDkllou"rchs

mcnt.Lc chamP n

&at ou lc atLlt du comPl

c jamms sattlro,lP 261]

This extra rnctaphor,rcn1aining outsidc thc ncld vvhich it cnablcs us t

circun1scribe,a s cxtracts or abstracts this cld f r itsel and thcrcf re
rclnovcs itsclf m that hdd as ne rnctaphor thc lcss,Bccausc f what

we m ht for convcnicnce call metaPh rical supplcmcntati n(thc Cxtra

metaPh r bcing tlt thc mc umc a mtstaPhor the less),no d s cdtion
or account of philosophical rnctaPhor can evcr prosPcr Thc supplcmcnt
is al vays

unfolding,l)ut it can ncvcr attain thc status fa c mplcmcnt

The ckl

is nc cr saturatcd.

r IJf r r & Jr

suPPlCmcntation F r thc momcnt, let us not quil)ble ovcr this (lcbatablc choicc
f tcrms, ver thc n`issions of Derrida s Parcnthesis pointing to thc botanical
mCtaPh r in his o
n disc ursc, o er thc l sc rcndcring of
'1ou
Ia taxinon1ie
l

11isto c(lcs

m taPh Ks Phl sophiqucs n y rctrouv t jamals son compte

Lt,t

270

PHILIP E LE

/1s

us no v considcr only the anasen1ic play vhcrcby tropical supplcmentarity is de ncd

lc t ur

dc Plus dC Cnant lc t ur dc moins/

vhich the Enghsh m

vcs into Parcn^

theses and rcndcrs thc cxtra lnctaPhor being at thc same tirnc a rnctaphor thc less,
v c

Thc Enghsh trans 1its the main Point about the pcration f suPPlemcntarity
cn ugh fron1thc standP int of Phil soPhy, the surPlus troPc on thC Outsidc

is als

a rnissing troPc,it functi ns hcrc as a Plus but thcre as a rninus,on this hand

as a suPPlement but on the thcr nc as a lack; vhethcr added t thc lnctaPhoricS

of philosoPhy or subtracted fr rll it, thc unmanageablc cxtcrnal rnctaPh r assurcs
its incomPlCti n, Thus the sct of Phil s Phy s1nctaPhors can ne er be thc
vholc

sct Now,sincc this P int iS madc,why bc concCrnc(l with a fcw httlc changes in
thc translation?Docs it1nattcr,for cxamPlc,that`c our is translatcd as metaPhor

thtlt dcv n nF( ,ec ming iS tmnslatt d l)cing at thc samc um ?

It docs rnattcr if thc anascn1ic play on thc` ord ro1Jr rnattcrs Thatit d cs indeed

matter is easy enough to dctcrminc,sincc Dcrrida clccts to rc-mark thc tcrm l

itahcizing it and by clistinguishing it ron1 mctaphor in thc o crturc of thc ncxt

scction of the essay:

Chaquc f is qu unC rh toriquc do nit la m taPhore, clle
i1nphquc n n sCulcmcnt1Inc PhiloSoPhic mais un r seau concePtucl dans lcqucl`
it un rour,
Philosophic s cst ConStituoc. Chaquc Hl,(lans cc r seau,formc(lc surcr
'

on dirait une1nt taphorc si ccttc notion n otait ici troP(l

riv c

(P 274) The trans-

lation: In cvcry rhCtorical de niti n f mctaPhor iS imPhCd not just a Philosophical

P siti

n,but a c nccPtual netvcork vithin vhich PhilosoPhy aS such is c nstituted

Each thrcad fthc nctin addiu n rms a turn ofsPccch(wC mightsay a metaPhor,

but that thc noti n is too deri

atl c

in this case)r

From this,t
points:thcrc is c1carly causc to rcfrain fr m si1nply substituting

rnctaPhor f r FOur, sincc thc latter is, as it vcrc, morc Pri1nitivc, lcss PrcciSCly
sxcd in a dehneatcd systcm; therc is alsO causc, as

ve considcr thc chffcrcncc the

translation makcs by sPcci ing tlac scn of ro as urn f ccch,

thc considerable sPcctrum dcscribcd by thc v

ord

rc ect n

s rnany mcanings, Arnong thcsc

turn,rc oluu n, rcuit,orcum rcncc;twist,twisting;trick,kat,skill;shaPe,

outlinc,coursc;s vccp,laP;sprain Hcncc a gamut quitc as rich as that ofthc ctymo~

logically Parallcl Enghsh vord turn and oRcn c rrcsPonding to it,and onc that is

m0jCct,m rcover,tO an emk conncc ons ith

r 0tII and d

LIi that Pr

e to bc

critical in Dcrricla s writing What,thcn,is the forcc ofFOur that wc mi ht wiSh t

PreSCr c in translationP

On thc strcngth of thesc t vo Points alone, having to do

vith the mcaning

secm impo allt

caPacity of Four and with its rc1lt0ns to a aCent n tions,it wot ld

to rcckon vvith thc relati ely abstract,conccptually imprccisc amd ncxible naturc of
tl

e term Morc Particularly,the semantic load borne by rour/

turn

prompts us to
n and

ask vhat seme makcs f r thc amazing mallcability that vve grasP in itS dcnniti

multiplc uscs unsurPrisingly thc scnsc of Circular m tion that stands out in thc

ctymology thc turning ofthc term

turn/

c might say

is thc kcy t

its le erage

FOur is onc f thosc Oscillatory n uns that can,dePending on the c ntcxt,dcsignate

a Particular act, an ongoing acti ity, a fact, or a statc

in othcr vords, that can

CCn aCtiVc and passivc PolCs r rnodcs,Ovving to its

mo e across a continuull,bct
capacity as a conccptual shiRcr,thc vord Can gurc a vide rangc of rcPresentations
tllat i

manuc corc,s niing

it t h ld

an rder ofc

n crson

and dKumscription,cnables

in a statc of PotCntial rclati n or articulati n.It is this articulatory po vcr

THE MEASURE OF TRANsLATION EFFECTs

271

that a strong translation vill scck t rctain In thc case fthc Phrasc vc ha c under-

scorcd hcrc, lc tour dc plus dcvcnant lc tour dc m

tour dc PluS

ins,

thc anascn1ic opP sition

tour dc moins, obviously tcnds, via thc rcPctiti

n of rour, to sct

o thc term turn as it is distinct9 m thc tcrm mctaPh r ;but this is morc lling
hcrc l)ccause the prcscnt ParticiPlC dcrc,a nF is an activc form pointing to thc vcry
Pr cCss

f turning, thc circular m vcmcnt of Pcrpctual shifting that thc Phrasc

Pical SuPplcmcntarity.In ths c nncction,rnorcOvcr,thc usc ofthc

ratl tl,an mctaPhoHml, tt,mocliIquPPlCmel taH als bcc mes
signiscant bccause pc ( m thc Greek Fr s)als mcans turn or change

attributcs t

tr

t m`r Plml,

ur instantiatcs the tr pical

so tropical supplemcntarity is n t, or not just, thc tvv ~sidCdncss f thc

thc cry m cmcnt of differ~
encc insofar as it is not the rclati n fsamc/insidc to othcr/ utside but thc turning
fthc samc a vay fr m yet neccssarily l)ack to itsclf~_that is(lcsi natCd and als
by dint f thc tc1 Porizing/tcmP rahzin8 introduccd by thc PrcsCnt participlc

bcc rlling, cxcmPh Cd or Pcrf rmed by thc turning of this PhraSC that circumscribcs it Thc linkagc of thc t v turns,thc cXtra onc and thc n1issing onc,is not

mctaphor f rnctaphor;it is thc turning in languagc-

a shnplc idcntity but a ccasclcss process of convcrsion in ti1nc As thc text bluntly

asserts,thc dchiscencc of thc supPlemcnt can ncvcr pass out of tcmporal Pr ccss
into thc statc of the c mPlcmcnt Thus thc translation s suPPrcsSi n f the term

hist ry in thc main clausc f the sentcncc c haVC bccn vorrying t)orders On thc
scandalous Thc P int is indccd that thc extra/n1issing metaPhor f1nctaPhorS
cannot bc thc kcy to thc tax nomy and hiSt ry of Philosophical mctaPhors, that
f

r an acc unt oF lnctaPh r in general it is rathcr ncccssary to aPPeal t troPical

suPPlCmcntarity,

After tran ation

From thc forcgoing obscr ations and examPles (thCy coukl bc cxtcnded indcn~
R ls to mcasurc up to the standard r

nitcly),it is clear that

Vhi Mythology

abusi c dchty in translation that vc ha c br ught to bcar on it.The abuscs in the

Frcnch tcxt arc c 11nonly l st; thc translation rarcly produccs any tclhn effects
f its0 vn;the sPccial texturc and tcnor of Derrida s disc urse gct nattcncd out in
an Enghsh that shics a vay from abnormal, dd~s unding constructions, Yet it is
only fair t rcc gni'c that a ncgativc c aluation is hardly aPPropriate hcrc f
cl scly

allicd rcas

r tvvo

ns,A comparativc exa 1ination of original and translation sho vs

that(1)thc translation d es c mPlyvith the exPcctations estabhshcd by Guillcn1in~

Flcscher

s contrastivc characterization of French and Enghsh and also that, in so

doing, (2)thC translau nc mphcs vith thc ai1nt anghcize that is cnunciatcd in
thc translat r s introduction.Thc introducti n states and con) uents on that ai1n as

IntClligible Enghsh rcnderings havc gcncrally bccn prefcrred t dircct

transfers into Enghsh of M, Dcrrida s suggcstivc cxploitation f nuanccsf French
vocabulary This rcsults inc itably in s mc loss ofthc f rcc ofthc riginal, Indecd,
fo

vs

somc f rce and alsO sOmc scnsc gct lost.

Yct thc sahent fcature f the translator s introducti n, vhich rcafsrms thc valuc
of natural,intclligiblc,idi matic Enghsh prccisely by sctting it ff against Dcrrida

272

PHIL1P E LE

/Is

tortuous,PrCcious,language straining Frcnch,is that thc translat

r bc ins by p int-

ing out quite cxPhcitly that thc cssay,through its analyscs and argulucnts,contcsts
the ery critcria and suPpositions that n ncthcless go crn his translati n
of Whitc

Thc rcadcr

Mythol gy docs gct a rcasonably(lircct rc-PresCntation of thc Derridean

critique that challcngcs thc riginary status of naturc,the Priority of the intelligible,
the pri ilcging of thc scmantic o er the syntactic,thc hegem ny of use- alucs,and
s f

rth Alth ugh voth lcsser clarity and incision, the reader als gets somethin

f thc analytic strategy designcd to PinPoint, in the Play of n1imctic Particlcs, in

f articulati n, anagranunatisln, semantic displaccment, in the aporias
Pr ceSses
occasioncd by supplcmcntarity,thC vork ofhcter genc us factors that dislocatc thc
conccPtion fn1ctaPhor,that undcrn ine all attcmpts at thcOri7ing1 ctaphor,that
infcst rnctaphoricity vith thc untameablc encrgy f(liffercnce
lntcgral t that analytic stratcgy are mo es and momcnts, not sirnPly intCr~
rogatory, dcscriPti c, r explanatory, that ve lllight loosely tcrn den nstratl c
or c Cn Pcrf rmativc Thcsc are lnon cnts at` hich thc clcments and Proccsscs of
rhct ric and syntax that Dcrrida points ut analytically,or thc thcscs that hc articu_

latcs,are also putinto Play are Put n disPlay,cnacted,actuahzcd~in his riting,

Such skids into pcrformancc arc Vrought in a Practicc that, for cxamPlC, n akes
visiblc thc
cry incklcncc f syntactic f r1nations uPon mCaning_gcncration that is
be 8dgucd To miss that Pcr rmati e dimcnsion is not to miss thc mcssagc but,
just thc translat r s note indicatcs,t0miss or rc(lucc its rcc by diminishing thc Cnergy dc oted t tightcning thc hnk bct cen mcssagc and discursi c
practice That is no small1niss.What it lcavcs intact,by dcfault,is a(lisparity~a
disscnsion or cont1 adicti n~bct veen saying and doing, bct vccn tclling
and shovving, thcsis and cxPressi n, Program and Pcrformance, a disPa1 ity that

form f

La rnythol gic blanche

rn
cs

at discrete momcnts, vith ti1nely abuscs,to ovcr

ridc The translati n thus tcnds to saP thc strcngth ofthC thcsis it rcstatcs by blocking

ff its cnactmcnt or cnf rccmcnt by thc statcment and thcrcby allo` ing the
contcsted valucs t prc ail unshaken in thc fabric ofthc cry disc ursc that PurPorts
to contcst them

La Inythologic blanchc contains, in its discussi n of thc trcat1ncnt of cata_

chrcsis in Fontanier s rhctoric,a hnd of troPical versi n oflanguagc-shaPing abusc

~ lc c up

dc rcc

unc torsion q a con us (P 307) that CxCmPli es

F

c havc cnvisioncd for thc translation of Derrida Thc intcrcst of

thc practicc
catachresis in Fontanier s thcory, as Dcrrida s analysis sho vs, is its intcrmediatc
atus between krc(lucibly or` nal hcCPtions f thc sig
ng c de and thc stan(l
ard taxin my of usagc, Excrting an abuse that cstran:CS it from cach ordcr, thc
tr

Pe can circulatc bct vccn thc t v f then1, cxcrcising both an irruPti c and an
n It exemPh es thc d ublc mo c that abusi c translati n has

integrati e functi
t

PurSue: b th t violatc and to sustain the Principlcs of usage Like thc r ur,it

thus comcs cry closc to mctaPhr, indeed m re con1monly taking a metaPh

ric

rather than Inctonylllic turn, vithout,hovcver,being rcduciblc to it,But for trans~

lation thc signiHcance of thc cataohrctic ngure in

La rnythologie doubtlcss lies less

in thc additional P ssibility it affords us for comccptuahzing thc vvork

f translati

than in thc critical qucstioning that DCrrida intr duccs through his discussion of
Fontanicr,At stakc in thc nnal sccti n of thc cssa is thc movcment of domesticahich rhctoric~and analogously,Phil S Phy~bring thc
tion or recuPerati nl)y

THE MEAsURE OF TRANSLATION EFFECTS

273

of catachrcsis back undcr the c ntr l l a rcigning intcrPrctation, of

mcanings suPPoscd t bc alrcady Prcscnt in thc storch usc oflanguagc Dcrrida s
soPhy stand as a vvarning, scarccly
f rccsJl remarks about b th rhct ric and Ph
abusi c f rcc

n1istakablc,agail9st thc =cry rccuPcration vc havc obscrvcd in thc translation of his

essay,in the Passage on1Frcnch to Enghsh~a warning ag nst what amoun to

rccuPeration l)y the

natural languagc,

as vve dccnn it, in vhich the()riginal is, as

VC VCnturC incautiously to clai1n, rcndercd That recuPcrati

n is thc obvi us risk

t11at a strong translation must run and ovcrcon1c

DcSPitC itS exPhcit disputation

fand o crt rcsistancc t

ccrtain forms f re~

cuPcrati nt11at do n t have t bc acccPtcd as si1nPly inc itablc,dcspite thc lllanifest

ilylphcati ns for translation of its trcatn1cnt of analogy and ProcCsscs of substitution

r f

its

igor us critiquc of thc subordinatin of syntax in thc1uctaPh

rol gy

of

mCtaPhysics, La mythologic l)lanchc coukl bc,has bccn,translated in(lissOnancc

with its wn

program This hctis a s l)cI^ing commcntary on d1c staying Powcr

classical c nccPts of translati n r o (l ubt thcir d n1ination is so xscll built int

our languagcs and thus int thc th ughts vc arc ablc to articulatc thr

ugh thcn that

even thc 110st conCcrtcd eff rts tO translatc abusivcl arc(l o1ncd tO suffcr undcr
thcir hcgcmony YCt this is by no n cans to conCcdc that rcsistancc to rccuPcrati n
in translati n is thcrcf rc imPossil lC Or un
arranted, onl

that rccuPcration can

ncvcr bc complctcly th varted and thus that thc rcsistancc has to bc disabuscd,F

thc translat r,thc qucsti n is silnPly to

hat cxtent thc recupcrati e effccts of trans~
lati n

can be c ntl^ollcd, t
vhat extent thc rcsistancc the origi11al puts uP to the

rccupcrations imPoscd by its o vn idiolu can l)c rcm bilizcd in the languagc of thc
t1

n In the casc or Dcrrida,hcrc that rcsistance is Prccn,incntly a11 atter

nancc,thc task f thc translator is surely to v rk ut a strategy
all
vs thc111 st insistcnt and (lccisivc cffccts f that Perf rmancc to rcsurfacc

anslati

ofvriting Perfor
that

in the translated tcxt and to assumc an i1 Portancc Su cient to suggcst thc vital
status of strati cd rc ntrapuntal vriting in thc original
The cxistcncc of cak, cntr pic translati ns surcly dePends in Part n a tilllc
littlc can bc donc: thc cry Possibility of translating strongl)

fact r ab ut
hich

dcri es olu that f reading ins hthlly,and thc lattcr dcrives in tu1 11 om
iarity t11at ca

1only bc gaincd o

cr

tiI c.Thc cl scr a translation

a hmil

Fa monun cntal

tcXt suCh as th sc of Dcrrida is to thc riginars(latc f Pubhcation,thc morc likcly

itis to bc undul dc cicnt Yet frorll thc cak translati n thatis PubhshCd and starts

cxcrting influcncc cll l)cf rc thc strong aPpreciati n f thc riginal has l,ccomc
possible,thcrc ren1ains an imPortantlcsson to be learncd That lcsson conccrns not
translation but c n1n1cntary The histor)()f dCconstruCtion in N0rth Amcrica during
thC PaSt dCcadc rs has included sOmcth"1g of a dcbatc an1 ng arious partisans
of thc critical cndcavor c nccrning the forn1 in
vhich Dcrrida s
v rk should be
disscn1inated.At onc PolC,a Purist ie ,holding as uncon1Pro1nisingly as Possiblc
thc intcgrity of Dcrrida s Phil s Phical Pr ject;at thc d1cr polc,an adaPtivist
vicvv,a oving for a d mesticatcd
crsion of dcconstruction that could,f r examPle,
t

be skctchcd ut as a mcth d usablc for litcrary criticism Since sOn1c rccuPcration

is inevitablc in any dCrivcd text,bc it translad n r con)lnentar ,and since,indccd,
b th translati

n and commcntar arc initially caught uP in the samc struggle to

f thc riginal, the issuc can only be a qucstion of(lcgrcc: to

vhat lcngths should ve go in ordcr t n inin izc thc rccuPCration?

trans 1it thc forcc

274

PHIL P E LEWIs
As I suggcstcd rnuch carhcr,thc cxistcncc of veak,n islcadin8translations d cs

ha e an c
cct n

thc co 11nentator s conccPtion of her task Insofar as an intervith such translati ns,
Pretation f Dcrrida in N rth Arncrica has to rcckon
cornrllcntary must attcmpt not silnPly to cxPlain thc intricacics of thc French text

ibc thcn1 and understand thclll in Enghsh but

rcjcct and cxPlain away thc translauons and thc misconccPtions they sPawn

and to suggcst ho v ve
als t

rl ight dcsc

Thc translation thus bcc mcs a sPccial Pr blcn for thc c n1n1cntary,intervening in
thc rclati n bct `ccn original text and cOIurncntary sO as to con1Phcate the task

intcrPrctati n J\t thc risk f an cxccssivcly schcmatic account, lct us lay out thc
Pr blcm in thc follo

ngvay

1 Bct vccn thc original Frcnch tcxt and any c nunentary on it,thcrc is a rcla-

tion of suPPlCmentarity, that is, insofar as thc c 1rnentary is an additi n to thc

original tcxt, sayh)g somcthing thc origi11al d
lllissin

in thC riginal that it seeks to suPPly,S

cs n t

say, it imphcs somcthing

that Parad xically

hat suPPhes

n1akcs uP for)the lack als suPPhcs(furnishCs)it; and ncc this pr ccss is undcr

mmcntary vill t

l^c

cr Pursuc a funda-

`vay, thc lack is fOrcvcr to bc suPphCd, c

mcntally productive c ursc as the c ntinuancc of an intcrrogation undcrtakcn in the
origina1.

2 Bct veen thc translatcd Frcnch text and the commentary, thcre is a comPa_
rablc rclati n f suPplen cntarity, centcrcd n thc Pr ccSs of c rrcction; thc
C011nCntary stri cs to makc uP f r vc11at thc translation statcs inadcquatcly, rccu_

rcver to bc c nal)ensatCd in the

PCrati Cly constitutiI g thc translation as a loss f
ongoing history of that tcxt S intcrprctations
/hen rclati n (1) is con1Phcatcd by relati n (2), thc c=ct

is 11

t to altcr

thc suPPlcn1cntal relati n bct fccn orig"1aland c l1nrncntary in structurc;it is si1nPly

ard an clcn1cntal task, that of a critical rcdress(lcvotcd

to oricnt that rclation to
rathcr n10re to dcscril ing thc original to Pointing out vhat it rcally does and

thcrcby says-than t saying vhatit docs n t say,to suPplcmcnting it in thc str

ng

scnsc.

Given this situation, thc risk is thcn that thc burdcn

f lacklustcr translation

mc an in1Pcdance t Commcntary,that it vill intcrfcrc vith the c mmcnvc

tarial cffort to rcsPond str ngly to t11c challcngcs of thc riginal T11c risk,
n1ight say, is that c mmcntary v ll)c contcnt tO suggcst vhat sh uld c mc aCross
vvill bec

in translation and vill go n furthcr That uld in fact bc a liilurc to dcal vith
thc Pr blc 1 f rccupcration as translati n itsclf rnanifcsts it For inadequatc translatiom c

nfronts thc commcntator vith a(lual neccssity on thc nc hand,it is clearl

irnPerativc to addrcss critically thc qucstion of vhat thc translation rnisses,to CxP sC
the crucial losscs in thc abusi c and Pc1 formati e

(hmcnsions f thc tcxt; n thC

ther hand,this
cry indictivc/corrcctive oPerati n makcsit a l thc111 rC CSscntial
f r the cO111mentary to suPplCmcnt strongly
ith its
vn l)crl rmancc,to CnaCt its
o `n abuscs, t regeneratc thc tcxtual cncrgy `vastcd in thc translati n Tbc
incrcascd di iculty of col mcntary stc1us iom its ha ing to(l c in the tensi n

bct vccn thcsc t vo rcsPonscs,thC Onc analytic,thc ther ritcrl), and s mcho
to program thc rmcr s that it will kcun(latc,rathcr than hold i11chcck,the Pl yS
f the lattcr
As Dcrri(la sO clcarly undcrstands, c mmCntary docs not havc thc
ignoring thc effccts of translation,

f PrCtcnding to bc scParablc l1

on

Ption of
translation

THE MEAsURE OF TRANsLATION EFFECTS

275

In thc schcmc c havc uthncd hcrc,undcr thc acgis of frcc translati n,commcntary is distinguishCd fron1 translati n abo c all by the f rn1er s oPP rtunity to

rnati e dill,cnsions ofthc riginal,not sirnply thr ugh

caPturc thc abusi c and Perf
reProduction,but also thr ugh invcntion Rclativcly spcaking,the translator s lot
is an unhaPPy()nc becausc hc Plays an instrumcnt n orc rcstrictively 1imctic than
that fthc con11uentator,Translao

ni1nposcs by dcfault rccuPeratlons the cornlncn-

tator can rcasonably scck to cludc,entails hn1its n abusc and f rmulativc discovcry
that sllc can udlc,usly tran sS Yet tllc commc11tator

s ll,uI

stllt0fl tl anslat0n

still has to bc vahd,has to l)c rcarticulablc t11r u8hout the fran1c vork of hcr inter~
Prctati n,

Thc exigcncy of high dchty ncver rcccdes Thus,if c n11ncntary is to

compcnsatc in somc mcasurc for the recuPcrati c losscs ccaSioncd by usablc translations, it must mcet thc challcngc of thc original to suPPlcn1cnt strongly, on a
PCr )rn)ativc registcr, `

it1

out f rsaking thc tl)ankless task of thc translat

Thr ugh thC ProcesSCs f suPPlCn cntarity,thc cry(lcmarcation of translation from

Co 11nCntary cannot hClP but bcc

mc problcmatic,For con11ncntary to suPPlCn1cnt

the translati n is PcrhaPS RrSt t

add to it, t

corrcCt it, sirnPly t

c ntcst

cuPCrations by cxPosing thClla;but ulti11)atcly that11)ove,ifit is not t

its rc-

acquiCscC t

thc cry discursi c ordcr f thc translation that it questions, Furns into a rcplaccment oF thC translati n s let us add, in all thc scnscs of an elhPtical phrasc:
cornlucntary suPPhCs thC translati n by(loing thcr than translation In thc vakc

translati n, the nissi n

of commcntary is to translate in di rcnce

Notes

crs la traducti n abusivc, PaPCr PrCsCntcd in thc scn inar La Traduction

at thc sumluer1980colloquium LCs Fins dc l H mme Cerisy la sallc,
Francc,

crs la traduction abusi

c,

in Les fns dc

h mjz,e(Paris:

Galil c, 1981),

PP 253^61
9yr2rdxe c

mPc du` dnfd1s

cr d

Phrys,1981)

4
5

Thc Rctra

of A/lctaph )rs,

dnHFdis

P b/ r,,cs de rrdducrion(PariS:Ed i ns

nl Fi ic2(Fal11978),5-33

Fions,trans Alan Bass(Chicago:uni crsity of Chicago Prcss,1979)

Vhitc M)th logy `Jc irerci9 Hisr ,` 6 1 (1974), 5-74 I rcfcr to La

M)thol C blanchc, in ds d Fd Phi`os Phic(Pa1 iS: Mintllt, 1972),
Pos

247-

324

Chapter 22

Antoine Berman

TRANsLATION AND THE TRIALS

OF THE FOREIGN
ra s/a ec/by Lawre ce/e`?ur`

JF

;, J)

l J T :

Heidcggcr uses t dc ne onc pole f Pocuc exPc cncC lIl Holdedin(D c J hrun
dcs Fr mdcn)

Now,h thC PoCt,thiS ial is csscntial cnacted by translati n,l)y his

vcrsion of S phocles,which is in%ct d1e last work Holdcrlin Publishcd bc re

descending int n1adncss In its

vn tin c, tbis translatiOn
as consi(lcrcd a Prh)1c

luam station of his mad11css Yct toda

iCW it as Onc ofthe:reat moIncnts of
c
t

Vcstcrn translati n: not onl bccause it givcs us rarc acccss to thc Grcck tragic

V rd,but becausc vhilc giving us access to this W rd,it revcals the vcncd cssence
of c cr translati n

Translation is the trial of thc f rcign, Butin a doublc scnse In thc Hrst Placc,
it cstabhshes a rcladonshiP t)CtwCcn the scl

samc(P'oPrc)and the F rcigm by airning

fork t us in its uttcr forcignncss I c,ldcr n rc eals thc

to opcn uP thC f rcign
strangeness of thc Greek tragic Word, whcreas mo8t
attcnuatc Or canccl it,In thc scc nd plaCc,translati

Classic translati

n is a trial or

ns tcnd to

he f rcifn Is

since thc brcign work is uPro tc(l

n1its own/dn udJc fround(s F de`dn 1ic)And
this tlial,oftcn an cx c,can also cxhibit the m st sh1gular Po ver f thc translajng

,ork s most original kcrncl,its m st dcePly buried,111 st

sclf samc,but cqua y thc1u st distant from itsclf FI Dldcrhn(hscernsin soPh clcS
!ork~in its languagct vo oPp sCd PrinciPlCs on the onc1 and,the in11nediate

iolcncc of the tragic Word, vvhat he calls the rc f hcavcn, and on the ()thcr,
act

to rcveal thc f rcign

h ly sobricty/

F r

1985

iC,,thc rati na ty that comcs to contain and n1ask this

Holdcrhn,translating Rrst and forclta

st n cans

iolcnce

libcrating thc iolcnce rcPrCssed

TRANsLAT10N AND THE TRIALS OF THE FOREIGN

277

c i ns in tl c janslating language~in othcr

ords,acccntuating its strangcncss Paradoxically,this acccntuation is the only vay

in thc w rk through a scrics of inrcn

of gi

i11g us acccss to it Alain addrcsscd thc toPic oftranslation in onc of his rcmarks

n litcraturC:
translatc a poct~Enghsh,Latin,or

Grcck cxactlyord fOr vord, ith ut addin8anything,Prcscr ing thc

I ha

c this idea that ne Can al vays

vCry ordcr ofthc v rds,until at last you nd thc rneter,e en the rhymcs
v

rst draR rcscmblcs a mosaic

f barbarisms;thc b s tare badly j iI1cd;thcy a ccmcntcd together,
iolcncc remains,no
ash,a ccrtain
but n tin harmony A forccfulncss,a

I ha c

rarcly Pushed the exPerilnent that far;it takes tilne,I rnean,af

m nths, plus unc mmon Paticncc, Thc

doubt rn rc than ncccssary It S rnore Enghsh than the Enghsh tcxt,rn rc

Greck than thc Grcck,lnorc Latin than thc Latin

J
(Alain1934 56-7)

Thanks t such translati n,thc languagc of thc riginal shakcs vith a its1il)eratcd
n1ight thc translating languagc In an artiClC dc
tion ofthe

otcd to Picrrc Kl

ichcl Foucault distinguishcs bct

encitl,

sso vski s transla_

/ccn t /o1nethods f translati n:

It is quitc ncccssary to adn1it that t vo kinds f translations exist;they

do not ha c thc samc luncti n r thc same naturc, I11onc, somcthing

(mcalllng,acstllt tic value)mu maln idelltical,allcl it is g en Paq gc

into anOthcr languagc;thcsc translations are goodhcn thcy go

fr m

hkc t samc [
l And thCn thcre arc translati ns that hurl onc language
l taking the original text f r a pr jcctilc and treating
against an ther l

the translating langua8c likC a targct Their task is n

t to lead a rncaning

back to itsclf or any fhcrc elsc; but to usc thc translatcd lanI::ua{::e to
dcrail thc translating language

(Foucault1964 21)
Docsn t this distinction si1nPly corrcsPond t

thC grcat sPht that di ides thc cntirc

ns(in thC br ad scnsc)

scld f translation, scParating so-callcd
m n n litcrary translations(tCchnical,socndsc,advcrtising,ctc)P VhCrcas the
literary translati

lattcr pcrfor 10nly a scmantic transfcr and dcal vith tcxts that cntcrtain a rclation

f cxtcri rity or instrun1cntahty to thcir languagC,the formcr arc conCcrncd ith

ork,s,that is tO say tcxts s bound to thcir language that thc translating act inc itably
bccomcs a maniPulation of signiners,vvherc t vo languagcs cntcr into
arious forms
of c llision and s mcho v c0 P e

This iS undcniablc, but n t taken scriously. A

supcr cial glancc at thc hist ry of translation suf ces t sho v that, in thc literary
d main,c crything

transPircs as if the second typc of translati n camc to usurP and

ConCCal thC Hrst tyPc As ifit vcrc suddcnly dri cn to thc rna1 gins of cxccPtion and
hcrcsy As if translati

n,hr om being thc0 als f

thc Forcign,wcrc rathcr its

ncgation,its acc mati n,its naturahzati n As if its1nost indi idual esscncc vcrc

radically rePresSCd HCnce, the necessity for rcHccti

n n thc Pr PCrly rJaic F aim

f the translating act(rCcei ing thc Forcign as Foreign) HCncc, the necessity for
an analysis that sh

ws how(an(l why)tlliS

mh ,i m timc immemorial(although

278
n t

ANTO1NE BERMAN
al

vays),bccn skc vcd,PcrvcrtCd and assi1u atcd to son1ethiI1g od1cr than itsel

such as the Play of hypc1 tcxtual translorn1ations

Thc analytic of translation

IPr Posc t eXan1inc bricfly the systc111oftCxtual dcf rn1ation that oPcrates in e

cr)

transIation and Prcvcnts it fiom bcing a trial of thc f rcign I shall call this exam~

hation the nd,Fic

rirlsJ

rio

Ana tic h tw

analysis of the def rn1ing systen and thc1

ef rc

senscs of the tt rm a dt,tmled

an analysjs in thc Cartcsian scnsc,

but als in the Psychoanalytic sensc, insohl as tl)c syStCln is largcly unc nscious,

orccs that causc translation to dc`iatc ll~

Prcscnt as a scrics of tcndcncies r

n1

its csscntial ai1n Thc analvtic of tra11slation is conscquCntly(lcsigncd to (lisc vcr

thcsc forccs and t sho
vhcrc in thc tcxt thcy are Practiccd ~ son

`hat as

Bachclard, ith his Psychoanalysis of the scicntiHc sPirit, vantcd tO sho vh thc
mt tcHalist imagjnauon c nhsed alld dcr lcd thc blccti =c aim of tlac natur
sclcnccs
Bcfore l,rescnting thc dcta cd cxal)1ination ofthc(lcf
sc cral

r1

ng

R)rces1 shal11 1akc

rcmarks First,thc analysis Pr poscd here is provisiona it is forn1ulatcd n

the basis of my exPcHcncc as a tanslator(Phmarily of Latln Amcrican litc1 aturc

into Frcnch) To bc SystCmatic, it rcqui1 cs the input of translat rs fr n1 0thcr

domains ( thCr languagcs and :orks), as

vCll as linguis[s, poeticians and .
Psychoanalysts,sincc thc def

rn ing

forccs constitutc so manv censures and rcsist~

allcCs

This ngJclrjvc analytic should be extendcd by a P

oPC1 ations vhich

ha c

al vays lin

sir1

cc unterPart, an analysis

itcd thc def rmation, although in an intuitivc

and unsystematic vay These Perati ns constitutc a sort of counter_s stclll dcstincd
to neutrahze, r attenuatc, the ncgati e tendencics Thc ncgati c and Positivc
analydc s ill in ttlrn enaHc a cIi quc of rrdnsfdFions thclt is n0thcr mply(lcsc"P
tivc nor simPly norn1ativc
Thc ncgati c analytic is pri1na1 ily conccrned vith cthn ccntriC, anncxationist
translations and hypcrtcxtual translati ns (PastichC, irnitation, adaPtation, free

rcwHting),wherc thc Play of dCformin8f

rcCs is1irccl

cxeroscd.E cr translator

is incscaPably cxP sed t this play of forccs, c Cn if hc ( r shC) is anilnatcd by

an tbcr ai 11

Morc thcsc unconscious R)

ccs form Part f thc translator

s bci ,J,

detcrn1ining thc dcs1 c to translate It is illus rv to thi11k that the translat r can bc

frccd111crcly by bCcon1ing avare of thcn1 Thc translator s PracticC must subn1it t

anal sis if thc unconscious is to bc ncutrahzcd It is by yielding to thc

controls (in

thc Psychoanalytic scnse) that translat rs can hoPc t frcc thcmscl cs fr 1 the

systcm f

dcf rmatl n that burdcns thcir PracticC

cxprcssion of a t vo~n illennia- ld tradition,as

cll

This systcm is thc intcrnahzcd

as thc cthn ccntric structurc or

culturc,cvcry languagc;it is lcss a crudc syStcm tha11a

culti atcd languagc

Only languages that arc cultivatcd translatc,but they arc als thc ncs that Put

c cry

hat
Strongest rcsistancc to the ruckus of translation,Thc cens r,You scc
a
a Psych analytic aPProach to language and hnguistic systelns can Contril)ute t

uP tl C

translatol

gy This aPProach must als l)c the w rk of anal sts thcmsclvcs, ncc
they exPcricncc translati n as an csscntial di1ucnsio11of Psychoanalysis

TRANsLATION AND THE TRIALS OF THE FOREIGN

A nal

279

v l1)c thc(Icf rn1in8tcndcncics

P int: thc focus bcl

in thc don1a",of litcrary Prosc

that intcrvcnc

thc 10`el and the essa

Litcrary Pr Sc c llCCts,rcasscn11)lcs,and intern1ingles thc Polyhngual spacc of

a communit

It n obihzcs and acti

atcs thc totahty of languagcs

that c cxist in

any languagc,Tl)is can bc sccn in Balzac,Proust,JoycC,Faulkncr,Augusto Antonio

Roa Ba s,Joa
P int f
ac

ie v,thc

Gmmar s Rosa,Carlo Emilio Gadda,ctc,Hcncc,iom a~form

lan:uagc_bascd c sm s that is PrOSC,CsPCCially thc novcl,is char~

tcrized by a certah) shdPc

ssncss,
hiCh rcsults fr m thc cn rluous brc of

langua8cs and lh1guistic systcms that oPcrate in thc

v rk

This is als charactcristic

of canonical vorks,` r ndc Pr sc

ithin

Traditionally, this shapclcssncss has been describcd ncgativcly,that is,

thc horiz n

of Poctry Hcrman Broch,Ior examPlc,remarks of the no

cl that

in contrast to Poetry, it is n t a produccr, but a c nsun1er of style

j It aPPliCs itsdf w h much lcss h1tcnsity to the du

hkc a

of loo ng

rk of art, Balzac is of g1 catcr vcight than Flaubcrt,the f

rn

m rc than thc artistic Thornt n VVilder Thc novcl

lcss Tholnas XVoll

does not subn)it,like Pr Pcr PoCt

y,to thc critcria of a1

(Br ch1966:68)

In cffcct,thC111astcrxx orks

f Pr

Sc arc charactcrizcd by a ki11d

f bad
riting/

a ccrtain lack of c ntro in their texture This can bc sccn in Rabclais, Ccr antes,

ont gnc, Saint sin1on, sterne, JCa11 Paul Richter, Balzac, Zola, Tolst )y,
D stoc sk
The lack of control dcrives frolll the enorm

us linguistic n1ass that the Pr se

wrker must squeczC into thc work -at thc risk of makng it brmally cxPl
morc totahzing thc vcritcr

dc

Thc

s airn,thc more obvi us thc loss f control, vhcthcr in

thC Pr h rati n,t11c swclhng of thc tcxt,or in works whcrc thc mOst scruPulous

attcn0on is Pai(lto hrm,as in Joycc,Br

and rhythn1ic Hoss,can1
Tl1is is tllc c

c cr

ch,or Pr ust PrOsc,in its multiPlicity

bC Cntircl) n1astCrcd And this 1)ad

riting is rich

s int
nscqucncC f ks Polylin laliSm,D n(Vix c,For examPlC,gathc

itsclf thc plurahty of sPanish languagcs (luring its cpoch,l1 111PoPular ProvCrbial
sPeech (Sanch

) t

thC convcntions of chi alric and Past ral

omanccs, Hcrc the

languagcs arc intertvvincd and mutually ir nizcd

Thc Babchan Pr hfcration of languagcs in no cls P sc sPCcisc difsculties for

translation If nc f the PrinciPal Pr blCms fp etic translation is to resPCct
ncro,t11cn thc Pon0pal pr blem
tllC Po scmy f tllc pocm(cf ShakcsPca s so

f translating

thc no cl is to rcsPect h

shdPc`css Po
of1c and a

id

an arbitrary

horn gcnization.
Insofar as the novcl is c nsidered a loxx:er form of literature than poctry, thc
dcf rmati ns of translati n

hCn thcy do not Pass

arc more accePted in Pr sC,

unpcrceived For thcy oPerate on Points that do notiIx11ncdiatelv rcvcal thc1nsclvcs

It is casy to dctcct ho :a Poelll by H ,ldcrhn has bcen massacrcd It isn

t so eas

to scc Vhat vas<k)11Cto a n el b Kalka or Faulkncr,csPecially if thc translati n

scclns good Thc(lcf n ng systen functi ns hcrc in c mPlcte tranquilhty ThiS
1

is vhy

it is urgcnt to clab ratc an analytic for thc translati n fn vcls

278 ANToINE BERMAN

not al
ays),bccn

SkC cd,Pcr crtcd and assirn atcd t son1cthing othcr than itsclf,
such as thc Play of hyPertcxtual transforlnations

The analytic of translation

Pose t cxan1inc l)ricHy thc systcn1oftcxtual dcf

I Pr

translation and Pre

cnts it f1

rn1ati n that
PeratcS iI1e ery

on1bcing a trial of thc f reign I shall call this cxa

inau n tlac dnd,Fic rrdnsFd on

Anal ic in tw senses of tllc tcrm a dct"ltbd

analysis of thc dc rllling systen1,and thcref rc an analysis in the Cartesian scnsc,
but also in thc psycboanalytic sensc, insofar as thc systcl11 is largely unconscious,

om

PreSent as a scrics of tcndcncics r%Pc 6d at ca1Isc tmnslauo11t de iatc h

its csscntial ailll Thc analytic f translation is c nscqucl1dy(Iesigncd to disc
cr
thcsc f rccs and t s11

vhere

in thc tcxt thcy arc Practiccd ~ s mc vhat as

it,
antcd to sh :h
thc

Bachelard, vith his Psychoanalysis of thc scicntihc sP"

matchalist ima

nati n

conhscd and dcrailcd thc ecu C m f

tllc natural

sclcnccs
Bcforc PrcsCnti11g thc(leta cd cxa1u"1ation ofthc(lcf rn1iI1gl
SCVC1

,I

ake

ccs,I shall n

al rC1narks.First,the analysis proposcd herc is pro`isi na it is forInulated n

the basis f my CxPCricncc as a tlanslator(P11m ily of Latin Amcrican htcraturc

int

Frcnch). To be systematic, it rcquircs the input of translators fron1 other

domains (other languagcs and

v rks), as
vcll as linguists, pocticians and

Psychoanalysts,sincc thc(lcf rn1in forccs constitutc so llaany ccnsurcs and resist~

anccs
This n fdri analytic should be cxtcndcd by a P sir ,c countcrPart, an analysis
f PCrati ns vhich havc alvvays lirnitcd the deformation, although in an intuiti e
and unsyStCmatic ay,1 hcsc opcrations constitutc a sort of countcr-systcn1destincd
to ncutrahzc, or attcnuatc, thc ncgative tendencics The negativc and Positive
dyucs will in ttlm cnal)

cac que

rrd

ls

ions tlltlt is neither

mPly deschP

tlve nor s11uPIy I1orluatlve

The ncgauvc analytic is Pri1uaril) concerncd vith cd1n centric, anncxationist

translations and hyPc1 tcxtual translations (Pastichc, in1itation, adaPtati n, frec
rcwriting),whCrc thc P|ay of dcbrming forccs is ccly exerciscd Every tlanslator
is inescaPably cxPoscd to d1is play of forccs, c
an ther ah 1 A/Iorc

Cn if he ( r shC) iS anilnatcd b)

thcsc unconscious f rccs form Part ()f thc translat

s bciz,J

determinin8thc Jcs rc to translate It is illus ry to thh1k that thc translator can bc

ccd 1crcly by becoluin8awarC ofthcn Thc translator s Practicc must submit to

analysis if thc unc nscious is t l)c ncutrahzcd It is by yiCkhng to the

contr
ls

(in

thc psychoanalytlc scnsc)that translators can hopc to

systCm f

def rmati n that burdcns thcir PracticC

cc themscl cs9 m thc

This syste1n is thc internahzcd

cxprcssion fat ` lnillennia~ ld tradition,as vcll as tbc cthnocentric structure of

culti ated languagc

Only languagcs that arc cultivated translatc, but they are also the ones that Put

cvcry culture,e cry languagc;it is lcss a crudc syStcn1than a

uP thc str ngcst rcsistancc to thc ruckus of translation,Thcy ccnsor.You see

vhat

a psychoanalytic aPpr ach to language and hnguistic systc 1s can contributc to a

translat l gy' This aPProach must als l)c the v rk of analysts thclnselves,sincc
thcy cxPerience translati n as an csscntial di1ncnsion of Psych analysis

ALs OF THE FORE1GN

TRANsLATION AND THE TR

A nal
in thc d

279

point thc l cus bclov l be thc dcforn1ing tcndcncics that intcrvenc

main f htcrary Pr sc _thC novel and thc cssay

Litcrary prose c llccts,rcassemblcs, and inter 1inglcs the P lyhngual space f

a con1111unity It rn bnizcs and activatcs thc t tahty of languagcs

any languagc This can bc sccn in Balzac,Pr

Roa B tos,J a

G0mar s

Rosa,Ctl1

that coexist in

ust,Joycc,Faulkncr,August Antonio

D Emili

Gadda,etc Hencc,iom ay

rm

`
Point of viC v,thc languagc bascd cosmos thatis Pr sC,CspCCially thc n vcl,is char_
actcri'cd by a ccrtain sFa Pc cssncss,
VhiCh rcsults
r m thc cnorm us brc v of

languagcs and linguistic syStCms that oPc1

f canonical :orks,`cJ

atc in thc v rk This is als characteristic

Jr ndc Prose

vithiI)
rizon of Poetry Hcrn an Broch, f r cxamPlC,rcn1arks of the ncl that

Trachti nally, this shaPelcSSncss has1)ccn descril)cd ncgatively, that is,

thc h

in contrast to Poctry, it is n t a produccr, but a c nsumer of stylc,

1, , l It aPPhcs itsclf vith much lcss intcnsity to thc (luty of looking

hkc a v rk f art Balzac is of greatcr vcight than Flaubert,thc form~

lcss Thomas Volfc ln rc than thc artistic Thornt n Viklcr The novcl
d cs n t

subn1it,likc ProPer P ctry,t thc critcria of art

(Br ch1966:68)

In cffect,thc lnastcr
orks of Pr se arc charactcrizcd by a kind f bad vriting`

a ccrtain lack of contro

in thcir tcxturc This can l)c sccn in Rabclais, Ccrvantcs,

M I)taigne, saint si1110n, stcrne, Jca11 Paul Richtcr, Balzac, Zola, T

lsto

D st c skv

Thc lack of c ntrol dcri cs fr n1the enormous linguistic lnass that thc l,r sc
ritcr rnust squcczc into the vorkat thc risk ofrnaking it formally cxPlode Thc
vhethcr in
morc totahzing thc` ritcr s airn,thc more ob ious thc loss fc ntr l,

thc l)1 ohferation,the svclling of thc tcxt,or in vorks hcre thc m st scruPul us
attcntion is l)ai(lto f

n, as in Joyce, Broch, or Proust, Prosc,in its lnultiPhcity

and rhythmic n
,can nc er bc cL1ti1 ely nlastcrcd And d1is l)ad writi11g is rich
This is thc c nscqt1Cncc ofits polylingualism Don ixorc,br cxamPlc,gathcrs int

itsclf thc Plurahty f Spanish languages during its cpoch,fr 1poPular provcrbial

sPCCch(Sanch )

t thC c

nvclltions of chi alric and pastoral r

manccs Hcrc thc

languages arc intcrtxxiI1cd and mutually ir nizcd

t1

Thc Babehan l)r hfc1 ati n of languagcs in no cls PoSC sPccifc(limcultics f r

anslation If one of thc PriI1ciPal Pr blcn1s f poctic translati n is to rcsPect

tllc P lyscmy

of thc Pocm(cf shakcspcarc s sonncFs),dlen thc prin0pal Pr blcm

id an bkrary
of tmnslating the n d is t rc cct S shd fss Po J
c and a
homogcnization
Insofar as the no cl is considcrcd a l :cr form of literaturc than P ctry, thc
dc rllaations

of translation are morc acccptcd in Prosc,

hcn they do n t PaSS

unPerceivcd,For thcy oPcratC On P ints that do not immcdiately rcvcal themsclvcs

It is casy to dCtect h
cm by H klcrhn has bccn lnassacred, It isn t so easy
` aP
tC,scc hatvas(lone t an vel by Kafka r Faulkncr,esPecially if thc translati n
scems good The cleformin systcm ncd ns hcre in c mplctc tranquilhty This
is vhy

it is urgcnt to elab rate an analytic f r thc translati n of no cls

280 ANTOINE BERMAN

This analytic scts out to locatc sc eral(lc rn1ing tendcncics Thcy for 1a sys-

rc;some combine

tcmatic vholc,I shall mcntion t vclvc hcrc Thcrc l,lav bc rn

vith

or dcrive m thers;s me arc wdl kn wn And some may aPPcar rdevant nly

t Frcnch
classicizing translation, But in fact thcy bcar on all translating,
at lcast in the cstcrn tradition,They can bc f und just as oRen in Enghsh transla_
tors as in sPanish or German,although ccrtain tendcncics rnay bc more acccntuated
in onc linguistic~cultural spacc than in thcrs Hcre arc the t

vcl c

tendcncics in

quCstion:
1

rati nahzati n

clariscation

3 CxPansion
4 cnn blcmcnt and p Pularization
5

qualitativc impo erishn1cnt

quantitati e imPovcriShment

7 thc destruction of rhvthms

8 thc dcstruction of undcrlying nct /orks f si8nincati n
9
10

thc dcstruction of linguistic patternin8s

thc dcstructi n of vcrnacular net forks or thcir cxotici'ati n
thc dcstruction of cxPressi ns and idi ms

11

12

thc cffacemcnt of thc suPcrirnP Sition Of languagcs

Rationahzation
This bcars pri1narily on thc syntactical structurcs of thc riginal, starting ith that
most rncanin ful and changcablc clcment in a Pr sc tCXt:P1IncFu Fion Rationahzation rcc mP SCs SCntenccs and thc scqucnce

f sentenccs, rcarranging thcm

according to a ccrtain idca of discursivc rde'.

hcrCVcr thc scntcncc structurc is

rclati

ely cc(ie,whCrc er it docsn ta11swcr to a spcci ci(lca f rdcr),it1 lsks

a rati

nahzing contraction This is visiblc,for instancc,in the fundamcntal host

ity

vith vhich thc French grcct rePctiti n, thc Prohfcratlon of rclative clauscs and
Participlcs, long scntcnccs or scntcnccs vithout crbs~all elcmcnts cssential to

prosc

Thus,Marc Chapiro,the Frcnch translat r fthc Br tJle F rl,d'ov,` ritcs

The riginal hca iness of D stoc sky s stylc Poscs an ahnost insolublc
problen1 t thc translat r It
vas imPossiblc t rcProducc thc bushy
undcrgr0 vth of his scntcnccs, dcspitc thc richncss of thcir c ntcnt,
(citCcl by Mcschonnic 1973: 317)
This signi es, quitc openly, that thc cause f rationahzati

n hasl)ccn adoPted As

ve ha c sccn, thC csscnce of prose includcs a bushy undcrgr

vth More ver,

C Cry f rmal excess curdlcs novchstic prosc,

h0SC imPCrfccti n is a conditi n f
it~s exlstencc Thc gl l ing SllaPelesmcss in catcSs tllat pr se Pltlngcs into tllc
dcpths,thc strata,thc P lylogis1n of languagc, Rationahzati n(lcstr ys all that,

TRANSLATION AND THE TRIALS OF THE FOREIGN

281

c, drd concr Fe ess Rational

t annihilatcs anothcr clement f ProsC irs dr1vc
ization mcans abstraction Prosc is ccntercd on thc c ncrctc and e en tcnds to
render c ncrctc thc numer us abstract elcmcnts l)obbing in its d (Pr ust,
Montaigne),Rau nahzau n makcs the riginal pass9on1c ncrctc to abstract,not

r cxamPlC~by translating crbs

only by reordcring thc scntcncc structurc,but_ f

into substanti cs, by choosing thc n orc gcncral of t vo substantivcs, ctc Y cs

Bonncfoy re ealcd this ProccSS vith shakcspcarc s vork,

This rati nahzatin/abstracti n is all thc more Pcrnicious in that it is not
FOFdf It docsn t rncan to l)c Itis contcnt to r
`erse the rclati nsvhich Pre ail in thc

original bctvvccn formal and informal, ordcrcd and dis

rderl , abstract and

concrcte This c nvcrsion is tyPical of cthnoccntric translation
it causcs thc v rk
f sFdrus~and sccn1inglyvithout changing forn1and
t under8 a changc of siJn,

mcanIng
To sum uP

rati nahzati n dcf

rms thc original by r

crsinf its basic tcndcncy

ClarifIcation
This is a corollar of rati nahzati nvhich Particularly c nccrns thc lcvcl f clarity

Vherc the original has n problcnn m ing

lkcra h uagc c1st lIllPo tht dc tc,Wlatxn thc

PercePtible in vords and thcir rncanings

h the mdt

rc,c,ur

Argentinc no chst R bcrt Arlt vrites

mc micntOs dc cqPCmnz

y los cxcesos eran desPlazadoS P

r des~

(tlle exces s wcrc disl l c(l by thc cxccssi Cncss of

hoPe; Arlt 1981: 37), FrCnch docs n t tolcratc a litcral rendcring l)ecause c
xs:herc,in this Passagc fr

1 os

s1c c

ocos,

hat?
an exccss of

Thc samc gocs for D

stoc

To rcndcr thc suggcstions

sky, ChaPir writes

f a Russian scntencc,it is oftcn ncccssary to complctc it

1973 317

cry

CXCCss is sr1FF in qucstion French asks:

(citcd l)yN1cschonnic

18)

Clarifcation sccllis to bc an obvious PrinciPlc t

Thus,thc Amc1 lcan PoCt Galway Kinncll wrkes

clcarcr than the

riginal

Thc

n1any translators and auth rs,

translati n should bc a lltdc

(citCd by Grcsset1983:519),

Ofc ursc,clari cati n is inherent in translatiom,to the extcnt that cvcry trans~
latic,n mP1 lSCs~somc d r

ot

Cxl,llcltatlon,Btlt tllat cal

n twO R

rerlt

thin8S

(1)the exPhcitation can l)c thc rnamifestati

n ofson cthing that is not aPParent,

but c nccaled r rcPrcssed,in thc rigina1.Translati n,by virtuc ofits

mcnt, Puts int Play thiS clCmcnt, Hcklcggcr alludes t

In translati

vn mo e-

thc Point for Ph s phy:

n,the vv rk f thinking is transposcd int the sPirit of anothcr languagc

and s undcrg es an incvitablc transformation But this transformati n can bc

fccund,bccausc it shines a nc v light on the fundamcntal P siti n of thc qucstion

(HCidCg8Cr196 10)
Thc powcr fillumint ton,of il, nyosrdFi n,(1)asI h catcd aproPos H l(lcxrlh,
is the suPrcmC P
vcr f translation But in a ncgati c scnsc,(2)cxPhcitati n ai1ns

to rcndcr clcar
vhat docs n t vish t bc clcar in thc original Thc mo cmcnt
from polyscn y to mon scmy is a modc f clarincati n Paraphrastic or exPhcati C
translation is an thcr And that lcads us to thc third tcndcnc

282 ANTOINE BERMAN

Expansion
Evcry translation tcnds t bc longcr than the riginal Gcorgc steincr said that trans-

is in ationist. This is thc consequcncc, in Part, f thc t

PrcVi us

ndencics Rational h8and cla hg q K cxPans0n,an u o din of what,in

thc riginal,is f ldcd, N vv, on1thc ic vPoint of thC tcxt,this cxPansion can

bc quahHcd as emPty It can cocxist quitc vcll vith di crsc quantitativc forms f
impovcrishmcnt, I mcan that Fh dcfiri I, dJs ,,
hinJ, that it augmcnts only thc
gross m s f tt ,WithoLlt augmcllthg sw of Cakng or sIgn1 ing ThC ad
lati n

tion is no m rc than babblc dcsigncd to mufnc thc

v rk s
vn 0iCc,Explicitati ns
thc tc morc dcar, btlt thcy actRlally l) urc iFs o n modc gfdd

Thc cxPansi n is,rnorco er,a strctching,a slackening, vhich imPairs thC rhythn1ic

may ndcr

vcrtranslation, a tyPical casc of vhich is Armcl

Gucmc s tnnslaton f/lfo/D1 (1954),ExPandCd,tllc m cstic,occanic novcl

o v f

thc vork.It is ftcn callcd

bccomcs bloatcd and usclcssly titanic In this case, cxPansion aggravates thc initial
shapclcssncss of the

v rk,causing

it to changc fr rll a shaPeleSS PlCnitudc t

a shaPe-

ow In Gcrman, thc Fr menrs of N ahs P ssess a vcry spccial

brevity,a brc ity that contains an in nity oflncanings and somch
v rcnders them
lcss v id or h

ng,

but vcrucally,hkc wclls,Translatcd by thc samc Gucrnc(1973),they are

lengdlcncd hnmodcratcly and si1 ultanc usly flattcncd. ExPansi n nattcns, hori_
zontahzingvhat is csscntially dccP and Crtical in N vahs

Ennoblement
This1narks thc cuhninating Point

f classic

translation In P Ctry,it is p ctiza~

u n. In Pr SC,it is rathcr a rhct rization, Al"n alludes t

this Pr

cCSs(with

Enghsh poctry):
cn1by Shcllcy into Frcnch,hc vill Hrst sPread

If a translator attcmpts a P

ving thc practice of our Pocts

vh arc mOstly a bit t
oratorical,sctting up the rulcs f Pubhc dCclamation as his standard,hc

v l inscrt their thats and vvhichs, syntactical barriers that

cigh upon
and PrC ent_ifI can Put it this vay thc substantial
0rds on1biting
cach ther,Id n t disdain this art of articulation . . But in thc cnd it
isn t the Enghsh art of spcaking, so clenchcd and c mPact, brilhant,
it out, foll

PrCcise and str ngly enigmatic,

(Alain1934 56)

Rhctorization c nsists in producing

clcgant scntcnCcs,
vhile utilizing thc
sourcc tcxt,sO tO sPeak,as r mdFericzF Tbus the cnnoblcmcnt is Only a rc vriting,
a

styhstic cxercisc

bascd on__and at thc cxpense of

thc original This pr cedurc

is acdvc in thc litcrary scld,but als in the human sciences, vherc it Produccs tcxts

that arc rcadablc,

brilliant,

rid of their riginal clumsincss and c mplcxjty s as

to cnhancc thc mcaningr This tyPC of revriting thinks itsclfjustiHcd in rcc cring
thc rhct rical clcmcnts inhcrcnt in all Prosc~but in ordcr t banahzc tllcn1and

assign them a Predominant PlacC

Thcsc clcmcnts~in R usscau,Balzac,Hugo,

TRANSLATION AND THE TRIALs OF THE FOREIGN

Mcl ille, Pr ust, etc, ~ rcstorc a ccrtain

orahty,

283

and this rahty cffcctivcly

vhich may bc
posscsscs its ovvn norms of nobihty ~ th sc of g od sPcaking/

culti atcd But g

d
spcakng
in
thc
original
has
nothing
to do vith
P Pular or

the rhetorical clcgancc

cxtollcd by thc'e

mtlltancOusly an hilatcs both nl

rhtst ric

f that cnn blcs In fact,the lattcr

and%rmlcss Pol o c(SCC ab c),

Thc l gical oPpositC f cnnoblcment _ r its countcrPart~ ccurs in passagcs

judgcd too
poPular : bhnd rcc urse to a pscudo-slanghich PoPu` Fizcs thc origlnal,or to a sPokCn languagc which rcnctts nly a co on bcF ccn rdF dnd
o n

_Slang bctrays rural flucncy as vcll as the strict

Thc dcgcncratc coarscncss of Pscud

codc of urban dialccts

Qualkathe impovcoshmcnt
This refers t

thc rePlaccmcnt oftcrms,cxprcssions and Hgures in thc original vith

terms,exPrCssi ns and gurcs that lack thcir s n rous richncss Or,c rrcspondingly,
thcir sig hg r icol lc richness A tt rm isico c whcn,in rclati n to its rcfcrcnt,
it crcatcs

an imagc/

iconicity:

cnabhng a pcrccption f rcscmblancc, spitzcr alludcs to this

A
0rd that dcn tcs facctiousncss,or thc Play of
ords,easily bchavcs
cry languagc woddwidc,thc tcrms that dcnotc

in a whimsical manncr_just as in c

thc buttcr y changc in a kalcidoscoPic lnanncr

(spitzCr 1970 51),

This docs n t mCan thatthe w rd buttc1 fly objCctivdy resemblcs al)uttcr

y,

but that in its sonorous,Physical substance,in its dcnsity as a vord, vc fccl that it
posscsses something ofthc buttcr
in thc

wn PCctlliar ways,what

Vhen

s buttcr y

cxistcnce Prosc and poctry produce,

n bc callcd suJ ccs griconici

translating thc Pcruvian chuchum cd with Purc( vh re),thC1neaning can

Certain be Kndcrc(l,btlt nonc of tllc wol

cl

s phonctic si::lll

goes for cvcry tcrm that c mmonly quali6cd with

r( id),t oF (colorfttl),c,tc,Cutl

ing ttlth The qame

ux ucD,dru(r bust),
c Phrkality f

t,ts tllat all rc r to thc ic

thc sign And vvhcn this Practicc of rcplaccmcnt,

hich is rnost ftcn unc nscious,

is aPPhCd t an cntirc vork,t thcvholc of its iconic surfacc,it decisi cly cffaccs

a good poltion ofi

ing

Process and modc f cxpression~what makes a

vork sPc t us

Quantitativc impovc shment

This rs
signi ers

to a kxictll loss,E cry wo1 k in PrOsc p

llts a ccr n PIoFJ%rdri n of
and sigmf^ing ch ns,Grcat novelistic PrOSC is abundant Thcsc signihcrs

can be dcscHbed as ufxed,esPe0dly a gni cd may ha c a mtlldl,licity d gni

For thc s ni6cd

isdJc(hcC)Arlt cmPl ys s i,,b dnre,rosrro and cd without

crs

J tlfying a p uctllar c,l lll a Particul scIltcn

is markcd as an imPortant r
F1:,,`in

The esscl tial thing ls tl at`is

ork by thc use ofthrcc signi ers Thc trans

lation that docs not rcsPcct this rnultiPhcity rcndcrs the isa8c of an unrccognizablc
w rk Thcrc is a loss,thcn,since thc translauon c ntains ft,

r signiscrs than thc

his

original Thc translati n that attcnds to the lcxical tcxturc of thc

vork,t its rnodc

f lcxicahty ~cnlargcs it This l ss Pcrfcctly coexists ith an increasc of thc grOss

quantity or rnass ofthc text vith cxPansion,For exPansi n consists i11adding articlcs

284 ANTOINE BERMAN

and rclatives (`c,

,
cs,

qui, tl c),

CxPhcativC and decorati c signihcrs that havc

n thing

to(lo ith thc lexical tcxture of thc riginal Thc translatin rCSults in a
tcxt that is at nce`o rcr and f nJcr More vcr,the exPansi n ftcn vorks t mask
thc quantitativc loss

The destruction of rhythIns

I shall pass raPidly o cr this asPcct,h
vcvcr fundamcntalitrnay bc Thc no elis n t
less rhythn1ic than Poctry, It evcn comPrisCS a1nultiPhcity f rhyth 1s sincc thc
cntirc bulk fthc novclis thus in Iuovcmcnt,it is f rtunatcly difscult f r translati n
t dcstr y this rhythn1ic movcn cnt This cxPlains
hy e en a grcat but badly trans~
latcd n cl continucs to transPort us Poetry and theatcr arc morc fragile Yct the

f r cxamPlc,throu h an
dcf rn1ing translation can considcrably affect thc rhythn
arbitrary rC

ision of thc punctuation Michcl Grcssct(1983)sh

vS h
v a translati n
r thm whcK thc olund included c,l ly/our

J Fatllkllcr de loF js dlstin

ma1 ks f

Punctuation,thc translation uscs rl en -F v ,Cightccn f

hich

arc c

mmas!

The dcstruction of underIying ne orks of signification

The litcrary
ork contains a hidden di1ncnsi n,an undcrlying tcxt, vhcrc ccrtain

and link uP,f rn1ing all sorts of net

0rks bcncath thc surface
thc text itsc1f__the manifcst tcXt, PresCntcd for rcading It is this sLJbF xF that

signi crs c rrcspond

f

carries thc net vork ofrd~obscssi ns, Thesc undcrlying chains c nstitutc Onc

aSPCct f

thc1

llytllm and signi ing Pr

ccss ofthe text AR

ng in rvds ccrtain

rds n ay rccur,ccrtain kinds f substantivcs that constitutc a Particular nct /ork,

vhcthcr thr ugh thcir rcscmblance or thcir aim, thcir

asPcct In Arlt you nd

v rds that vitncss the PrcsCncc of an obscssion,an intirnacy,a Particular PcrcCP_

tion,although distributed rathcr far om cach othcr~s 1CumeS in diffcrent

chaPtcrs~and with ut

a c ntcxt that justi cs r calls

r thcir use Hcncc,the

foll wing scocs of dtJJIl, nrdrjrcs:

rr

gate

df0n
`du` n
ing
cagc

Porr n

door/cntrancc

vhich estabhshes a nct /ork

///w ng\\\

gate

giant

cage

door/entrance

\lane/a ey/

i d F0n

C on

giant

lanc/allc)

TRANSLATION

ND

THE TRIALs OF THE FOREIGN

285

vs that thc signi crs in the1sel es ha c no Particular

This sirnPlC nctvork sh
nd cs scnsc is thcir hnkagc,which in%ct signals a m st imPortant
valuc,that what
di1uensi n ofthe v rk, No v,all of thcsc signifers arc u m nFdrives, aPPr PriatCly
enough,as Arlt sn el os~s^Icrc ocos cont ns a c tain dimcn"on gfd1 m nFdh n:
vings, cagcs, cntranccs, 8iants, alleys acquirc thc inordinatc si7c thcy ha c
gatcs,
in nocttlrnal dret ms If such netw r aK not tlansmitted,a glll ing ProccSs h

thc tcxt is dcstr ed

Thc n isrcading of thcsc nct vorks corrcsPondS to thc trcatmcnt gi cn to JrotIP
1nJs grIl, oi fn c6in

a work,such

To skctch out a
isual(l
adjectl es and substantl

Frcud did nt,r use or

lat rs ha

thosc tllat orga /~e sm dc

ofcxp ssion

ain,for cxamPlC,an auth r rnight emPl y ccrtain verbs,

es,and n r rh rs V.A Goklsmidt studies the w rds that

thcy n1ight lDe cxPcctcd NCCdless t say,trans~

vojd d vherc

c ften insertcd thcm

The destruction of nguistic patternings

cl f signi crs, mctaphors,

Thc systcn atic nature of thc tcxt gocs bcyond thc lc

ctc ;it extends to the tyPe f scntcnccs,the sentcncc constructions cnnPloyCd

such

Patternings lI1ay includc thc usc of tirnc or thc rccourse to a ccrtain kind f sub r
dinati n(GrcSsct Citcs Faulkncr s becausc ), sPitzCr studics thc Patterning systcm
in Racinc and Proust,although hc still calls it stylc Rationahzatl n,ClariHcation,
CxPansi n, ctc dcstr y thC Systc ,latiC naturc of thc tcxt t)y introducing clcmcnts

vhcn thc
that arc cxcludcd by its csscntial systcm I1cncc,a curious conscqucncC

translatcd tcxt is1u rc homogcncous than thc original(PosscSsing1n orc style in

:ay,rnorc hCtcr cmPl yCd
by the tlanslator(hkc c mbining Cnnoblcment with PoPularization whcrc the ll
ginal culti atcs an orahty) ThiS aPPhes as Cll to thc Positi n of thc translator, vho

the ordinary scnsc),it iS Cqually lu re incol,ercnF and,in a cc1 tain

gcneous,rnorc jnconsisrenr It is a PdrcJa york ofthc diffcrcnt kinds

f vriting

basically rCSOrts to e cry rCading PossiblC in translating t11c original Thus,a translation al vays risks apPcaring f,clmtnJcn

LIs

clnd jncol, rcnr

at the same ti1nc, as

n vith t11c translation f Paul Cclan A carefull c nductcd

vriting o
tcxtual analysis of an original and its translati n(lclll nstratcs that thc
A/lcsch nnic has sholx

the~translati n, thc_disc ursc-o thc~translauon is cI

sFe,

ldric, likc thc

nc Phytc`vhich is rejectcd by rcadcrs at Pubhshing houscs fron

v rk of a

the vcry rst Pagc

Exccpt that, in thc casc of translation,this asystcn atic nature is not aPParcnt and
in fact is c

nccalcd by :hat

still rcn

ri_
ains of the linguistic Patternings in the

gina1, Rcadcrs, ho cvCr, pcrccive this incnsistcncy in thC translatcd tcxt, sincc
v thcir trust on it and d n t scc it as thc or a truc tcxt,Barring
thcy rarcly bCSt
any Prcjudiccs,thc readers arc right:it is n

katurcs f
conC df

a tcxt, sta1

ta true tcxt;it lacks thc distinguishing

tlng with its systematic naturc Hon2 Jenj7dFjon Cdn 0n,0rC

dysFcmdrici9,rh n exPdns1on cdn conce Fq dnrit lI 7e

imPovcrishi,, nr

Thc destruction of vcrnacular net

orks or their exoticization
Tlus d main is csscntial bccausc all great Prosc is r

French d csn t

otcd in thc

xs=ork,
vrotc N/Iontaignc, Gascon v

crnacularlanguagc
If

(citCd by M
"

unin1955:38)

286

ANTOINE BERMAN
In thc rst Place, thc P lylogic ailn of Pr se inc itably includcs a Plurahty of

ernacular elemcnts,
In thc sccond PlaCC, the tcndcncy to :ard concrCteness in Pr sC nccessarily
includcs thcsc elcmcnts,bccausc thc crnacular languagc is by its vcry naturc m rc

bibl tcux is m rc
Physical, 1n rc iconic than culti atcd languagc, Thc Picard
cxPrCSsivC than thc Frcnch 1ivrcsquc (b kish) ThC ()ld F1 cnch
s rcclagc is

richcr than sOrcclleric (s rccry),thC Anti

rnanqucr de rcsPcct (to lack rcspcct)

lais d rcsPcctCr

lnorc cxPrcsSi c than

In thc third Placc,pr sc oftcn ain s cxPhcitly to recaPturC the rahty f vcrnac~
ular In thc t venticth ccntury,this is thc case

vith a good Part~ /ith rl,e good Part

~of such litcratures as Latln Amcocan,Itahan,Russian,and North Amcrican.

The cfraccmcnt f vcrnaculars is thus a vcry scrious injury t thc tcxtuahty of
PrOSC orks It1nay bc a qucstion f effacing(lin1inuti es in Spanish, Portugucsc,
Gcrn1an r Russian; r it lnay inv l c rePlacing crbs by non1inal c nstructions,

crbs f action b verbs vith substantivcs(thC PCru ian

alagunarsc,
enlaguncr,

bcc mcs thc flat-f oted sc transformcr en lagunc,

to be transf rmcd into a
lagoon ),Vcrnacular gni crs may bc transP sed,like Portc which bec mcs

inhabitant
s

f Buenos Aircs

Thc traditional mcthod f Prcscr ing crnaculars is to exo jCi/C thcm

Exoticization can take t

f rms.First,a typograPhical Pr ccdurc(itahcs)is used

to isolatc hat d es not cxist in thc

: #

)F IF
i

fs

rigina1,Thcn,n 0rc insidi uslv,it is addcd

Mardrus s
er-Arabizing translati ns of the
J, uscInd dn
Onc i 1JllFs and thc sonJ
c,F so

Ex ticization may join uP a8ain with poPularization by striving to rcndcr a

b rm

lar th a bt al one, PaH an sla tran tC tlle 7rdo d

Bucn s Aircs, the Normamd dialcct t translate the language f thc Andcs r
Abruzzesc IJnfortunatcly, a ernacular chngs tightly to its so and colnpletely
t

,:,F

thcr crnacular rdns`drj n ctInccur onFv ber cc

tJ`r1vclrcd nJudJcs An Cx ticization that turns the f reign fr lll abroad int thc
forcign at `
homc vinds up mercly ridicuhng thc riginal
rcsists any direct translating into an

The destruction of expressions and idio

1s

Prosc abounds in imagcs,exPrCsSi ns,hgures,Pro crbs,etc

vhich dcrivc in Part
thc vernacular A/1ost convc
a mcaning or cxPcriencc that rcadily
nds a
el
imagc,
exPrcssi
n,Hgure,
or
Pr

crb
in
thcr
languages
Para
Herc arc t vo idioms i r11conrad s novcl T
Phoon:
fr n1

Hcc id n t carc a tinkcr s cursc

Dammc,if tlais shiP isn t worsc than Becllam!

ComPcarc thcsc two i(li ms with Gi(lc s ama n y

en chait commc(lu juron d un tameur

s

(Hc didn

t gi e a tlnkcr

s cursc)

htt

ral

cr
n:

TRANsLATION AND THE TRIALs OF THE FOREIGN

287

Que dlablc m cmP HC si n ne sc Cro ait P BCdlam!

(The DC l takc mc ifI didn t think I was in Bcdlam!)
(ci

d by MCCrschcn198 8Ol
ms,likc

il s

cquivalent

is

Thc hrst can easily bc rcndcrcd into con1parablc Frcnch idi

cn chait

an quarantc, commc d unc guigne, ctc, and thc scc nd invitcs thc

rcplaccmcnt of Bcdlan
vhich is incomPrchCnsiblc t thc Frcnch reader, by

Charcnton (Bedlam bcing a hmous English insanc asylum) Now itis c i(lcnt that
con11nc clc l

cvcn if thc mcaning is idcntical,rcplacing an idiom by its

an ethn ~

ccntosm RqDec tcd on a largc scalc(thsiS dways thc casc witll a novcl),thc Practice
will rcsult in tllc absulcll whc

d c chamd sin bPh n cxl,rcss tl emselx es

ith a nct :ork of Frcnch imagcs Thc PointS I Signal hcre

r Six thousand,T
Plcs n ust al ays bc n ultiPhcd l)y Hvc
is to attack thc disc ursc of thc f rcign vork Ofc ursc,
cqui alcnts in thcr languagcs, but
thesc cqui alcnts
translatc is n t to scarch for equivalenccs. The dcsire t

ith onc rtVo cXam-

Play` id1 cqui alCncc

a provcrb may havc its

Frdns
rc it T

d n t

rcPlaCC ign rcs, furthcr~

morc, thc cxistcncc in us of a PrOI'crb conscic,usncss Vhich in1mcdiatcly clctccts,in a

nc :pr crb, thc br thcr f an authcntic onc: thc vorld of ur Pr vCrbs is thus
augn cntcd

and cnrichcd(Larbaud 1946)

The effaccment ofthe suPcriI Position oflanguages

Thc suPcrhnP siti n flanguagcs in a n vcl invol es the rclati n bct
`ccn(halcct
and a c mmon languagc,a koine,or thc c cxiStence,in thc heart f a tcxt,oft vo
or morc koinc The nrst case is illustratcd b the novcls f Gadda and G nter Grass,

ircznD B ndcrds,
chCrC his SPanish from SPain is decked out vitl
by
allc-Inclan s
divcrsc Latin Amcrican sPanishcs,by d C work f Guimaracs R sa,wherc classic
Portugucsc intcrPenctratcs Vith thc dialccts f thc Braz ian interior The scc nd
casc is illustlated by J S Maria Arguedas and Roa Bastos,whcrc sPanish is rn di
cd pro undly(syn cucdly)by tw
ther languagcs h om ral ctllturcs:Qucchua
and Gu a And tllcrc is nnally thc hmit casc~Joycc S FInn dns, c and its

sixtcen agglutinatcd languagcs

In thcsc t
o Cases, the suPcrirnP Siti n of languagcs is thrcatcned by transla~

tion Thc rclation of tcnsi n and intcgration that exists in thc original bct

:ccn thc

vcrnacular languagc and the k inc,bet

ccn thc undcrlying languagc and thc surfacc

languagc, ctc, tcnds to bc effaced H

vt PrCsCr e thc Guarani_SPanish tCnsi n
in Roa BastosP Or thc rclati n bctwccn SPanish m sPain and the Latin Amcrican
sPanishes in Jrdn Btz,,dcrdsP Thc Frcnch translat r f this v rk has n t confrontcd
thc Pr blcn ; thc Frcnch tcxt is comPlctcly hon1ogcncous Thc samc gocs for thc
translation fp
ari dc Andradc s rI
cu n iill ,vhcre thc dccP Crnacular ro ts f

thc
v rk arc suPPrCssCd ( :hich d cs n t haPPcn in the sPanish vCrsion of this
Brazilian text)

This is thc ccntral Problen

Posed by translating n vels ~ a ProblCm that

dclmands rnaxi1nun re ecti n fr rll the translator, E

er

novehstic vv rk is charac-

terized by linguistic suPcri1nP sitions,c cn ifthcy includc s

The novcl, said Bakhtin, asscmblcs a J,crcr

ci lccts,idiolccts,CtC

Crsity of discursive tyPes, a

`D8y or di

288

ANTOINE BERMAN

Fcro

,sjd

r divcrsity oflanguages,and a h

198 `89) Th mas Mann s novd Tflc l/r

F r

Pfl

ic/l/o1

n r or di

ersity of voiccs(Bakhtin

nr0no crs a hscintlti11g cxamPlc

f hctcr :1 ssia, :hich thc translator, RIauricc Betz, xx as ablc to Prcscl c thc
dial
8ucs bct vCcn thc hcr cs/ Hans castorP and N adamc Chauchat In thc ri_
ginal, bod1 c lllllaunicatc i11 Frcnch, and d c fascinating d1i11g is that thc )
Gcrn1an s French is n t

rhc s ln as thc)

ung

oung Russian vo uan s In thc translation,

thcsc t vo varieties of French arc in turn ll^amcdl)v thc translat

s Frcnch N aurice

Bctz lct Th mas Mann s Gcrman rcsonatc in his translati n to such an cxtent that
thc thrcc londs of French can bc(listinguishcd,and cach PosscssCS its sPecific f0reign~

ncss his
C

is thc s rt f succcss _not quite iluP

Cry translator0f a novcl ought t

ssible,certai111y difHcuIt__t
VhiCh

asPirc

Thc analytic f tI anslati n broadly skctched hcrc n1ust bc carefully distinguished

litCrary, social, cultural, etc

vhich partly govcrn

t1 anslatin8act in e cry S cicty Thcsc norms/

vhich vary historically,ncvcr

l n1thc study of
thc

no
s

spcciHcally concern translati n;thcy aPply,in fact,t

any :riting Practicc

hatso-

cvcr Thc analytic,in contrast,focuscs n thc univcrsals oF dcformation inhcrcnt in

translating as such It is bvi us that in sPcci c PeriodS and culturcs thcsc uni er~

sals ovcrlaP
vith tl)C systcm of norIns that g

vriting think onl

vern

nc classical Pcri d and its bcllcs in d lcs Yct this c i11ci(lcncc is ccting
t

vcnticth ccntury,

vc n

of dcR)rmation are not an

ngcr subn1it to ncOclassical n

lcss in f

rcc Thc

c cn

tbc
In thc

of

rms, but the uni crsals

entCr into conflict

ith thc nc

norms govcrning vriting and translation

At thc samc tirnc,ho vcvcr,thc deforn1ing tcndcncics analyzcd abovc arc not
ahistorica1, They arc rather historical in an riginal scnsc, They rcfcr back to thc

gurc of translati n bascd n Grcck d)ought in thc Vcst or more PrCciscly,

Platonisln,The gurc of translati n is undcrst d here as thc f rm in vhich trans_
lation is clcPloyed and aPPcarS to itsclf, l,ef rc any exPhcit the ry Fron its
cry
bcginnin:s,
vestern translati n has been an cmbelhshin: rcStitution of mcanh1g,
bascd on thc tyPically Platonic scParation bet ccn sPirit and lcttcr,scnsc and ord,
contcnt and f rn1,thc scnsiblc and the1)on-scnsiblc
Vhcn it is afHrmcd todav that

translation(including n n litcrary translati n)rnust Pr duce a clear and

elcgant
tCxt(CvCn if thc Original does not posscsS thCSc quahtics),thC af6rmatl
n assumes

thc Platonic hgurc of translating,c cn1f unconsciously All thc tendcncics notcd in
thc analytic lead t thc salnc rcsult:thc Pr ducti n of a tcxt that is luore

clcar,

more clcgant, Inore flucnt, rnorc PurC than thc Original Thcy arc thc dcstI
tion of thc lctter in fa

t1c-

r of rncaning

Nc crthelcss,this P at nic gurc of translati n is not s n)cthing falsc t1 at can

be criticizcd the rctically or idc l gically F r it scts uP as an abSolutc Only onc
csscntial Possibility of translating,

vhich is PrcciSely thc rcstitution of rncaning All

translation is,and must bc,thc rcstituti n ofrneaning.

Thc Problcm is kn
vil`g vhctllcr this is thc uniquc and t11th11atc task of trans~
lati()n or whcthcr its task is s mcthing clsc again Thc aI1alytic f translatl n,inso r

as thc analysis of ProPcrly dcforn1ing tcndcncics bcars On the translat

r,docs in f`ct

hich must necessarily bc callcd literal

PrCSuPPoSc anothcr figurc of translating,

translation Hcrc literal rneans: attachcd to thc lettcr (of vorks), Lab r n thc
lettcr it1translation is rnorc ori8inary than1 cstituti n of rneani11 It is through thi
lal)

r tlaat translation, nd1e onc han(l,restorcs thc Pardcular signi

lllg Pr ccss ol

TRANSLATION AND THE TRIALS OF THE FOREIGN

289

w rks(wl lch iS morc than thcir mcaning)and,on thcthcr hand,transbrms thc

translatin81anguagc Translation stilllulatcd thc fashi nin8and rcf`s11i ning of thc
cstern languagcs only bccausc it laborcd on thc lctter and Prof undly lnodi
grcat
cd thc translatiI1g language As sin)Plc restitution of rncani11g, translation could
nc cr ha c PlayCd this lk,1

mativc rolc

Conscqucntly,thc csscntial ah11()f thc analytic of translation is t

high"ght this

othcr csscncc f translating,

vhich, alth ugh ne er rcc gnizcd, cnd
ved itvith
hist rical cffccti cncss in cvcry(lomah1 vhcrc it vas Practiccd

Chapter 23

shoshana BIum uIka

SHIFTS OF COHESION AND

COHERENCE IN TRANSLATION

3 s

lTa

Itl\s:; l; 1

IH

to cach othcr in cohcrcnt vays This cxPcctation docs not nccessar y cntail that
uttcrances ha c to bc liI1kcd t cach od1cr in tcxtuall vcrt vavs Considcr for

CxamPlC thC f llowing altcrnati c rcphes to a ho :arc you query

1o v arc vou?

1a

1n Hnc.

1b

c failcd the tcst

1c

J(,l 11ny is lcaving hr thc Stltes

1d

tomorro
Thosc arc PcarlS that werc his cycs

The listcncr Presulnably l

as n difhculty to acccPt 1b as an altcrnati c csP0n C

instead of1a;though thcrc is no vcrt rcsPonsc t thC h

~
v qucstion,sharcd kn

lcdgc of thc
v rld vdl sufHce to intcrPrCt1b as n1canin8 n t so vcll ,In both 1a
and 1b responses are() crtly linkcd t thc question,at lcast by the I~y u rcla~
tionshiP.In1ct11crc is no such linking,yct thc ans vcr rnay bc perfcctly acccPtable
Its intcrPrctation xs`ould PrCsumably nccd somc sPcci c sharcd kno
lcdgc bct vccn
intcractants,t11c naturc of
hich v uld tcll vhcd`cr thc sPcakcris ann unci11g good

or bad nc s VVith a strctch of the i1nagination,

ve can c cn Possibl)
irnaginc a contcxt in
hich 1d
0uld bc heard as c hcrcnt F r exa1uPlc,had
ne vs

intcrruPtcd T

s Ehot vhilc

rCsP ndcd by uttcring thcsc

1986

ndcring ovcrThc Wastcland ,hc n)ight vcl1hav

v rds

aloud

sHIF Ts

OF COHESION AND COHERENCE

291

Thus e can scc that thc scarch for cohcrcncc is a gcncral PrinciPlc in discoursc
^

interPrctati

n Cohcrcncc can bc vie

dmo

oF rcxr,m dc l crr rhc reddcr m`isr n

rj0

'ed ds d ct, =erF PoFenr

mctanir,J lcfdrionsl,iP

rJl u Pit c

css

s ofinre,Prerd~

F0r this Pr ccSs to be reahzed, thc readcr or listcncr must be ablc to rclatc

thc text t rclc ant and fan ihar : rl(ls, cithcr real or ctional C

thel hand,will bc consi(lcrcd dIa re i@nshzP

`d
c rcsscd u
c cc cm r
`

hcsion, on thc

hoFdin ber ecn`t,,^ thc rexr,

In thc foll
ving,I shall address thc issuc fP Ssible shifts fc hcsi n and cohcr~
cncc in thc translation of vritten tcxts, The main argumcnt postulatcd is that thc

ProcCSs of translati n ncccssarily cntails shifts b th in tcxtual and(liscoursa1rcla-

tionshiPs The argumcnt is devel Pcd l)y adopting a discoursal and c n1n1unicativc
aPProach to thc study of translation It is assun1ed that translati
n sh uld be ic vcd
as an dcr cll co nnlu iCdrion;as in the study of all acts fcommt11)icauo11,c nsidcra
tions of both thc Proccss and thc Product ofthc c 11nuniCat c act ncccssari y rclatc
t at lcast thc linguistic,disc ursal and social systcms h lding for thc t vo languagcs
and culturcs invol cd.

1Shifts in cohcsion
On the lcvcl f cohcsi n,shiRs in tyPcs f cohesivc lnarkcrs used in translati n secm
t

arcct translations in ne or both fthc f llo ving dirccti

shiRs in levcls f cxPhcitncss;i e thc gencrallcvcl

ns

f thc target tcxts tcXtual

cxPhcitncss is higher or lo ver than that of thc sourcc tcxt

b,

ShiRs in tcxt lncaning(s); i C d1c cxphcit and imPhcit mcaning l)otcntial of

thc sourcc tcxt changcs thr ugh tranSlations,

F sh s

Thc ve1 t
t

in Icye s

orcxPF Fncss

cohcsivc rclati nshiPs bct ccn Parts f thc tcxts arc ncccs3arily linkcd

a languagc s rammatical

systcm(Hallida)ancl Hasan1976)ThuS,grammatical

diffcrcnccs bct vecn languages v l be cxPrcssCd l)y changcs in thc typcs of tics uscd

to mark cohcsion in sourcc and targct texts suCh transforn

thcn1a shiR in the text s ovcrall level

ati ns

n1ight carry xxith

f cxPhcitncss Considcr2a and2b

2a souice F nfu e s rfnfhslll

2b, dl /cznfu c(rI

MaHc w hclping Jimmy dimb tl c

rfrench

Maoc&ak en ain d

biggCSt brdncf,of thc trcc in the

Jimmy
grin1pcr sur la Plus hautc"der
branche(lc

iont yard,t start work on thcir

l arbre du jardin P ur con 1ncnccr

trcc110usc,The br

ncrl l

construire lcur cabanc, l,rdncJlc

kcd vcr

stl ng

but when Jimmy grabl)cd

h ld,ir st ted to crack.Hc might

a tl air es solidc,mais qua11d

Jin myF Fr P ,c` commcnqcl;

really:et hurt!

craqucr,Il P

urrait

rahucnt sc

hi mal,
(Ha1 vard

Languagc and Litcrary skillS Pr jcct;

Pr vided

by courtcsy of Cathc1 inc snow)

292

sHOsHANA BLUM-KULKA

As rcquircd by thc Frcnch g1 an11uatical systc 1,in thc French ersi n,thc anaPh ric
rcf

rcncc to thc branch is n`arkcd tvicc R)r gcndcr( La branchc,cllc con1rllcnqa

and rcPcated once m rc than in Enghsh(

attraPa

) ThC rCsult is a shghtly hi8hcr

lcvcl of redundancy in thc Frcnch as comParcd t

thc Enghsh vcrsi0n,a trend that
= uld bc1 c crsed11ad the translati n Iscd French as thc sourcc language
On a hi hcr, tcxtual lcvcl, such shiRs in le cls f exPhcitncss thr ugh trans~
lati ns

have bccn clahncd t bc linked to diffcrcnccs in styhstic PrcferCnccs for tyPcs

of cohcsivc Fnarkcrs in thc t

languagcs involvcd in translati n Lc enston(1976)

an(l Bcnuan (1978)have contrasted Engbs11wkh Hebrc

C1

ce of Hebre

gi en

f r lexical rcPetiti

and n ted tbc Prcfl r~

n or Pronon1inahzati n Lc cnston clairns that

the ch ice bct vcCn lcXical rcPctiti n and Pron n1inahzation,Hcbrc v ,ritcrs

tcnd t PrefCr thc f rmcr vhilc Enghsh` ritcrs tcnd t

choosc thc latter Berman

modi cs this clailu by arguing that both in Hcbrc v and in Enghsh,Pron n1inahzati

n is Prcfcrrcd 'hcnever Possiblc,but sincc a choicc is often n t gran11 atically

pos l)le in Hcbrcw,in hct lexicd rePctiti nis hr mo1

in English A siln ar clairn has rccendy bce11madc

c equent iI1Hcbrcw d1an

tugucsc and Enghsh(Vieka

r Po1

1984),namcly that cohcsivc l aturCs in Portugucsc rcnect a str ngcr nced f r clarity
and a highcr dcgrcc of spcciscati n than Enghsh

Thc phcnomcnon dcPicted in d1cse studics luight indeed indicate di ercnt

norms g vcrning thc usc of Particular cohcsi c dc iccs in thc sourcc and targct
languagcs Such diffcrcnccs1nay also,h
vc cr,bC ascribcd to c nstraints imPosed
by thc translatjon Process itsclf
The ProcCss of translati n,Particularly if successful,nccessitates a con1Plcx tCxt
and(lisc urse Pr ccssing

11e Pr cCss ofi11terPretation Perf rmcd by the translator

on the s urcc tcxt n1ight lead to a TL tcxt VhiCh is n1 re rcdundant than thc sL
tcxt This redundancy can bc cxPressed by a risc in thc lcvcl fc hcsi c cxPhcit^
ncss in the TL text, This argumcnt1nay l)c statcd as r/,c cxPJ,or rj n/l P rhc"s

v11ich P stulates an bscrvcd c hcsive exPlicit 1css on, SL to TL tcxts regardless

of the incrcasc traccablc to differcnccs bct vccn thc t hnguistic and textual

systems invol ed It foll

vs that exPhcitation is
ie vcd hcrc as inhcrcnt in the
Pr cCss f translati

F r

lack f largc_scalc cn1Pirical studics that1night`ahdate either rb th the

styhstic prcfcrcncc and thc cxPhcitation hyPothcsis,rnorc cvidcncc f r thc lattcr

111ight be sought by exan1ining differcnt tyPes of intcrlanguagcs, fr

Pr ducCd

m th sc

by languagc lcarncrs to thc Pr ductS f both non-ProfCssional and Pr fcs^

sional translators

T11c srst indication of this trcnd is thus to bc s ught in thc vrittcn rork of

language learners stcmn1cr(1981)analyzed the usc of cohcsivc dcviccs in Gcr1nan

lcarners

Enghsh, and f und that f thc

c typcs of cohcsivc dcviccs shc in

csti-

gatcd (substitution, clhpsis, reference, lexical c hesion and conjunction), it ^as

ic
hesi n(c g lcxical rePetition)as wcll as njunctions which wcrc markc(ll)

`c
`c
ovcrrcPrcsCntcd
in thc learncr data,
id1 an n~c 1itant undcrrePrescntation c

n n Cg P laclmh zatloll) he tlqc J coll c dc s was m

fc,r
l

rc

ith English nati c spcakcrs h tendcd to PrCfCr refcrcntial linkagc vcr lcxical
c hc on,substitution,elliPsis and c unction,In Ber1 an s(1978)study,a silllilar
overrePrcsCntation of`exJc
nati e sPcakcrs c)fI1ebrc v `coJ,csion

Vas dcPictCd in the Enghsh

rittcn vork()l

sHIFxrs OF COHESION AND COHERENCE

293

vc Can
lMoving from thc domain of languagc lCarning to that of translation,

vork of nonCxPcct to nd a trcnd for cxPhcitation csPecially markCd in thc

T1:tr:

JF:

h
:

: g l;:oT lr

;
another
for somc sPCci c Practical cnds
or to rendcr tcxts from onc languagC t
n
Thc less cxPCricnccd thc translator, thc more his or her Process of intcrPrctati

fthe sL1night bc rencctcd in the TL,

Thus, it is not surPrising that in translati ns donc by (bilingual) graduatc

rcsca h assistan working n tlle H val d Literacy sklllS prt,lcct C trend is fc,r

thc TL tcxts to bC1on:cr than the SL()ncs; for examPlc in thrcc short tcxts tbc
diffcrcnccs in lcngth` Crc as f0llo
s

nJ isJl9

Fr

sL

g,tIPh mic

3 64
+ 54
5 127

nch Tr

rj1
gItiP cm1c

or( xl

85

69
149

Thc(liffercncc in lcngth rcHccts thC trCnd toxxard cxPhcitation cvklcnt on cl0SCr

cxamination Thc following arC CxamPlcs of how sL tcxt has bcc11cxpcl11ded in TL:

TL(Frm

sL r nJ`ish

3a

3b .

Halfxxay uP hc rCalized

.Il n otait PaS CncorC cn

chcllc,`orsquc
haut de l

that the laddcr was swaying

ccf c ci
scnri qt

dir

en rrclin

de lDdscLIFcr

4b Isabdk tait jt s ment

4a Ruth wasjust carr ng thC

garbage out thr ugh thc ont

door
4c Har cy ran in iom Playing and

cra Frdin

sorFir dc la ll,aison Pour n

cs

Po IbeF/cs dchoIs

cFrr

4d Hcrvc rcntra chcz lui en

droPpcd his rollcr skates on thc

,ont stePs on his vay t the

courant ct jcta ses PatinS

kitchcn for a cookic

la porte d entr c Pdrcc q

r ulcttcs

PrcssJ cl

sur lcs escahcrs dcvant

d cr

Prcndrc

iF cr ir

un Jr cILI

dd,,sF cuisine

5a S1et kl

tl

en n t

to hclP each

other
5c Thc tcad1cr bcgan,

0 , n

5b Elle leur(lit dc nc Pas s ai(lcr

ct dto Frdl

g ,

jI

r FDur

5d La maitressc dit,

sc1

cri vc' ,(l

`

0 , n

)h lcad to thc addition f cxPhcit conncc-

x
J 6clDarcC cluF aIil(l l,our )in botl Wlllle in

3and4thc Plc c d

CxPhcitation lnight bC c nncCtcd to syntactic or lcxical languagC diffcrenccs

no such

arguIucnt can bc uscd to cxPlain thc cxan 1Dles in5 Thc translator silnPly cxPands
the TL tcxt,building into it a scIalantiC redundancy abscnt in thc riginal

294

sHOsHANA BLUM-KULKA
Thc nct 1 csult in all cascs is a risc iI1 thc target tcxt s level f exPhcitness

Example6sho vs
'0

that this Phen mcnon is not abscnt fr n1ProfCsSi nal t1^anslations:

n1 11t

1non chcf d

t1` auX grandcs

PerS nnes ct jc lcur ai

demando si rn n dcssi111cur faisait pcur,

Ellcs rn

nt rcPondu

P urquoi

un chaPcau

(saint-ExuP ry,

6b

ferait il PcurP
Lc P

Fir Princc,P 11)

ed 1ny masterPiecc to the gro vn-uPs and asked them

I sho
w11cthcr thc drawings ightcncd thcm,

B JF thcy ans vcrcd, FriJ/,rcncdP hy should any nc be

llig11tC11cd

b a1 at?

(Enghsh crsion, 1962by

Thus, it111ight l)c thc casc that exPhcitati

Voods)

n is a universal strategy inhcrcnt in the

proccss of languagc mcdiation,as Practiccd by languagc lcarncrs,non-ProfcSsi nal

translators and Pr

2 '`c

nin ~:`dnd

ssional translat rs ahkc

cof,csion

AS P intcd ut by Halliday and Hasan (1976) c hcSi n ties do much n1orc t11an
11c choicc

i(lC c ntit1uity and thus crcatc thc scluantic unity of thc tcxt
Pr

in
l

cd in thc tyPcs of cohcSi c markcrs uscd in a Particular text can affcct thc

texturc(as bcing

q
sc

r dcnse )as =cll as thc style and11)caning of tbat tCxt

Particularl in literature,the ch icc f cohcsivc markers can scr c ccntral functi ns

vs that shiRs in tyPcs fc hcsi c tics through translati

in thc text It foll

n may

alter thesc ft1nctions

In Pintc,r

s play,OJJ T,P,,cs,(PintCr1971)the stage dirccu ns cdl r clim hghF,

in which thrcc gurcs can bc disccrncd:Dccley,slumPcd in an artnchail1still,Katc

v,l kin8 ut F lloving a
curlcd on a sofa,st l,and Anna standing at theind

vhilc Anna s
PintcrcsquC sdcncc, thc lights go uP on Dcelcy and Katc, smoking,
gurc rcmains still i11di1n light at thc indoAsis oRcn thc case in nl )dcn1PlayS,
the Hrst scntcnCcs sPokCn give thc imPrcssion that thc conversation has bccn goil g
nf r son1c tin1c

7
js/
SL(En

TI lHcbrc"

Dark.(PausC)

kchah(dark)

Kate

Dccle : Fat or thinP

mcna

Katc:Fullcr than111c,I think

(PausC)

yotCr n11ca mimcni,ani xo c ct

(m K fttll than me,I tllho

Declc she was thcnP

as thcnP)
kax hayta azP(S ShC

Katc:It11ink so
v
Deele shc mav n t beI1

kax ani xo evct(s I think)

or raza?(fat or tl in)

yitaxcn sIcna kax kaet(PCrhaPs

shc is not s

(PintCr,

now)

1971,Hcbrcw version b R,Kislc

sHIF s OF COHEs10N AND COHERENCE

295

that thc dial guc conccrns

vC kn
nc female Pers n and two timc f1 amcs(tllCn and now) But this in rmau n is
By thc cnd ofthcsc six turns(and threc PauScs)

dchbcratcly unf ldcd t us in stagcs, (lisambiguating cach line by thc subscqucnt

ne The nrst hnc,`lark ,is ambiguous in rcgard to rc rcnt is Katc rc rhng to

ff stagc or to a pcrson?Thc sccond line estabhshcs by
semantic mCans that the rcfcrcnt is probably human, It is only by the fourth turn

the dirn light on the stagc/

that gcndcr is established( ShC was thcn )too,RctrOsPccti cly,the rst three hncs

thus crcate a lcxical cohcsivc nct

rcading or listcning

`ork(dark, fat, thin, full) n

t apParcnt on rst

Thc Hcl)rcw translator is hcc(l with tw Problcms i n the vcry rst hne
c t be marked br8cndcr
Thus,rcgardlcss f

First,Hcbrew rcquircs thc acljccti

the lcxical item uscd,thc gcndcr f thc rcfcrcnt is cstabhshcd immcdiatcly,Scc nd,

f r dark Thc v rd ch scn kchah

can only aPPly to human rcfcrcnts, Conscqucntly,in thc ncxt lincs,thc Hcbrcvc
there is n cquivalcnt polyscn1ic lcxical itcn

tcxt is at no Point ambiguous in rcgard to thc kind of cntity or pcrson Katc and
1)ccley arc talking ab ut Thc rcsult is that vhcrcas in thc

ri inal

thc turns rclatc

to cach othcr l)y subtlc means of lexical cohcsi n, in Hcbrc v they arc conncctcd
cxP citly,lcxically and gra 11natically,gi

in

thC tCxt a dcnsc,cl sc tcXturc instcad

fthc l scr onc Pintcr Probably intcnded

F r the rst four turns,this c
ct is Partly unavoidablc sincc it s due to diffcr~
cnccs in thc gramrnatical systclus bct veen thc t vo languagcs, By the fourth turn,
it bcc mes

aPParcnt that unavoidablc changcs in cohesive markers madc by thc

translator Play an important Part in crcating this dcnsc texture

Thc Hebre translator addcd t vicc thc vord

so
0nCC in turn4and again in
turn6,and P stPosCd thcvord so in turn5 These scen1ingly trivial changcs actu~

ally arcct thc indircct sPccch acts trans

1itted by the riginal,a Phcn mcnon

oRen

dctcctablc in htcrary translatl ns (Blun1-Kulka 1981), Katc S hcsitant rcPhcs to

Decley s queries(thc rCPCtiti n of I think
com n cnt(6)that

, I think s

in 3and5)arC lnct by a

casts doubt n Katc s cxPCrtiSC n thc toPic discusscd In intcr-

actional tcrms,if wc dassi

`:cs as Cithcr

supporti c or challcnging in rcgard

to cach othcr (Burton 1980; Blum-Kulka 1983), thc challcnging m cs in this

cxchangc bclong to Dcclcy,
vhilC Katc s mo cs arc suPPortive, thus sho
ing
Deelcy at s mc advantagc over his sx ifc In thc Hcbrc v version,rnovc4, vbich in

English n1ight stdl bc intcrPrCtCd as a sirnplc rcqucst for clariscation, imphcs

ndcr or doubt,thus suggcsting that it is mcant as a cha

I think

cngc ln5 (in HCbrc v

cngc,coun~
)thC challengc is rnct by Katc by an emPhatic counter_cha
vc6 Thus,thc P vcCr strugglc bct veen thc c uplc,at this stagc

tcrc(l again in m

of thc Play still only hinted at, seems to turn in translation int

ment bctwccn marricd pcoplc,of whch ncithcr comcs

an ordinary argu~

ut witll an ad

anhge ovcr

thc Othcr,
Iv uld likc t suggest that thc functional shifts causcd by changes in tyPcs of
cohesion markcrs aPParCnt in thc translation fC9Fd iI,,cs arc by no lneans unusual

They t

in vitb

thc trcnd for cxPhcitation discusscd carhcr,Exccpt that in litcrary

tCXts, esPccially in m dcrn PlayS vhcrc thc shrt lines of sccn1ingly ordinary talk
arc so heavy vvith in Phed n eanings, cach shift in c hesion has far~rcaching c nse-

quCnccs for the intcrprctation of th se mcanings

296

sHOsHANA BLUM-KULKA

2 Shift of coherence
As wc11ave seen,cohcsion is an ovcrt tcxtual rclau ns11iP, bjectively dctcctablc,
Thc study(Dfcohcsionlcndsitsclftoquantitati canalysis HcnccitshouldbcP ssil)le
hat cxtent cxPhCitati n isindccd a norn that
to asccrtain by emPirical rcscarch t
vhat extcmt it is a langua8c
cuts across translations froln various languages and to
Pa1r^SPcclfic PhCnomenon

Cohcrence, on thC thcr hand, dcHcs quantitativc1ncth

ds f analysis, unlcss

aPPr achcd lrolll thc rcadcr sP int f

ic I understand cohcrencc as rhc rcclF1zcn~
on

FcxF

s CdninJ PorcI Fjd ;tllis realizau n can be taPProachCd C

thc rctically, by Postulating an

hcr

idcal rcader (aS suggcsted l)y Fill1nore 1981) or

emPirically, by invcstigating thc` ays a:ivcn tcxt has becn1 cmcrllbcrcd or intcrpretcd by various rcadcrs,as done in tcxt1,roceSSing Psychohnguistic rescarch(
D k

an

and Kintsch1983),
Thus,I agrce vith Edmonds n(1981) vh CquatCS c hcrcncc 'ith

intcrPrctability, ln considcring

shi s

the tcxt

in cohcrcncc through translati n, Ivill be

conccrncd, n thc1n st gcncral lc cl, vith cxan ining thc Possibility that tcxts1nay
cha11gc or losc thcir mcaning l9otcntial thr

ugh translati n

l bc argucd:

Thc k)ll
ving Poi11ts
`

ed shRs
cxrt
That tlacrc is a nccd to cllstinguish bctwcen d rj%cuscd and
Fl

of coherencc,and that Probably,thc formcr arc lcss a`oidable than thc lattcr

That text~foCuscd shiRs f cohcrcncc arc linkcd to thc Process f translati n

Pcr SC, vhile rcadcr~focused shi1ts arc linked t a change in rcadcr audienccs
throu8h translati

That both tyPes fshiRs can bc studicd t

a ccrtain t xtent

by psychohnguistic

lneth ds f text Pr ccssing

2.F Reddc %c Iscd

Tcxts may coh c

sh0 s c hcr cc

witll rcsPect t

sul,lcct m r(e mathCmatics),to genK

rld ev ked and/ r Pre_

convcndons(litcraturc)or with rcspcct to any P Ssiblc

mcs
a
cohercnt
disc urse if hc
sCd
by
thc
tcxt
For
thc
rcadcr,thc
tcxt
bcc
supP
dd
kn
wlcdgc,su
cd
mattt r knowcan aPPly rdo ant schcmas(cg ba~sc(l on
lcdge, hlu iarity with gcnrc convcntions) to(l1 aw thc ncccssary in rcnccs r

understanding both thc lcttcr and thc sPiI1t fthc tcxt h1Filhuorc s(1981)tCrms,
this Process leads t

an cnvisionment ofthc tcxtin the rcadcr s rnind,En isi nmcnts

can,of coursc, ary vith individual rcadcrs and vith diR rcnt typcs of audicnccs
Thus,KinJ Ledr vould n t 1ncan thc same to thc British rcadcr and t thc Frcnch
bihngual rcadcr vvh can rcad and undcrstand the riginal Nccdlcss t say, thc
cliffcrcnccs in cnvision111cnts bct vccn thcsc t vo readcrs lllight incrcasc c nsidcr~

ably if thc Frcnch sPeakCr has t rcad KinJ Le r in translation.

As poh)tcd out by Eugcnc K, Bristo v,in his introducti n to his translation f

vn language, e cry Pers n transChckhov s Plays, Even vithin thc sbn of11is
v1977 X r) T illus~
hat he secs or rcads,ion his oxs n CXPCriCncc (B1ist
lates
trate t11is P int hC tClls thc st ry of ho v TFle CJ,cr: chdrF vas n t thc samc in

thc minds f thc direct rs ofthe M scow Art Theatre as in Chel h s Iuh1d T thc
)

sHIFTs OF COHEs10N AND COHERENCE

297

(hrcctors thc play as a tragcdy,to its author, ac mcdy,in PlacCS e cn a farce

Though thc(lircct rs cvcntually had thcir vay,Chckho insistcd that n t once had
cithcr

nc ad

tl r ugh

my Play c chlly (Bribtow197

il)i(1.),

In cxan ining thc snal translati n product,thc qucsti n then is

can vc distin~

guish bct vecn shifts fc hcrcncc duc to thc ncccssary shiR bet
ccn audicncc typcs
as(listinct fron thosc shifts that arc traccable to the Proccss of translation Pcr SCP
I

vould hkc t suggest that it is important to attcn1pt to dra v this distinction,

:c can ha c a bettcr undcrstanding of vhat translati n can and can nor do,

sO that

or,in othcr vords,t bcttcr undcrstand the true li1nits of translatability

It foll
vs that if bridging acr

ss culturcs and lan8uages,as is al vays thc casc in

translation,is indccd dif rcnt om switching Phm ily bctwccn audiences(even

if a language shiR is i

1volvcd),thCn wc should scc cvidCnCc f r readcr~based shiRs

audiences and rittcn in t vo languagcs as8:

in tcxts origina y airncd at t

8
/

us scricz pr t Parier qu ils sont

en oyagc dc noccsP
N cn faitcs ricn, ous PCrdricz
trC

They look likc thcy rc n thcir

honeym n,(lon t thcy7

But thc rc not

Parl

M ct~ n c,Gauthicr s

nt rnari

ThC Jacks ns ha c bccn luar ed

dcPuls d uzc ans

t vcl

s sc rcndent;Ncw York,lui P ur

Mr Jac
n s n his w

affaires,cllc Pour fairc dcs cmPlcttes

an imP rtant deal in Nc v York.

de N l dans FiRh A cnuc.Ellc est

hcurcusc de ccttc ChVcrsi n dans le

train_train quoddicn,heurcusc dc

Christmas shopping on FiRh Avcnuc

N
vonder she s sn1ihng,Mr

pardr a cc lui~et ga sc voit,

Jackson didn t lcavc hcr bchind

c cars
to d SC

Jackson s golng to do somc

this triP

(Air Cana(la,n datc)

Thc tw ersions ofthe Air Canada advertiscmentillustratc thc c Py vritcr savarcncss of thc difFcrcnce in the cultural assumPti ns fthc audicnce they vcrc catcring

r Thc cmPha S On theimP ltanoc of Mr Jacks n s busincss h New Y rk catc

to Canadian AngloPohoneS, vhilc for the French Canadian c 11uunity thc rncntion
of Mr, Gauthier s busincss alonc sccn s to sufscc;thc vivcs in both ersi ns onlY

accompany thcir husbands,but vhilc in thc Enghsh crsion thc man s so-callCd
haPpincss comcs fr

mn t bcing lcft bchind,thc Frcnch ersi n plays both on the

vvoman s brcaking a /ay fron1 (lady chorCs and n the r mantic notion of bcing
haPPy to tra cl vith

Ob

Mr Gauthier

usly these tcxts n1ight havc bccn translatcd Fr m eithcr of thc t vo

:ere vrittcn as t vo Vcrsions

languagcs to thc othcr,Thc fact that aPparcntly they

to servc the samc purpose testi

es t

the fact that the Air Canada Pubhc rclations

PCoplc arc a varc of thc differcnt nceds of thc t 'o languagc cornrnunitics,
As sh

n by Toury(1977)tranSlati ns
th rcspcct to t
Propcr oPeratc

oPPoSing scts of norms:on thc Onc hand,that of sho

ing conccrn for the c ntc 1-

Porary rcadcr(thus bCing licensed to restruCture the SL tcxt in thc TL); and n
the thcr hand that f remaining as faithful as P ssible t thc sL Rcadcr~based shiRs

298

KULKA

sHOsHANA BLUM

of cohcrcnce arc hcncc hnked, to a ccrtain extent, to thC preva

hich the translat r
systcm :ithiI1

ing n rmative

Peratcs.

The Prcva ing n rm in thc20th century has bccn,on thc lnost gencral lc cl,

to cxpcct translations to li c uP to somc exPcctation of faithfulncss r dynan1ic

Cquivalencc

(Nida1964) In thCr vords,lu st

Pub ShCd translati ns arc rc8ardCd

as attcn1PtS to rcndcr a:ivcn tCxtin another langua c,and no as attc11)pts to con cy

C by de nition
a givcn mcssage to a nc1|l audicncc, Hcncc, sincc TL audicnces a
aln1ost al
a s nc v

to somc,if n t

,of sL audienccs,and ritcrs sharcdvorlds,

a largc cxtent,una oidablc.

rcadcr_f cuscd shifts f cohcrcncc in translation arc,t

Thc clearcst cxamPles ofshiRs of c hcrencc that rcsult frona thc changc in audi-

hcd1cr rcal
v rld or
cncc and nc,r languagc con1c f n) thc arca f rcfcrcncc
htcrary,allusions t pcrsons,PlacCs or other texts rnay Play a ccntral role in building
up thc cohcrcncc of a gi cn story Writcrs thcmsclves n1ay be avvarc of thc fact that
their rcfcrcncc11ct vork is not sharcd by their rcadcrs and take Pains t
h)f
tn tes or othcrvisc h)translation thc translat

CxPlain it

r bcc mes thc judgc as to the

cxtcnt to vhiCh hc Or shc Hnds it necessary to cxPlain thC s urce tcxt s rcfcrence
net

`ork to thc targct-language audience

Horzlmc rero F (Camus |951),evokCs HCathdilf
For cxamPlc9Camus,in

inating
PaSsion f r Cad)y in l, rhcrjnf Hc,iJhts to illustrate his Point k)r discrin
bctwccn crimcs of Passi n al)d crin1es f logic Thc Gcrman translator fck a nccd
cl by En1ily Bront

to add a f tnotc cxPlaining that thc rcfcrcncc is to a no

, vbilc

cCr1953)(undCrstandably)n r thc Hcbrcxh nc

ncithcr the Enghsh translator(B
(Arad 1951)jud:ed thiS ncccssary
/hile in rcading Can1us,follo ving thc allusion to IlVrJ, rin Hc rsiS not ncccs

Jf

sa y for understandin thc11 ain argument,in anothcr tcxt a sirnilar a usi nR1ight

bc central

In htcrary as
vcll as non-htcrary tCxts, thC issuc of sharcd or n n-sharcd
vorks Pc
l)aPs
rcfcrcncc nct ts0rks is n t an absolutc Onc F r con PlCx htcrary
only litcrary criticS comc to or clain to dcciPhcr all f the vritcr s rcfcrences and

allusions, Through thc Pr ccss f translation (as vvCll as in thc teaching of litera_
ture)thC probleln is to clchn1it th sc central allusions vithout thc understanding
of xl=hich thc rcadcr n1ight havc chf culty in cvcn f

Plot EvCn n1orc comPlcx are cascs

ll

in8the mait`argument()r
orks and PresuPP siti ns

vhCrC refercncc nct

of thc original text are a ncCcssary conditi n f r dra ing thc rcFel

nF iIl,P`iccIFic

ns

m the tcxt

ThC Pcnin Passage f Hcmin:way

ProvidCs a good examPlc f
di rent signi

r tsl

s story ThC Killcrs

(Hen1ingway1938)

o rcasons: hrst,bccausc its analysis highhghts thc

cance cohcsi n and c hcrcnce markcrs ll ight carry in thc translation

f onc Particular tcxt, and scc nd, bccausc the c hcrcncc of this tcxt hinges on

%miliarity with a sccmingly almost i ial rcfcrcncc nctwork

Thc Killcrs

s rlInfFisJ

Thc(loor of Hcnry s lunch ro m oPcnCd

lCn C mcjn

and r,

Thc sat do :n at

thc c untcr,

1 What s

yoursP

GcOrgc askcd tl)cm

(Fft

brc

sr1c an im nixnsu(two men

cntc1 cd)

sHIFTS OF COHESION AND COHERENCE

d n t kn w,

Vhat

ne

gfFhc mcn s id,

do you want to eat AlP

Outsidc

299

am axad haana im
(s d ne ofthc mcn)

it was gctdng dark.Thc strcet hght

came on ou idc thc wind w Tll

,,,en at the c

11ei

unter lcad thc mcnu,

Fr lll thc thcr

haana 111(thC two

mcn)

end fthc c untcr

Nick Adams watchcd thcm Hc had

bccn talking to Georgcvhcn thcy
carne n

ll
3
I

ha c a r ast

Pork tCnderl invith

aPPlc sauce and mashcd P tat cs/

hc
F ,,L,n sc9id

4
It isn t rcady yct.

5 XN/hat thc hell do you Put it n thc

card f rP

6 That s thc dh1ner, GcOrge exPlaincd,

amal h"o hali

on(said tllc

Hrst n an)

You can gct that at six o clock

7
Thc

cl ck sa s twcnt

svc, Fhc se

It

st vCntV

9
Oh,t11c

minutt,s PaSt

nd mdn sdid,

cni(tl c
amar h ha
sccond ma11sai(l)

minutcs fast

hcll with thc dock,

rJ,c

ia,dn s jd.

hat ha c you got to cat'

10
I can givC you any kind
11

am hal

n lthc nrst
har

man said)

ichcs/
f sand

Gcorgc sald.

You can have han1and cggs,bac n

and eggs,li er and bacon or a stcak,

12 Give n1c ChiCkcn cr qucttcs 'ith

green Pcas and cream saucc and mashed

13

P tato

That s

thc dinncr

(HCmingway1938,Hcbrcw crsion
by R Nofand Y swarts)
cati n and co-rcfcrcncc
the xt onc lor thc two mc11 Who arc n tidcntiscd bv namc(u111Css
mcntioncd by cach othcr)and thC SCc nd for thc Pc Plc prcscnt in thc lunchr on1,

vh arc named and rcfcrrcd t b namc This obvi us(liffercncc in co-rcfcrcncc

nct
orks hclPs t sCt uP thc t v mcn as thc strangers and estabhshes thc

Thc c hcsi c dc ice consists of t vO seParatc scts of idcnti

nct orks n

s Point f ic`v as that of t11c Pc PlC vithin thc lunchr n1 Thc pcrsPCctivC
cstabhshcd ah cad in the nrst scntcncc_- tvvo mcn Camc in causes a problcn`f r
story

Hcbrc v nl in d1is kcy scntcncc The vcrb used

enter
(lChikanes), othCr visc an aPPropriate choicc, is neutral to thc PresuPP Sition
f

translation int

PersPCctlvC
For the rest ofthc PassagC,d c simPhcit ofthc co-rcfcrential(lcvice lcnds itsclf
casil t translation, Thc rcfcrence nct vork is translated alrnost vord f r vord to
Hcbre and thus comPenSatcs for thc l ss in persPectivC in thc nrst scntcnce of thc
storv,

300 sHOsHANA BLUM-KULKA

On thc thcr hand, dcri ing d1c rcle ant imPhcati ns m this text, ic
buildiI1g a cohcrcnt intcrPrCtation,ncccssitates fa 1iharity vith ccrtain l,rcSuPPosi^
tions
hich ha cto d

vith sirnPlC,evcryday kn dcdgc oft11c Physical utlay and

bchavioral norms of Amcrican lunchro ms In thc cxchangc takin Placc bct vcCn
the
vncr ofthc lunchr n1,GcOrgc,and thc t v lncn :ho c11tcr,thC accclcrath1g
|ension and thrcat embcddcd in thc rncn s aPPcarancc,to be rcvcalcd as a rcal thrcat
latcr on,is transn1ittcd thr ugh a dialogue ccntercd on thc rdering of food

To undcrstand thc intcractional balance and indircct sPccch acts of this

cxchangc, thc rcadcr l as to bc ablc to dra v the aPPr Priate inferences from a
convcrsation ovcrtly conccrncd ith f od, and covertly ccntering on the issue of
Cr Through this exchangc, thc t vo men disPlay an a:gressivc attitudc hich
P

is rnct1)ya corrcct , c cn aPPCaSing,bchavior on the lDart of GcOrgc By thc cnd

ofthc cxchangc,thc incquahty bct veen particiPants l)Cc mcs clcar, vith
thc1ucn
Ss

as aggrcss rs,posscssh1g thrcatcning Po /cr o cr all othcr ParticiPants.

To follow thc Pr ccss by hich the intcraction unfolds,it is in1P rtant t reahze

hic11n1Ovcs in the dial guc constitute a challcngc and hich are attemPts at coop
erati c

bchavior I xl ould likc tO sug8est that in Part such undcrstanding hiI1ges On

familiarity with t11c cultural PrcsupPositi()ns of tllc st ry,thc lack

f whch m ht

lead to inaPProPriatc infcrcnccs

Thc systcn atic challcnging inhercnt in the t
thcir vi lati ns of convcrsational rulcs, i e by

mcn s rnoves is trans1ittcd by

iolations of()ricean(GricC 1975)

n1axiIns of relevancc, 111anncr, quantit) and quahty, A closc exan1ination of tbc

PaSSage, turn by turn, unfolds this ProccSs
In turn3thcrc is a subtlc
i lation of rnanner:instcad of naming thc ordcr(
ll

havc dlc.

maly,thC rst man rcads out f1 m thc mcnu the hll dcsc1 il)
tion of thc dish rdcrcd T thc n n-An1crican ear,this clcscription n1ight suggcst
)aS CuSt

an clab ratc dish t bc ass ciatcd with %nc restaurants. Thc Alucrican rcadcr,

accustomcd t thc en 1,ellished stylc in

hich f
d is listed in the si1uplest of
An1c
ican rcstaurants,rccognizes thc

rdcr as sOmcthing quite con11non Thus,the

n ofd1c Or(lcr by Gcorge i11tun 4n1ight bc i11terPrctcd in two diffcre11t
'ays,depending on sharcd r non~sha1 ed background kn
vledgc Thc rcader
h

rClccti

is i1nPrcssCd by thc namc ofthc dish n ight vondcr at thc f dn t bcing a ailable
uP n

rder at a PrcSumably fancy 1 cstaurant, thus PcrhaPs ndimg thc Ovcrtl

challcnging qucstlon f turn5jusdnablc,Actually,Gcorgc is acung Perkcdy within

11is rights (ic being c oPcrati C) by relying on tlac acccptcd cust

di1111cr

of having

and n n~dinncr foods since this division is also Pr bably listcd on thc

menu,his cust lucrs dchberatc rcfusal to accePt this n rn1bcc mcs a thrcatcnil)g
challcngc, Thus, turn 12 iolatcs thc n axirn f rclevance l)y Pcnly ign ri11g the

dinncr rdcr c nstraint

Thus, knowlcdgc of two cttltural schcmcs sccms to bc imP

rtant r this

cxchangc- thc rclativc fancyncss ornon-f ncyness of thc dishes Incnti ned and
thc cultural n rm f

ha ing a ti1nc lilnit f

r dinncr and non~dinner rders.Thc lack

fb th n1ight transR)r1u thc intcractional balancc dcPicted in thc story iom onc in
icth1 s, to
tcntial

vhich one Party rCPrcsents thc aggrcssors and thc othcr thc l)
r less On an cqual f oting and l) th arc
one in
vhich thc txs o pa1 tics are morc
challenging cach othcr

SHIFTS OF COHES10N AND COHERENCE

301

C)l)viously, thc last P ssibility is cxaggcratcd, since thcrc arc further

indicat rs in thc dial guc Ior tbc cust

vcrt

s refusal to abidc by the rule (seC turns

lu cr

7-9on thc discussion of thc til,lc)YCt,thc grasPing of thc full scope f indircct
ailable to thc rcadcr vho sharcs dlc

n1eanings convcycd in this cxchangc is only a

text

s cultural PresuPP
Tl)ere is n

siti ns

t 11uch

thc translator can d

occasional rcfcrcnccs to spcci

to ren1cd this situation, Contrar to

c rcfcrcnts, hich can bc pr idcd by diffcrcnt tcch-

niqucs, thc naturc of cultural instituti

ns, as is thc casc in this st

ry,is l ot eas y
f cohcrcncc in translation arc to somc cxtcnt una oidablc,unlcss thc translator is normadvcly free to

cxPlaincd in a f

otl

tc

It lt,llo vs that rcadcr-f cuscd slllRs

transPlant thc tcxt fr 1n ne cultural en

ironmcnt to another.

2.2 rcxr. CusCd shD s oFcc,hercnce

j

it:

Thc(hfferencc in the translator s role in rcgard to1 cadcr~bascd vcrsus tcxt_bascd

shiRs f cohcrcncc can bc sccn as that

ft
o

types c)fn cdical Practicc For rcader~

bascd shifts, the translator is in thc Position of the Practitioncrs of Prc

mcdicinc:his role is to forescc thc P ssibihtics

f damagc

cntivC

to intcrPrctation in the

TL and t aPPly mcans to mi11imizc them

Vith rc:ard to tcxt bascd shiRs,d1c
translator is in thc Positi n f thc Physician adn1inistcring trcatn ent: in d is arca,
accurate diagnosis is thc necessary rst c nditi n to successful trcatrllcnt, In othcr
vords, text-bascd shifts fc hcrence Rcn occur as a rcsult()f Particular choiccs

madc by a sPcci c translat r,choices that indicatc a lack of a vareness on thc translat r

s Part of the sL text s lneaning P tcntial

n differcnccs
In Part, tCxt-bascd shifts fc hcrcncc arc hnkcd to
C -kn
bct rccn linguisdc systcms Yct I v uld likc to suggest that thc most scHous shiRs
occur not due to thc direrences as such,but bccausc thc translator failcd to rcahzc
thc functions a Pa icular linguistic systcI ,or a pa1 ticular forI ,plays in con cying
ving cxamPlc illustrates this Point:
indircct rncanings in a gi cn text Thc f ll

10
rE fisl,,
A

Do vou

B: N
A

thanks,rcally I can

B: No,look(
/\

t,

C)h,con)c on You c becn t

church,ha c
somc coffcc,

t b

:ant to comc inP

a re vard

)Y

Have

rc a(loll l,ut

I got this wik now.

I beg your Pard n

avcke ct shxa a(I m(I

ask y ur Pa1

,.)

n)

But thanks,anyxl:a

(John UPdike1960 223,Hcl)rew

In thc dial gue
n

cr on

by E KasPi)

bctwccn a man and a oman in UpdIkc s Rdbbir Run,t11cm or

cssages arc bcing transn1ittcd indircctly Thc cohercncc of thc(]ial guc l,ingcs on

rclatlng a sct of hnPhcati ns to cach other

nrst,that thc wOman s(A)in ita on

302

sHOsHANA BLUM-KULKA

must havc bccn intcrPretCd by thc n1an (B)aS rcfcrring to somcthing clse beyond
fhich
c ffce, and second, that it is the imPhed rathCr than thc stated invitation
hc dcdincs by 1cntioning his wik,The woman s rcaCtlon in turn5~ I bcg your
~ n1ight bc con cyin8 a nun11)cr of diffcrent indircct speech acts shc
Pard n
1ight bc sh
ving indignation at bcing, l)1 csumably,rnisintcrprctcd; she 1i:ht bc
aP logi'ing for having n)adc thc tr, or she n1i ht be sirnply si8nalli11g non~
c n1Prchensi

n, As the story continucs, thc

v man

a11grily slams the door in thc

an s hcc Thus contcxt rules out thc last two intcrPrCtauons and thc rcader is lcR

vas she mad bccausc hc had turncd d /n a Pr P Sition,

to puzzlc vith thc hcr
1

or bccausc he had sho vn that he had thought shc had madc

224) ThC
( r I

(UPdikc 1960:

ll ask) lor y ur Pardon , T11is PhraSc is habitually uscd for aP

Sl htl)

logi'ing in a

hrmd way,T11us,in Hel)rcw,t11c voman is hcard as aP l gizing br ha ing

madc the ffcr, Hcncc thc translation is sho :n

ti

neP

Hcbrc :translation for I beg your Pardon n1cans literally, nl askiL1g

c oPtions

to li1nit thc(

al gue

s interPrcta-

Furthcrm rc it should bc notcd that givcn thc c ntcxt ofthc dialoguc,

this n1istranslati n causcs a shift in the text s structure of cohcrcncc, lcavi11g the

r thc TL readcr too

er the 'on1an s anger a real Puzzlc f

hcr s puzzle

Tl)rec hrther PasSagcs iom d1c Hct)rc v translati n of Pintcr sO`d TI ,,cs

CC)I)Si(l

cred earher Pro ide a further examplc

11
s

I rF cb'c"

lEn`^J,l

A12345

Deele : An idca vhat she drh1ksP

Katc;Nonc
Deelcy shc lnay bC a cgctarian
Katc

Ask hcr

Dcclcy:It s too latc You c al1 cady

mcuxar111ida at k ar

c
kcd

cttavsil sil hakascrol clax,

v ur casscrolc,

bi alt

cs

bazc galll basar cgan1ycrak t

Pausc

(It

s to

latc Y u vc alrcady

oked our casscrolc dish

It contains both e8ctables and

meat,)
/hy isn

tshe n arriedP I mean, vhy

inging hCr husband?

Ask hcr

isn t shc l)1

Katc

B
1

Dccle :Y u ha cn t secn hcr fc)r

t

vcnty ycars

Katc You vc

ncvcr secn hcr Thcrc s

a diffcrcncc.

Pausc
Deeley At lcast thc casser le is big

lcfaxot sir hakascr l rnasPik

cnough for f ur

learba a(at least thc casscrolc

Kate:You said shc was a

Pausc

cgcta1 ian

dish is bi:en ugh for f ur)

SHIFTS OF COHEsION AND COHERENCE

303

C
1

Dcclc N 0rk takes nle axx aV

quitc of1cn,of coursc But Kate stays

here
Anna
Fou ha c a vondcrful

yc

casscrolc

ha e

Deelcv
VhatP

Anna Ilncan
ik,Aw ndcrhl

w"

lcxa kasscrol nina(y u

a wond hl casscrolc),

so sOrr

(PintCr1971,Hcb1

v VCrsion by R Kislc

Thc Hrst tirnc Dcclcy rncntions casscrolc hc and Katc arc still talking ab ut a third,

PrCsumably n n~prcscnt Pcrs n, (Dn onc lcvcl, thc phrasc

you

c cookCd your

casscrolc is a Pcrf ctly rclc ant commcnt in thc cliscussion about aPProPriatc f

od

'cgctarian gucst, assu lling, of coursc, that thc dish c ntains1neat

for a Possibly

The translator,apParentlyorricd that hcr Hcbrc

d111ot ha c a a ablc
`readers

the relcvant lncat casscrolc schcn1a, t k Pains t CxPand thc tcxt by

ay of
CxPlanation But, though thc sPcciic ingrcdicnts of the dish thus bcc mc crystal
clcar, thc m rc hnPortant indircct mcssagc con cycd by this linc is c mplctely
l st Thc fact that Dceley is n t solcly c nccrncd vith c
king is hintcd at by thc

aPParCnt changc of toPic in his ncxt "nc C VN hy isn t she n1arricd, ctc, ) and

reinf rccdvith fkIrthcr references t

casseroles in tcxt B and C. The real issue
'itll hcr w man

discussccl sccms to bC K e s prekrence rmriage o er h

iend, Anna Basically, thc Play c nccrns a triang1c, ` hcrc busband and h iend,
vif Vicvcd h1 tl)is contcxt, Dcelcy s
Anna, arc invol cd in a strugglc o cr
change oft Pic l m food to marriagc is quitc coherent,as wcll as hs rckrcncc to

a casscrolc big cn ugh for four in turn B3 At somc P int during thc rst act,
Anna turns f1

m thc window,sPcal lng,and m ves

d wnt Katc and Dcelcy j in_

ing in thc con crsation, Follo ving comn1cnts about the housc and the silcncc,
she says, You have a 'ondcrful casser le (turn C2) Quitc bviously,by this third

rcfercnce to

casscrolc d1c rcadcr

r hstcncr is not cven pcrn1ittcd a htcral

intcrprctation Sincc thc translat r optcd for litcral1neaning only on t v prc ious
occasions,thc o erall shift of cohcrcncc in thc play is ine itablc
It has oRcn bcen n tcd(G ff1nan1976;Gricc1975)that natural convcrsations

havc a rcsidual ambiguity,

bscure, vhilc vhat

vhcrcby
s sdid Can, on closer analysis, scem
vhat

is mc nr is usually bvious and clcar,Thc rnain P int I tried t

arguc in rcspcct to shiRs of c

hcsi n

and cohercnce in translation can bc sun11uar-

i'cd by contrasting thc ProccSs ftranslatjon vith that f natural discoursc:contrary

to natWd disc sc,trt rldatic,ll is a Pm ss w"csh wh is s jd migllt bccon)c
obvious and clear, vhilc
hat is m clnr lnight bccomc vaguc and bscure

3 The need1or empirical studics

The discussion of shiRs fc hcsion and cohcrcncc PresCntcd abovc has bccn dcrivcd
fr n1 t

basic assun1Ptions 6rst, that translation is a Proccss that

pcrates on

rcxrs(rathCr than 0rds r scntenccs) and hCncc its product8 nccd to bc studicd

304 sHOsHANA BLUM-KULKA

ithin the l1 amcvvork of discoursc analVsis; and scc nd,that translation is an act

fc lmrnunication, and hcnce both its proccssCs, Pr ducts and effects can and
nccd to l)c studicd emPirically`vithin thc n1cth d l gical framc v rk of studics in

comlnunlcatlon
I havc attcn1Ptcd t

dC

cl

p this aPPr ach thCOrctically by suggcsting thc

hcrcncc and thc tyPcs f ShiRs

:ould likc to c nCludc by
rc_cxan ining thc distincti ns offcrcd from an cnrlPirical standP int,iC,,to considcr
thc
ays in vhich emPirical
ahdati nn1ight bc sought f r all rs mc ofthc trans_
disth1cti n bctxxccn shifts of cohcsion and shiRs of c
that I Dight

occur

ithin each f thcsc lnajor catcgorics I

lation shRs Postulated

As conccrns shiRs fc hcsi n in translati n,I ha c argued for a need to cxalYlinc
d c

c=`Qct

f thc usc of cohcsi c fcaturcs in translati n n the TL tcxt s leVcl f

cxphcitness and on the TL tcxt s vert n1canil)g(s), aS c mParcd to the sL tcxt,

Possiblc changcs in lc`cls

f cxPhcitness throu:h translati n 'erc postulatcd t

occur cithcr as a rcsult of di

renccs in styhstic PrcfCrcnccs bct vcen t vo languagcs

(iC , onc language sho hng a tcndency for higher levels

cohesion)or as a rcsult of an cxPhcitati

f1 cdundancy thr ugh

n Process suggested to bc inhcrcnt to trans_

T cstabhsh thc rclati c

ahdity()f thcsc hyp thcscs it vould bc necessary
rst carry out a largc-scalc contrasti c styhstic study(in a i cn rc8istcr)to cstab_

lati n.
t

hsh c hcsivc PattCrns in sL and TL, and thcn to cxan1inc translati

ns to and fr

b th languagcs to invcstigatc shifts in cohcsi c lcvcls that occur thr ugh translati

Such studicsvill nccd to cstabhsh indcPcndcntly (1)thC Prcfcrcnccs in ch ice

of c hcsivc tics in a given rcgistcr in lan ua:cA;(2)thC
re

I>rcfcrcnccs i11thc ParallCl

:istCr in languagc B;(3)the shiRs in cohesive ties in translatcd tcxts of thc same

rc ster i m

languagc A to B,a11d icc versa

ill

In considcring tcxts in languagcs

have

`and B indcpendcntly,such
nd`ch iccs fstudics
to differcntiatc clcarly bCtvcen obfiJ F
cohcsivc tics:ie,
9 and
choiccs dictatcd by thc gramn1atical systcms
f thc t v languagcs as
`ri
t thosc attributable tO styhstic PrcfCrcnccs In considcrh1g translatcd
tcXts frolli A to B and
icc
crsa, only thc oPFioncz chojccs should bc taken into

bct /een

c mParcd

account, sincc only thcsc can bc lcgitirnately uscd as cvidcncc f r sho vit1g ccrtain
trcnds in shifts of cohcsion throu8h translation
ould reveal diffcrences in PattCrns of cohesion dc/oss
Grantcd that thc study
thc tx
languagcs

cxamincd,thc exan1ination of thc translati

ns coukl thcn rc cal

any of thc foll :ing:

1

that c hesivc PattCrns in TL tcxts tcnd t

r,,drc thc norn1s f

L tcxts
P`rox

fthc samc re8istCr,

2

that c hcsi c PattCrns in TL tcxts tend to rcHcct n

re cr,whcll may l,e dtlc to ProtCsscs o

rms of SL tcxtsin the san1c

rrcIIaJ%r oPCratl

tl C

tratlda~

tion
3

that c hcsivc pattcrns in TL texts arc11cithcr TL nor sL nor

1s oricntcd,but
forn1a systc1n of thcir0 :n,Possibly indicating a process of exPhcitati n

Bet vcen lan uageS that d

n t diffcr substantially in their c

hcsi e

Patterns either

8ran)1natically r styhstically, shiRs in c hcsivc Pattcrns thrugh translation fron1

cithcr TL r SL norms could be c nsidercd cvidencc f r hyPothcsis 3, PosSil)l)

sHIFTS OF COHEs10N AND COHERENCE

305
th gran)-

indicating Pr ccsses of cxphcitation For languagcs that sceI11to differ b

matically and styhstically, as in the case of Hcbrc
Pr bably lu

rc exPhCit cohCsively than the

translations int

v and Enghsh,and vhcrc Onc is

vards exPhcitati n in
ther, a trcnd t

Hcbre v could be considercd as cvidencc R)r both 11yPothcSCS 2

(i.e ans r)and 3 (iC., cxplicitation) H

wCvCr,f thc samc shiRs in

Prcferenccs of lcxical c hcsion cr gralt11natical cohcsion arc als

rcvcrse dirccti n, ic , in translatl ns

f1 ol,1

f und

HCbrcx1. to English, this ll

that a Pr ccSs f CxPhcitati n is indecd taking Place in translati

As conccrns shifts of cohcrcncc in translation,I ha

ol ng

in thc

uld n1can

c argucd for a nccd t distin-

ccn rc dc'-bdscd shiRs,

vhich occur as a rcsult of a tcxt bch1g read by
guish bct
hich ccur as a result of thc
culturall (hffcrcnt audicnccs and FcxF~lD scd shiRs,
translation proccss Pcr sC In both cascs,such shiRs are th ught of as affccting thc
tCxt

s rnCaning Potcntia1,

Hcncc,in thc study of such shilts,thc analysis of tcxts should bc follo vcd by
vords, I adv catc a psychohnguistic
an invcstigation of tcxt cffccts In othcr

aPProach to thc study of translation cfFccts. Only such an apPr

ach, follo ving

as

an

rcltItC clain1s PcrtainiI)g to shiRs of mcani

1g

general (hscourse-oricntcd Psychohnguistic studics of tcxt processing(suc1

Dijk an(l Kintsch1983)can alidatc r

thr ugh translati

n. For exanrlPlC,a study of PossiblC shifts in indircct mcanings in

translation should establish (a)t11e intcrPrCtations agreed on in regard to a Particu-

lar tcxt by a hom gcn us grouP ofrcadcrs in thc SL;(b)thc interPrCtations agrccd
on by a Parallcl grouP ofreadcrs in the TL Should thc rcsults indicatc a rnismatch
bctvccn thc t vo sets of intcrPrctati ns,

these in turn might indicate eithcr rcadcr-

bascd r tcxt-bascd shiis of c hcrcncc

With thc cxccption ofson c PrChn1inary attcn11)ts in this dirccti

n(sarig1979),

date this PaPer being no cxcePtion~tcnd t base thcir clairns

n1ostlv on Contrasti e textual analvsis Yet,further ad anccs in thc el 1of translation sccn1to dcpcnd on a clcarcr c nccPtuahzati n,through Cmpirical rcscarch,of
translation studics t

the Pr ccss0f intcraction l,et veen tcxts and rcaders in both thc sourcc and targCt

languages

Chapter 24

Lor

Chamherlain

GENDER AND THE METAPHORICS

OF TRANSLATION

n TJ
I
(E

sI i{

: :F ; : iy

I :

:11

cn ifI am n t a creativc artist,still I am rccrcadng),1 VhilC shc Playcd an cn r~

mously imP rtant rolc rcProducing her husband s v rkS,both in c ncert and latcr
in preparing cditions of his ork, she vvas als a comPoscr in hcr0 vn right; yet
until rccently,historians have f cused n only nc comP sCr in this fa 1ily Indccd,
as fcn1h1ist scholarshiP has amPly dem nstratcd, convcntional rcPrcsCntations of
vhetbcr artistic, social, ccon 1nic, or pohtical_ ha c l)ccn gui(lcd by a

on1cn
cultural ambivalencc about thc P ssibilit) of a vvoman artist and about thc status of

Von1an

s
vork

shc could n tbca

In thc casc of Clara Scbumann,it is ironic that nc f thc reasons

m re

productl e c 1Poser is that shc vas kcPt busyvith thc

cight childrcn shc and Robcrt schumann produccd t gcthcr

Fro111our antagc lDoint vvc recognizc clain1s that thcrc arc no8rcat von1cn

artists as cXPrcssi ns of a gcndcr-bascd paradign1 conccrning thc disPositi n of

Po vcr in tlle fan1ily and thC statc As fcn1inist rcscarch3 oln a varicty of discil)lincs
opp sition bct veen Productivc and rcpr ducti crk organizcs the

vn,thc
has sh

ay a culturc alucs vork this paradigm dcpicts originahty or crcati ity in tcrms
f Patcrnity and authority, rclcgating thc gurc of thc fcmalc t a varicty of
sccondary rolcs I am intcrcstcd in this

PP siti n sPe(i cally as it is uscd t luark

nc t be

the distinction bct

ccn `Vriting and translating_luarki11g, that is, the

o ginal andmascuhnc, thc othcr t bc dcri ative and lt,lninine Thc djstinction

suPerhcially a Problem f acsthctics, f rt11crc are imPortant consequcnceS

hat I
in thc arcas of Pubhshing, r yalties, curriculun and acadcn1ic tcnure
is nly

1988

GENDER AND TH

METAPHORICS OF TRANsLATION

proPosc here is t cxan1inc hat is at stakc for gcndcr in the rc`rescn

lati n

307
crion of trans~

thc strugglc for auth rity and thc pohtics of originahty inf rn1ing this

strugglc

At best an echo/ 2 translation has bccn Hgurcd htcrally and mctaPhorically

in scc ndary

terms Ju as Clara schumann s Per rman of a musicd comP(

tion is sccn as quahtatively(li trcnt fron1thc riginal act fcomP sing that PiecC,

so thc act f translating is

icved as s mcthing qualitativcly diffcrcnt from thc
original act f vriting Indccd,undcr currcnt Amcrican copyright la v,both trans~
lations and musical Pc1 for1nanccs arc trcatcd undcr the samc rubric of

3Thc cultural clab

v rks

rati n oF this vic

deri ati c

v suggcsts that in the riginal abides

vhat is natural,truthful,and la vful,in the c Py,vhat is arti cial,f lsc,and trcas n~

ous Translati ns can bc,R)r cxample,ech es(in musical tcrms),c Pies or P rtra s
(in P llter tcrmS), rb
wcd r ill thg dc,thing(in sa orial ttSrms)
The scxuahzati n f translati n aPPears l)erhaPS most fan1iharly in thc tag
Fcs bc`` sjfd
hkc w m cn,tht,adagc pes,tralldauolls sh uld bc0tlacr bt att-

dhl r th`es
l Thc tag is madc Possil,lc b th by thc rhymc in Frcnch and by thc
%ct tht thc wold rrddu on is a
P

ssiblC

~to morc than Ph

Orlc,tllus mabr1 : es b dux i11

da`es im~
as coined in thc scvcntcenth ccntury+

mIl i11c

This tag owcs its longevity

it

nCtic Si1uilarity: vvhat gi cs it thc aPpcarancc of truth is that it

has caPturcd a cultural con1Phcity bct vecn thc issucs of Hdchty in translati

n and
ro c Fc l cs bcF`csjfd es,H llty is dt s dl)y tala imPh0t colltr t bctween
tlanshdon(aS w man)and riginal( husband,hther,c)r author) Howevcr,thc
in mt

us doublc standard PcratCs hcrc as it nlight ha e in traditi nal1narriages

i /translation is Publicly tric(l r crimes thc husband/
nd is
"t11ful
" tl)c
by law incaPable
fc mmitting This contract,in sholt,makes it imPossil)lC
infan

theun

original t be gu ty

of inHdchty such an attitudc betrays rcal anxicty ab ut thc

vhcrc
Problcln of Patcrnity and translati n;it n iluics thc Patrilineal kinshiP systcn
Paternity not lnatcrnity legitin1izcs an offsPri11g
It is thc strugglc for thc right of Paternity, rcgulating thc

dchty of transla~

tion,
hich vvc scc articulated b thc earl of R scon11uon in his sc cntccnth-centurY

treatisc on translation, In ordcr to guarantcc thc originahty of thc translator

v rk, surcly necessary in a patcrnity casc, thc translator11 ust usurp thc author s

role R sc lurnon bcgins bcnignly cnough, ad ising thc translator t

Chusc an

author as y u chusc a iend, but this intirnacy scr cs a P tCntially sub crsivc
Pu1 P

SC

unitcd by this SymPathctick B

nd,

You gro Falnihar,Indn1atc,and nd;

/ords,your stilcs,your souls agrcc,
Y ur th ughts,your
N

ngcr his IntcrPretCr,but Hc,5

st sdcnt dcPosition: throu h fan1iharity (friCndshil)), thC translat

bcc mcs,as it
cre,Pa of thc hmily and nally the hthcr himsdf whatcvcr
It is an aln

strugglc therc might be l

ct vccn

author and translat

r is =eilcd

l)y thc languagc()f

friendshiP xlvhilc thc translator is hgurcd as a lnalc, thc tcxt itsclf is hgurcd as a
f`e1nalc

hosc chastity n ust bc Protcctcd

308

LORI cHAMBERLAIN
d

With ho
`lnuCh case is a young Musc Betray
H nice the RcPutau n fthe Maid!
Your carly,l nd,Patcrnal care aPPCars,
B

chast Instruction of hcr Tcndcr Ycars

Thc nrst Imprcssion in hcr Inhnt Brcast

V l bc thc dccPest and sh uld bc thc best
Lct no Austcrit breed scrvilc Fcar
N
vanton sund ofFcnd hcr Virgin Ear,6

As d1e translator becon cs d1c author,he incurs ccrtain patcrnal dutics in relati n

to thc tcxt,to Protcct and instruct~or PerhaPs structurc~it Thc languagc uscd
cchocs thc languagc f conduct books and rcflects attitudcs about thc ProPcr direr~
cnces in cducating111ales and fcn`alcs; chast Instruction is ProPer f r thc female,

vh sc irginity is an csscntial Prcrequisitc to marriage T11c tcxt, that blank Pagc

Will bc the dccPcsr,), is
bcaring thC auth r s imPrint( Thc rst ImPrcsSi n
irnP Ssibly t

vicc virgin -oncc for thc riginal author,and again for thc transIat r

:ho has takcn11is PlacC

hich rcsol cs

It is tbis cbastity

or rcPrCssCs~t11c

strugglc l0r Patcrnity7

Thc gcndcring of translation by this languagc of Patcrnahsll1 is n1adc morc

CxPhcit in thc ci8htCCnth-ccntury trcatisc On translation by Thomas Franckhn
unlcss an aud1or likc a 1istrcss varms,
H w shall wc hidc his huks or tastc his charn1s,
1odcst latcnt bcautics nd,
Ho v all his
Hoxx:trace eaCh l vchcr fcaturc fthc

1ind,

Softcn cach blcn1ish,and cach gracc imPro

C,

And trcat hi u xsith thc(lignity of1~ovcP:

Like thc earl of R

sc mmon,

ho

Francklin rcPrCsCnts thc translator as a male

usurPS thc role of thc author,a usurPation

111atical gender and is1 cs lVCd thr ugh

vhich takcs placc at thc lcvcl of gran

a sex changC Thc t anslator is figurcd as a

malc scducer;thc auth r,conflatcd vith the con cntionally fcn1ininc featurcs f
his tcxt,is thcn thc n istress/ and the n1ascuhne Pron un is forccd to rcfcr t the
fcn1ininc attributcs of the text(

his

rnodcst latcnt beautics ) In c nfusing d1c gcndcr

ofthc author vid1the ascribcd gendcr fthe text,Franckhn translatcs thC Crcati c
r lc F

thc author into thc PasSi C rolc of thc tcxt,rcnderin8thc auth r rclati el)

Po vcrlcss in rclati n to thc translator,Thc author~tcxt,no

Van1istrcss,is flattcrcd

and seduccd by thc translator s attcntions, bcc rning a illing collaborat r in thc
ls

ProjCtt to makc hclsclf bcauuhl~and,no d ubt,unhitllhl

Ths bcf`e il
id
c,whosc l,lcmisl es hf km soknedalld who bct udcs ha t
thcrcforc bccn imProved, iS dcPictCd l d1as n1ist1 css and as a P rtrait n1odc1, h1
using thc PoPular Painting analogy,Franckhn als

revcals the gcndcr coding of that

tracc
mirnctic convcntion:thc translator/painter rnust scducc the text in ordcr t
vC scc a morc clal)oratc crsion of thi`

atures of his suL,Ject

( anslate)the f

convcntio1 ,though 11c arguing a different position on thc subjcct ofirnprovcmcnt

translation, in William Co vPcr s Prcfacc to Hon1cr s J i d Should 3

f a bcautihl w man,g c hcr morc r
P nter,Pr ssing to draw thC hkcncss
dlr ugh

GENDER AND THF METAPHORICs OF TRANSLATION

fe

309

ver fcaturcs than bel ng to her, and a general cast f countcnancc of his
vn

invention,hc n1ight bc said to ha c ProducCd a Jcu d csPrir, a curiosity Perhaps in

its
ay,but

by no mcans thc lady in quCStion CovPcr argucs for sdchty to thc

bcauuhl m dd,lext tllc

d

riF, r,to

anslati n

hllow thc tcxt yet h

dcmcan hcr,rcducing hcr to a m e cu

hcr,makc h

m ns ous C vC hCr m K r

!iJ : I l1
r1
::fl : :lF
:f1 I : :
In any casc, likc the carl fR scon11non and Franckhn, C
vPcr fcIninizcs the
tcxt and Inakcs hcr rcPutati n~that is,hcr sdchty thc rcsP nsibility of thc lnale
1

il

translator/auth
Ju

tt

r,

x a

conventlonal| guKd in mhinc rms,so too is language:

And /hen acsthctic dcbatcs shiRcd thc f cus in thc latc

cightccnth ccntury fron Pr blcms of rniFncsis to th sc of cxPrcSSion~in A/1 H
Abrams shm us tcrms, m thc n rr r to the lamP discussions of translad n
our

rnothcr t nguc,

follo
Cd suit Thc translat

s rclationshiP to this1nothcr hgurc is outhncd in sOmc

ofthc same tcrms that vc ha c alrcady seen

mcntd ProblCm rcm ns

rclati nshiPs and thcir Pr

dchty and chastityand the hnda~

thc samc how to rcgIllatc lt, umatc scxual(autho"al)

gcny

A rCPrCsCntati c cxamPlC(lcpicting translation as a problem f hdchty to dlc

rnother t nguc occurs in the

vork f Schlciermachcr,
h se

t vin

intcrcsts in

translation and hcrmencutiCs ha c l)cen in uential in shaping translati n theory in

this ccntury In discussin:the iSsuc of maintaining thc essential forcignness of a tcxt
in translation,schlcicrn acher outhnes vhat is at stake as f

Wh
v uld

ll vvs

n t likc t pcrn1it his mother tonguc to stand forth c

cry

hcre in thc rn st uni crsally aPpcaling bcauty each gcnre is caPablc o

h
v uld n t rathcr sirc childrcn
ho arc their Parcnts Purc cf gy,

and not bastardsP ,

h
v uld sucr bcing accuscd, likc thosc
:ho abandon thcir ch drcn t acrobats, f bending his mothcr
Parents
tonguc to foreign and unnatural dislocati ns instcad of skillfully cxcrcis~
lng it In Its o

vn natural gynnnastlcs.10

Thc translator,as fathcr,1nust bc truc to thc lll

thcr/languagc in rder to Pr ducC

lldrcn thcrwisc,hc will ProducC

`pon8;if
attcmpts
to sirc
cl tonguc is conccivcd ofas natural,
bastards t nly
for thchCcircus
Becausc
thc lnother
lcgitimatc o

any tamPering vith it~any inHdChty is sccn as unnatural,impurc, m nstrous,

and i 11n ral Thus,it is naturar

lav

vhich rcquircs rnonogamous relations in ordcr

to maintain the( bcauty of thc language and in ordcr t

insurc that thc vorks be

gcnuine r original Though his rcfcrcncc to bastard children lnakcs clear that he is
conccrned ovcr thc Purity f the mothcr tongue, hc is als conccrncd vvith thc

Lcgitirnacy has littlc to(l

vith m thcrho d and m re t
PatCrnity of thc tcxt
,ith
the
institutional
ackn
/ho is the
do
vlcdgment of fathcrh d Thc qucstion,

rcal fathcr f thc tcxt? sccms to motivatc thcsc concerns about b th t lc dcht
f the translation and the Purity of thc langua c
ln thc mctaPh rics f translation, thc strugglc for aud rial rights takcs Placc
b th in thc rcalln f thc fan1ily, as
c havc sccn, and in thc statc,for translati n
has also bccn gured as thc litcrary cquivalcnt fc lonization,a mcans of enriching

310

LORI cHAMBERLAIN

both thc language and thc literaturc aPPropriatc to the Pohtical nceds of cxPandin:
nations A typical translator s Prcface fr n1thc English cightecnd1century111akcs
this cxphcit:

You, my Lord, kn0 v hO thc

vorks of gcnius li uP thc hcad fa
nation abovc hcr ncighbors,and gi

c as n1uch honor as success in arms;

among thcse vc must reckon our translations of thc classics; l)y hich

when 'c

havc naturalizc(l all Greecc and R

e,wc shall be s

much

richcr than thcy by so many ori8inal Producti ns as

c havc of ur
o vn,11

Bccause litcrary success is cquated v ith lnnitary Success,translation can cxPand l)oth

htcrary and Pohtical b rdcrs A sin1ilar attitude to

ard thc cnterprisc of translati n
ma be bund in thc German Romantics,who used(/lnc
F'Cn(to transl c)and

'crdcuFschcn

(t

Gcrmanize) intcrchangcably: translation

vas literally a stratcgy of

hnguistic incorP rati n Thc grcat modcl f r this use of translati n is, of coursc,
thc R luan EmPire,vhich s (lramatically inc rP rated Greek culturc into its() vn

For thc Romans,Nictzschc asscrts, translation`as a form ofc nqucst 2

Thcn, to , the p htics of coloniahsln o crlap si niHcantly :ith the Pohtics
ofgcndcr we havc secn s r Flora An10s shows,br cxamPlC,that duhng thc sixtccnth ccntury in England,translati n is sccn as public cluty' Thc most stunning
examPlC of vhat is c nstrued as Pubhc duty is articulatcd by a sixteenth-century
Enghsh tlansltltor of H race namcd Th mas Drant,who,in thc PrehcC to his trans
lation fthe R man

author,b ldly ann unces,

First I have noxx donc as thc PeoPlc fG d :erc comn andcd t

d
vith
e vvomcn that vcrc handsomc and beautifu I ha e sha cd
ofF his hair and Parcd off his nails, that is, I ha
c
iPed a vay all his
vanity and suPcrHuity of mattcr
I ha c En hShCd things not
according to thc vcin f thc Latin Propricty, but of his :n ulgar

thcir caPti

tonguc, , ,

I havc picccd his rcason,ckcd and mcndcd his si1n

itudcs,

molliJ,icd his hardncss, prolongcd his corta kind of sPcechcs, changed

and lnuch altcrcd his rds,but n t his sentcncc,or at lcast(I dare say)
n t his PurpoSC

13

Drant is rcc t takc the libcrtics hc hcrc dcscribes,for,as a clcrgyman translating

a secular auth

r,he must 1akc Horacc morallv suitablc:hc must transbrm him

om thc R)rcign or alien into,signiscandy,a1ember ofthc f11mily,For thc passagc

m the Biblc t which Drant alludes(Dcut 21n2~14)c ncCrns thc Pr
Per wa)
to makc a caPti e woman a wifcs
f1

Then you shall bring her h mct your h usc;

(Dcut, 21 12, Re iscd standard

and shc shall sha c hcr hcad and Parc hcr nails

Vcr on)

ARcr giving hcr a month in which t m urn, the caPtor ca11

thcn takc hcr as a vifc;but if he Hnds in her no dehght, thc Passage f rbids hinl
subscqucntly to scll hcr bccausc hc has alrcady hun1ihatcd hcr In n

aking I orace

suitablc to bccomc a vife, Drant1nust transform hltll into a voman, the uneas

eects of vhich rcmain in thc tcnsion of Pron n1inal rcfcrcncc, hcrc his sec 1s

to rcfcr t
omcn In additi n, Drant s paraphrasc makes it thc husband~

GENDER AND THE METAPHORICs OF TRANSLATION

translatOr s (lut

311

to shave and Parc rat1 cr than the duty of thc caPtivc Horace

unf rtunately,captors oRcn(hd lnuch1u rc than shavc the heads f caPti eon en
i lc11cc
(sec Num 31"7-18);thc scxual

ti n

alluded t

in this dcscripdon of ansla

Pr vidcs an analogue t the Pohtical and cc n n1ic raPCs imPhcit in a col nizi11g

n1etaPhor

Clcarly,the mcan"1g()f the ord ndchty in thc contcxt oftranslation changcs

according to thc Purposc translati n is sccn to scrvc in a largcr acsthctic or cultural
contcxt In its gcndcrcd ersion, dchty s mctirncs dc ncs thc(fCmalc)tranSlation
rclati n to thc original, Particularly to thc origina s auth r (malc), dePosed and

rcPlaccd by thc auth r(malc) f thc translation In this case,thc tcxt,ifit is a good
and bcautiful onc,must bc rCgulated against its ProPCnsity for inhdehty in ordcr t
authorize thc originahty of this Prod1`cFion Or,ndchty n1ight also dc

ne a(malc)

aud10r~translator s rclation to his(femalc)mother t ngue,the language into which

c)languagc must bc P )tcc tCd
s()n)Cthing is belllg tmndatc<l In this casc,t11c(fem
against

ilihcau n,It is,l)ara(loxicall

',this So of Hddit)'tllat can justi

t11C raPc

anothcr languagc and tcxt,as C ha c sccn in Drant, But again,this

solt of H(lclity is dcs nCd to cnHch tllc hosF languagc by ccltiIing thc oHgnali

f translati n; thc conqucst8, rnadc captive, arc inc

and Pillagc c)

rPoratcd into thc vvorks of

gcnius ofa Pa1 ticular language

It sh uld

by no` bc b ious that this mctaPhoricS f translati n rc cals l)oth

an anxicty abOut the n yths of Patcrnity( r authorshiP and auth rity)and a Pr

und

ambivalcncc about the r lc of rnaternity ranging s on1the condcmnation of`cs

bc``cs9 d
es to the acJulatir,ll t ccolClCd t tl e mt,thcr t nguc In li,Ile J thc w
attemPts to(lCal vith l>od`the Practicc and thc luctaPhorics r translati n, scrge
Gavronsky argucs that thc s urcc f this anxiety and ambi alcncc lics in thc ocdiPal
vhich inf
structurc

rl s

thc translator s oPtiOns, (3avr nsky divides thc w rld f

translation FnctaPhors into t vo camPs ThC srst gr uP hc labClS pictistic rnctaPh rs

vhercin thc convcnbascd n thc c incidcncc fc urtlv and Christian traditions,

irgin.
tional knight Plcdgcs Hdchty to the unra ished lady,as thc Christian to thc

In this casc,thc translator(aS knight r Christian)takes

vs of hun ihty,Povcrty
_

and chastity In secular tc1 rns,this is callcd Positionar translation,for it dcpends

vcll k11
vn
on a

hicrarchizati n of thc Particil)ants

(author/t1 anslator)has thus bccn

erlai(l ith

Thc

b d11uctaPhysical

crtical rclation
and ethical"11ph~

cations,and in this rnissionary PoSition,subn1issivcncss is ncxt to godhncss,

Gavronsky argues that thc mastcr/sla e schcn)a undcrlying this mctaphoric

n1odcl f translation is PreciScly thc f undati n f tbc cdipal trianglc:
Hcrc,in tyPically euPhcmistic tcnus,thc sla

c is a wi1hng onc(a hypcr

bohc scrvant,a faithful)

thC translator considcrs hi1nsclf as thc child of

thc hther_creat r,his ri

hile
al,

thc tcxt bcc

ues the bjcct f dcsirc,

VhiCh has been c n1Plctely dcHncd by the Patcrnal gurc, the

that
phallus~Pcn Traditi ns (tabo s) imposc uPon the translator a highly
rcs ictcd ritual r

lc Hcis rccd

to curta

hmself(s ictly sPcakng)

in rdcr t rcsPcct thC interdicti ns n inccst,To tamPer vith thc tcxt

w ul()bc tantam unt to dimintlting,in Part r totally,thc thcr

aut11

r(ity),thC don1inant prcscnt 14

312

LORI cHAMBERLAIN

Thus,thc paten1al care f

hid1thc ca 1 f Roscon mon sPcaks is nc anilcstation of this rcPrcSscd inccstuous rclati nvith thc tcxt,a scCond l cing thc concern
for thc Purity of mclthcr (madonna)t Jngucs

Thc od1cr sidc of thc cdiPal trian:lC rnay be sccn in a desirc to kill t11c syn

bohc

fhthcr tcxt/auth r According to Gavronsky,thc altcrnativc to t11e pictistic trans-

vh scizcs PosscSsi n of thc

is thc cannibahstic,
aggrcssivc translator
h truly fccds uP n thC v rds,
ingur~
origh1al,
vh savors the text,that is,
`h
gitates thcn and fh , thereaftcr, enunciatcs then1 in his vvn tonguc, thercby

ls

hcrcas the Pictistic

ha ing cxphcidy rkl hi111sclf f thc ri8inal creator
lat r

model rcPresents tra11slators as comPlctcly secondary to

riginal,

`hat is Purc and

thc cannibalistic m dd,Ga ronsky claims,libcratcs translat rs om ser ,iljty to

11at Gavronsky dcsircs is to frcc thc trans~

cultural and idcol gical rcstrictions

lat r/translati

n fr n1 thc signs of cultural scc ndarincss, but his

nodcl is

unfortunately inscribcd vithin the samc sct of binary tcrms and cither/ r logic that

ve can scc the cxtcnt to

vc havc secn in thc mctaPhorics of translati n I11dccd,

vhich Gavr nsky s rnetaPhorS arc still inscribcd xxithin that idc logy in thc follo vin8

rmcd Here,
dcscril)tion;

Thc original has bcen caPturcd, raPcd, and inccst Pcrf

oncc again,thc son is fathcr fthc man Thc Orig"1al is n1utilatcd1)cy nd recogni
16 In rcPcating the sort of iolcncc
vc
tion; thc sla c_ mastcr clialcctic rc ersed

vcr
have alrcady sccn s rcmarkably in Drant,Gavronsky bctrays the dynan1ics of P

systcn1 Vhcd1cr the translator quiCtly usurPS thc role of thc

auth r,thc vvay thc carl fR scolnlllon advocatcs,or takcs authority through rnorc
iolcnt rncans,Po vCr is sti gurcd as a I11ale Priv Cgc cxcrcised in fa 1ily and statc
i11 this

l>atcrnal

pohtical arcnas The translator,for Ga ronsky,is a lnale vh rePeats n the sexual

lcvcl the kinds of cri nes any c lonizing country comn1its on its colonics.

As Gavronsky hilusclf ackno

`lcdgcs, the cannibahstic translator is bascd on
thc benncncuticist m (lCl of Gcorgc Stcincr,dac m st Prominent co1 temPo1 ary
thcOrist f translation;Stcincr

s in ucntial Inodcl i

ustratcs thc PcrsiStCncc of :hat

iolcncc in c ntemPorary trans~

ProPoseS a ur Part Pr ss of anslau n,

I ha c called thc P htics of riginahty and its logic of

lati

n thco

In his z+rF :db F,cincr

The rst steP,that f initiati e

trust/ dcscribcs thc translat

s vilhngncss

to takc

a8amblc n thc tcxt,trusting that thc tcxt vill yicld somcthing As a second stcP,
thc translat r takcs an vcrtly aggrcssi c stcP, PenCtrating and caPturing thc tcxt
(StCincr calls this aPproPriativc Pcnctration ),an act cxPlicitly c mParCd t cr tic

rnust
PossCSsion, Duri11g thc third steP,thC imPris ned tcxt lnust bc naturahzcd,
becollac Part fthc tra11slator slanguage,htcra y inc rP ratCd or en11) dicd Finally,

to comPcnsatC f r this apProPriati e raPturc/

balancc,attcmPt somc act of recil)1

thC

translator 1nust rcstore thc

ocity to makc an cnds for thc act of agg1 cssion

s nrr,r
F
P Jjc

vhich regards s cial structures as attcmPts at dynaluic equilibrium

achicvcd through an exchange of
ords, on1cn, and n)atcrial g ods steincr
r exam~
thcrcby makes thc com1cCtion cxPlicit betwccn thc exchange of womcn,
vords in an ther17
vords
in
onc
languagc
for
PlC,and thc cxchangc of

His rnodcl f r this act f rcstitution is,he says, that of L vi~strauss

srrucrurdFc

Stciner n1akcs thc sexual Pohtics of his argumcnt quitC clCar in thc oPcning

vherc hc Outhncs thc m dcl for total rcading/ Translation,

chaPtcr f his l) k,
as an act of intcrPretation,is a sPecial case f co1111nunication,and communication

ursc and discoursc

is a scxual act

Er sa11d languagc mcsh at c cry point,h)tcrc

GENDER AND THE METAPHORICS OF TRANsLATION

313

Pula and c pulation,arc sub-classcs fthe don inant fact fc 11nunication .

1:Stcincr makes n tc of a cultural tcndency t
scx is a Pr f undly scmantic act
c

int f

scc this act of con11nunication from thc lnalc P

ic v and dlus t valorize thc

P siu n f thc fathcr/auth r/ riginal,but at thc samc tirnc,hc hi1nsclf rcpcats this

malc f cus in,for examPlc,thc f

intercourse and c mmunication:

ll

ving descriPti n of thc rclati n

Thcre is cvi(lcnce that thc scxual dischargc in malc

bct vccn

scxual

nanisrll is grcatcr

than it is in intcrc ursc, I susPect that thc(lctermining factor is articu-

latencss,thc ability to conccptuahze vith csPccial

ividncss

.Ejacula_

tion is at ncc a Physi logical and a linguistic conccPt, ImP tencC and

specch_blocks, prcmaturc cn1ission and stuttcring, inv luntary ejacu_

lati n and thc v rd_ri cr of drcams arc PhCnomcna vhosc intcrrclations
sccn

to lcad back to thc ccntral knot of ur humanity Scmcn,cxcrcta,

and v rds are co 111,unicati c products.19

Thc allusi n hcrc t
alrcady n ted( an

L
i~strauss,cchocd

latcr in thc bo k in thc passagc

c have

Cxchange f vords, vomcn,and matcrial goods

),Pr vidcs thc

narrativc connccting discourse,intercoursc,and translati

n,and it docs so fr lll thc

fa1ualc translator Indeed,vvc n tc that hcn c 11nunication is at

issuc, that
vhich can bc cxchangcd is dcpictcd at lcast Partially in malc tcrms
P int f viCxs

sCmcn,excreta,and w rdC),whilc whcn

csdtution is at issuc,that which can

bc cxchanged is dePictcd in female tcrms

Writingithin the hierarchy f gcnder,stcincr sccms to arguc furthcr that thc
Paradigm is uni ersal and that thc malc and fcmalc r lcs hc dcscribcs arc essen 1dF
rathcr than dcck/cnFdF On thc thcr hand,hc n tcs that thc rulcs for discourse(and,
Prcsun1ably, f r intercoursc) arC social, and hc

uthnes s

mc fthe

c nsequent

differenccs bctvvccn lualc and fcmalc languagc use

Ata r ugh gucss,

V0mCn s sPcCch is richcr than mcn s in thosc shad_
ings of desire and futurity kno /n in Grcek and sanskrit as oPtativC;

Vomcn scclla to
erbahze a vider range of quali ed rcs l c and maskcd
n t say thcy lie about the btusc, rcsistant fabric f

.
Id
Pron1isC
the w rld:tl cy multiply thc facets of reality,thcy st
cngthcn tlac a-jecti e

to allow it an alternati e non inal status,in a vay which lncn

Rcn

Hnd unnerving,Thcre is a strain of ulti1natun1,a scParatist stancc,in thc

mascuhnc intonation of the rst~PcrSOn Pron un; the

I
f

vv

mcn

inti1natcs a rnorc paticnt bcaring,or did until W mcn s Liberati n,Thc

two language m (lcls

but womcn arc.20

f llow

nR belt

Gra cs s(liCtum that mcn d

But,
vhilc ackn
lcdging thc social and cc non ic forccs vhch Prescril)c diffcr~

enccs, hc
ants to behevc as
vcll in a basic biological causc

CCrtain hnguistic

(liffcrcnccs do P int t vvards a Physiological basis or, to be cxact, to

intcrmcdiary zonc bct een tI1c bi

gical and thc sOcia1,

/ards thc

21 steiner is carcful

not to insist on the bi logical Prcn1iscs,but thcrc is in his0 vn rhctoric a tcndcncy

to trcat c cn the s ciahzcd (liffcrcnccs bct

vecn male and fcmalc languagc use as

314

LORI cHAMBERLAIN

illllllutable If the scxual basis f com1nunication tzs the basis f

r translation is to

be takcn as a univcrsal, then Stcincr vould sccn1t l)c arguing srmly in thc tradi-

tion vve havc hcrc bccn exan1ining, onc in

hich rncn d but

vomcn arc,
This tradition is not,of coursc,c

n nCd t the area

f translation studics,and,givcn

the in ucncc fb th stcincr and Lovi_strauss,it is not surPrising to see gcndcr as

thc iaming conccl t fc mmu taton lll adlaccnt Cl such as scmlotics or litcm
cr1t1clsnn, 2

The rnctaphorics of translati n, as thc Prcceding discussion suggests, is a

symPtom of largcr issucs of vvcstern culturc

fthc l)o vcr rClations as thcy dividc

in terms of gcn(lcr;of a pcrsistcnt(though not always hcgcmonic)dcsirC t Cquate
languagc or languagc usc
ith morahty; of a qucst f r originahty or unity, and a
conscqucnt intolcrancc of duPhcity, f vhat cannot l)e clccidcd Thc fundamcntal
qucstion is,xshy havc thc t vo rcalrns f translation and gcndcr been mctaphorically

linkcdP What,in Eco s terms,is thc lnet nyn1ic codc Or narrativc undcrlying thesc
t

vo rcahns?23

This survcy of the mctaPh rs f translation

v uld suggest that thc in
Phcd
narrative conccrns thc rclati nl)ct 'cen the alue of Pr ducd n ersus the value of

rCProduction. What Pr clai1ns itsclf to bc an acsthctic Pr blCn1 is rcPrcscntCd

in tcrms of scx,hmily,and thc st e,and what is consistently issuC is P wCr
Wc havc alrcady secn thc v ay the conccPt of Hdcljty iS uscd to rc8ulatc scx and/in
thc fan1ily,t guarantce that thc ch d is thc Production of thc fathcr,rcProduccd
by the m thcr This rcgulat1on is a sign of thc fathcr s auth rity and Po vCr;it is a

vay of rnaking isiblc the Paternity of t11c chnd~Othcr isc a cti n of sorts__and
thcrcl)y clain1ing thc child as lcgitirnatc Progeny It is also,thcrcforc,relatcd t
ovning

and bequeathal f ProPcrty As in rnarriage,so in translati

din ensi

thc

n,thcrc is a lcgal

n to thc conccPt of Hdchty,It is not lcgal(shall I say,lc8iti1nate)to pubhsh

a translati

n f v rks notin the Pubhc d main,for cxamplc, vithout thc auth

aPPr Priatc Pr xy s) consCnt; onc must, in sho1 t, cntcr thc ProPcr conFr cr
bcf rc ann uncing thc l)irth of thc translation,sO that thc parcntagc vill bc clcar
( r

Thc coding of Pr duction and rcPr duction marks thc f rmer as a morc valuablc
acti ity by refcrencc to thc cli isi n flabor cstabhshcd f r the luarkctPlacc,
hich
PrivilCges malc acuvity and pays accordingly, Thc transF rmation of translati n
fr n1a rcproducti c activity into a producti c Onc,fron1a sccondary v rk into an
original v rk, indicatcs d)cc ding of translation rights as Pr

Perty rights~signs

of richcs,signs of Povvcr
I
voukl furthcr argue that the reason translati

n is so ovcrCodCd, s cr~
rcgulatcd, is that it thrcatcns to erase the diffcrcncc bctvvccn Production and
rCPr duction vhich is esscntial to thc cstabhshment of Po
Cr Translations can,in
,m qucradc 0r1 nals,tll cby lt ci tllung thc systcm,That the d
r

ncc is csscntial t maintain is argucd in tcrms of lifc and(lcath

E cry saddcncd

2,
rcadcr kn0vs thatvhat a P cm isrn st in dangcr oflosing in translati
sll

n is its lifc

Thc danger Poscd by in dchty is herc rePrcsentcd in tcrms fm rtahty; in a

comlucnt on thc Locb Library translati
latcs thc risk in n1 rc sPcciHc tcrms

ns of thc classics,Rolfe Hun Phries articu-

Thcy emasculatc thcir originals

25The SCxual

i lcncc ilnPlicit in Drant s Hguration of translation, thcn, can l)c sccn as dircctcd

not mPly against thc kmale material ofthc ttSxt( CaPti` e womcn )but against thc
sign of malc auth rity as vell;f r,as c kno fr m thc story ofsamson and Dchlab`

GENDER AND THE METAPHORICs OF TRANSLATION

315

Drant s cutting of hair( I ha C

Shaved ff his hair and Pared ff his nails, that is,

wlpcd away all hs van y and s1 pcrHxllty of mattcF)can glll 1oSS of malc

vhat onc critic calls thc m ntJu

Po vcr, a syn11)ohc castration This, thcn, is
I ha =c

inJ ir bFc
vhat thc riginal risks l sing, in short,is its Phallus, thc sign
ity,auth rity,and originahty26

f PatCrn~

vhat thc translator clai1ns f r hirnsclf

In the mctaPhoric systen1cxan1incd hcrc,

is prcciscly thc right of Patcrnity;he clai1ns a Phallus bccausc this is the only
in a Patriarchal code,to clain

vay,

1cgiti1nacy for the text T claim that translaung is

hkc vriting,thcn,is to rnake it a crcati c rathCr than1ncrely rc_crcati e~acti ity

But thc clairns f r riginahty and auth rity,Inadc in rcfcrcncc to aCts of artistic and

crcation,cxist in sharP contrast to the Place f translation in a literary or

econon1ic hicrarchy.For, ,h evriting and translating lllay sharc the same sgurcs
biol gical

of gender(h ision and po vcr a ConCcrn vvith thc rights of authorshlP or autll rity
~translating does n t sharc thc rcdcmpti c myths of nob ity r triumph vc asso-

oatc with writing,Thus,dcsPitC mctaPhoric claims11c r equality with w

translators arc Rcn revilcd or ignorcd: it is not uncommon to

translatlon in a malor PCriodical that ls

f translation

ters,

nd a re ie of a

mcnti n thc translat rr thc proccss

Translati n Pr jCcts in today s uni crsitics arc gcncrally considcrcd

nly marginally apPr

Priatc as toPicS for d ctoral disscrtations or as support f r

tcnurc, unlcss thc

riginal auth r s staturc is suf cient to authorizc thc Pr
Vhilc rganizatlons

jcct.

such as PEN and ALTA (Amchcan Litcrary Translators

Association) arc wortng to in Pr c thC translat r s econon1ic status, organizing

nsib itics, c en the
translators and advising thcm of thcir lcgal rights and rcsp
best translat rs arc sull P rly

Paid, Thc acadcmy s gcncral scorn f r translation

classics of
s
vv rld litcratu1 c,of rnsj r Ph
Phical and critical tcxts,and of Prcvi usly unrcad

vc ha c lookcd at
v rld. While thc mctaPh rs
mastcrPicCCs f thc third
contrasts sharPly
vith its rehancc n translation in thc study of thc

attcn)ptcd to cloak thc scc ndary status of translati n in thc languagc of thc Phallus,

estern culture enf rces this sccondariness vith a cngcance,insisting on thc fclmi~
nizcd status of translati

n Thus,th ugh ob iously both n cn and v mcn cn8agC in

translation, the binary l gic `vhich cncouragcs us to de nc nurses as female and

d ct rs

as rnale,teachcrs as fcmalc and profcss

c rP ratc

rs as rnalc,sccrCtaries as fcmale and

cXccutivcs as1nalc als dchncs translati n as, in many vays, an archc-

tyPal fClllininc acti ity

What is als intcrcsting is that,c

en v` hcn

vvhcn

`riting is said to bc likc translating

thc tcrms ofcomParis n are rc crscd

in rdcr to strcss thc rc-crcativc

asPCctS of both activitics, thc{::Cndcr bias docs not disaPpcar, For cxamPlc, in a
short essay by Terry Eaglcton discussing the relati n bet vccn translation and sOmc
strands of current critical thc ry,Eaglcton argues as foll
vs:
It n ay

bc,then,that translation fron1 nc languagc into anothcr rnay lay

barc f r us something of thc vcry pr

ducti c

mcchanislus of tcxtuahty

itsclf, , ,Thc cccentric yct suggcstivc critical thcOrics of Har

ld Blo

contcnd that c cry Poctic Pr duccr is l ckcd in(DediPal ri alryvith

strong Patriarchal PrecursOr

a n atter

that htcrary crcation . . .is in rcality

of struggle, anxicty, aggrcssion, cnvy and rCprcssion, Thc

316

LORI cHAMBERLAIN

crcator cannot abohsh thc un velc mc

fact that

his pocm lurks in

thc shado vs fa Prcvi us Pocn1 r PoCtic traditi n,against the auth rity
of vhich it lnust labour int its ovn

autonomyr On Bl n s reading,

all poems arc translations,or crcativc

PCrhaPs only thC litcral translat
cost and cnthral11ncnt vvhich all

1isreadings/

r vh

of othcrs;and it is

kno /s rn st kccnly thc Psychic

vriting in ol cs,27

Eaglcton s Point,thr ugh Bloon1,is that thc Productivc r creativc mechanism f

vriting is not orifindF,that is, texts do n t cmcrgc ex nih1 o; rathcr, b thvriting

and translatin8(lepcnd on prcvious tcxts Re ersing the convcntional hicrarchy,hc
in okes
lati

thc secondarv status of translation as a rnodel f

r vriting

In cquating trans_

n and rnisrcading/ ho vCvCr, Eaglcton(throu:h Bloom)nnds thcir c n)lllon

dcn n1inator to be thc strugglc vith a strong Patriarchal Precursor ;thc Product-

ivc or crcativc1nechanisln is,again,cntirely Inale Thc attcmPt by cither Eaglcton

vith thc c nccpt of creati e
r Bl m t rcPlacC the c ncePt f originahty
nly ith rcsPcct
n isrcading r translation is a sleight of hand, a changc in name
to gendcr and thc rnetaphorics f translati n,for thc conccPt oF translation has hcrc
bccn(lc ned in thc same Patriarchal terms c have sccn uscd to dc nc rigina1ity
and Pr ducti n,

At thc samc ti1nc, howc cr, much of rcccnt critical the r has callcd into
vhich cngcndcr this pri ilcging
qucstion thc myths of auth rity and riginahty
vriting a malc acti ity Thcorics of intcr_
f vritin8 Cr translating and make
tcxtuahty,for cxamplc,lnakc it dif cult t dctcrn inc thc PrcciSC b undarics of a

text and, as a c nscqucnce,dispersc thc noti n of origins ;no longcr si1uPly thc
product of an aut nomous (malC?) indi idual, thc tcxt rather nds its sourccs in
hist ry,that is,

vithin social and litcrary codcs,as articulatcd by an author Fcn

inist

v mcn,
sch larship has dra vn attcntion to the considcrable body of vriting by

riting Prc iously lllarginahzed or rePressCd in thc acadcn1ic canon;thus this sch l~
arship brings to focus thc conrlict bct vccn thcOrics of riting codcd in malc tcr 1s

and thc rcalit fthc fcmalc vriter,such scholarshiP,in articulating thc rolc gcndcr
has Playcd in our concePts f riting and Producti n, forccs us to rccxan1ine the

hicrarchics that ha c subordinated translati nt a conccPt of originahty The rcsultant rc

isioning of translation has conscqucnces,ofc urse,for1ncaning makng activas a convcntional metaPh r r

itics of all kinds, f r translati n has itsclf scr cd

vriting, and intcrprctation; indccd, thc

tably be cxan1incd in
anal gy bct vccn translation and interPrCtation n1ight Pro
m del f r a aricty of acts of rcading,

terms of gender,f r its usc in thesc discourscs surcly bches sirnilar issucs conccrning
auth rity, iolCncc,and

Po vcr,

Thc most in ucntial rc isionist thcOry of translation is offcrcd by Jacqucs

Derrida,whosc Pr Cct h bCCn to sub*

tllc

cry concclDt of d
r n which

ProducCS thc binary oPPosition bct /ccn an original and its rcproducti n ~ and
snall to lnakc this diffcrcncc undccidablc By(lra ving many of his terms r rn thc
lcxicon fsexual di"ercncc~disscn1ination,invagination,hymen__Derrida cxP

ses

of rnirncsis and dchty,de nitions

gcnder as a conccPtual framc ork for

f vicwing translation,Thc problcm of translation`
central to thc dassical
`ay

ilnPhcit in all of his vv rk,has bec me increasingly cxPhcit Since his cssay Li ing
de niti ns

On/Border Lincs,

thc PretextS for which arc shelley s Triumph of Lif and

E METAPHORICS OF TRANsLAT10N

GENDER AND TH
Blanch

sL rr r

tlc n,

317

rF,2:In suggcsting thc intcrtranslatab ity of thcsc tcxts,hc

iolatcs conVCntional attitudes n

t onl

vard translation,but also t vVard in ucncc

and auth ring

The cssa is on translation in man scnscs aPPcaring nrst in En:hsh~~that is,
in translad n~it contains a running footnotc on thc Problems of translating his

ovvn ambiguous terms as vell as thosc f shcllcy and BIanchot In thc Pr cCSs,hC

exposes thc impossibility of thc drcam f translation

vithout rcmnants ;there is,
hc argucs,al vays son1cthing lcft ovcr v hich blurs thc distinctions bct vccn original

and translation Thcrc is n

ancc of thc v rds

Jcri

silcnt

translation F r cxamPlc,hc n tes the imP rt~

r ciF,and sJr1c in Blanchot s tcxt and asks

Notc to thc translat rs:How arc ou going to tlanslate that, cjF, r

F , no c a/ nor as Sh rt storyr Pcrhaps it vvill
cxalnPlcP Not as nour

be bcttcr t

lca c

vord r ciF It is already hard cnou8ht

thc French

understand,in Blanch

s tcXt, in Frcnch29

Thc imP ssibility f translating a vord such as r cir is,acc rding to Dcrrida,a
functi n fthc la v ftranslation,n ta1nattcr of the translati n s in dcht or scc n~

darincss, Translati n is go crncd

by a doublc bind typiEcd by thc command,

not rcad mc thc tcxt b th rcquircs and forbids its translati n Dcrrida rcfcrs t
tllls dotllDlc bhd f transladon asa /m en,the

gl

of both r81n y

alld c nsum-

mation of a marriagc,Thus,in attemPting to o crdhrow thc binary oPPositions wc

ha c

sccn in othcr cliscussio11s of thc ProblCm, Dcrrida innPlieS that translation is

both original and scc ndary, uncontan1inated and transgrcsscd or transgrcssivc

Rccognizing too that the translator is frequcntly a v n1an~so that sex and thc
gcndcr~ascribcd sec ndariness f thc task frcqucntly c incide~Derrida gocs on t
a uC in TF, E Fhe OFhcr tllat
thc von an translator in this case is uot shnPly subordinatcd,shc is not

vho is loved b the auth r

She is also thc nc
vriting;that
and onhosc basis alonc vriting is possiblc Translati n is

the auth

s secrctar

is,it is not translation

ti cvriting

nl

in thc scnsc of transcription,It is a Pr duc^

called f rtl)by thc original tcxt;o

By arguing thc intcrdePcndcncc f riting and translating, Dcrrida subvcrts thc

autonomy and Pri ege f
sar

thc

ri inal tcxt,bimding it to an imPossiblC but ncccs-

contract vith thc translation and making cach thc(lcbt r f thc ther

In CmPhasizing both thc rcProducti c and pr ducti c asPectS of translatiOn,

Dcrrida s Projcct_ and, ir nically,thc translation of his w rks~Pr vidCS a basis
f r

a neccssary cxPlorati n ofthc c ntradicti ns f translation and gcndcr Alrcady

his : rk has gencrated a c llcction of cssayS f cusing on translation as a vay of

talking ab ut philosoPhy,intcrPrctation,and litcrary hist ry 31ThCsC Cssays, vhilC

not cxphcitly addrCssing qucstions of gcndcr,bu d n his idcas about thc doublc~
ncss of translati n
ithout cithcr idcahzing or subordinating translation t
convcntiona y Priv cgcd tcrms Dcrrida s ovvn vork, ho vcvcr, docs not attcnd
cl sel

to the historical or cultural circumstanCcs of sPeci c texts, circumstances

that cann t bc ignorcd in investigating thc Problcmatics of translati

n32 For

318

LORI cHAMBERLAIN

olncn
vcrc allo
cd t tl^anslatc preciscly
bcc z1Is it
as deHncd as a sccondary activity33Our task as sch lars,thcn,is t lca1 n
to listen to the silcnt discoursc of vomcn, as translators~in ordcr to bcttcr
cxaIl1Ple, in s 1uc historical Pcriods

articulatc thc rclationship bet vccn vhat has bccn c dcd as authoritativc discoursc
and vvhat is silcnccd in thc fcar

f disruPti n r sub crsion

Bcyon(l this bn(l of scholarship,what is rcquircd hr a RHuinist t11cOr)' f trans

lati n is a Practicc govcrncd by
hat Derrida calls the d ublc l)ind_ not thc doublc
standard, Such a thc ry n1ight rcly, not on thc fan1ily m dcl of oediPal strugglc,

but on thc doublc~cdged razor of translation as c llab rati n, 'hcre auth r and
translator arc secn as vorking togcthcr,both in thc co

Perati c and thc subvcrsivc

scnsc Thisis a n1odcl tllat rc l)onds t thc c nccrns c)iCcd by an incrcasingl)audiblc

nu bcr

of won)cn translators who are bcginning to ask,as su'anne Jill Le inc does,

vvhatit rncans to bc a voman translatorin amd ofa n1alc traditio11 sPcakin

ally of hcr tlanslauon f Cal)rera Inhntt s d Ffdbdnd Pdr

that n10cks xx otncn and thcir Ords, shc asks,

Whcrc d cs

this lca c a vvoman as translat

n ltInrc

SPCci c-

JiftInr ,a

tcxt

r ofsuch a b k?Is shc n t

a double l)etraycr,to l)lay Echo to this Narcissus,rcPcating thc arche~

ho cch thc
typc once againP All vho usc the mod1cr s fhthcr tongue,
idcas and disc ursc of great1ncn arc, in a scnsc, bctraycrs

this is thc

contradiction and coll,l)r n1iSe of dissidcncc,

ILevinc 1983: 921

Thc cry choice of tcxts to Vork id),d)cn,PoseS an initial dilen1maf

r the I Ilain~

ist translat r: :hilc a tcxt such as Cabrcra Infante sn1ay bc ideologically offcnsi

not to translate it vc uld caPitulatc t that logic vhich asc1 ibcs all Po :Cr
origiI1al

Lc

c,

thc

inc chooscs instcad t sub crt thc text, to Play i11idchty agai11st

inhdchty,and to foll
out thc tcXt s Par
contradicti ns f hcr rclationshiP t

djc l

gic Carol rvlaier,in(hscus8ing the

t11e Cuban P ct Octavi Armand, makcs a

sirnilar Point,arguing that thc translat

s quCst is n t to silcnce but t givc voice,

to 1uake avadable tcxts that 1 aisc difRcult qucsti ns and pen PcrsPcctivCs It is
csscntial that as translators
n1cn gct undcr thc skil) fl) th antagonistic and

rks Thcy111ust bCc mc indcPcndcnt,

vorks sPeak
but als
not only lct antagonistic

syn1Pathctic
d

rcsisting intcrpreters xl ho

sPcak ith thcm and Placc

thenl in a largcr contcxt by discussing thcln and thc ProcCss of thc" translati
Her cssay recounts her struggle to translatc the silencing ofthc lu

Poctry and ho v,by

n,

J4

ther in Armand
`

rcsisting hcr o vn silcncing as a translat r,shc is ablc t gi c

voice to the c ntradictions in Armand

ork By rcfusing to rcPrcss hcr

whlc cak J rthc v0cc f thC m tcr, M"er, c

xx n

oicc

Lcvillc,sPcaks thrcltl h

calld

agai11st translation B th f thcsc translato1 s

vork illustratcs thc in11)ortancc t ot
only of translating but ol
riting about it,rnaking thc PrinciPlCS of a PracticC Part
of thc dialo:ue ab ut rc isiI1g translation,It is Only hcn vomcn transIat

to discuss thcir
s

v rk _ and

`hcn cn

rs l)c8il

ugh historical sch larshil) n Previ usl)

cnccdomcn translators has bccn d nc~that vc vill be ablc to dchncate alter-

nativcs to thC oedil)al strugglcs for thc1ights of Production

For fe 1inists vorking n translation,rnuch or cvcn most of thc tcrrain is still

uncharted. VVe can, for cxamPlC, exa 1inc thc historical rolc of translation i11

GENDER AND THE METAPHORICs OF TRANSLATION

319

omcn svriting in(hffcrcnt l)cliods and culturcs; thc sPccial Pr blcll s of trans~

yF ;
s : S s: u: :: R

fd c canon and thc nlarkct_Placc n(lccisi ns conccrning vhich tcxts arc translatcd,by vhon1,and hoxx thcse translations arc rnarkctcd;thc cffccts

f translations

on canon and:cn rc;thc r lc f silcnt forn1s of riting such as translati n in articulating

o111an s spccch and subverting hcgemonic f

rms of cXPrcssi n Fcn1inist and

PoStStructurahst tllc ry has cnc uraged us to rcad bct veen or outsidc thc lincs f
thc d n1inant discoursc for inf rmati n about cultural f r1nation and autll rity;
translation can Pr vide a vcalth of such inf rmati n about PracticCs of do 1ination

and subversi n In additi n, as l)oth Lc inc s and Maier s commcnts indicatc, onc
f thc challcngcs for fcn1inist translators is to n1o c l)cy nd quesu ns()f the sex f

vithin thc c nventional hicrarchies

orking
thc author r translator,

ve ha c

s text and thc lnalc translator

alrcady scen,thc fcmalc translator f a fcmalc auth

of a malc auth r s tcxt w l bC b und by thc samc powcr rclt
r

ti

ns:wh

must l,c

hich translati n comphcs ith cndCr constructs In

subvcrted is the Pr cess by

this sense,af n inist thcOry of translatin ill nally bc ut Pic As vvomcn vritc
their0 vn lnctaPh rs of cultural Producti n,it l lay l)cl) ssiblC to consider the acts
of auth ring,crcatin:, r lcgit"nizin:a tCxt outsi(lc of thc gcndcr binarics that ha

madc / n cn, likc translations,

schumann m hcr comP sing

n1istrcsscs 0f thC sOrt of vork that kcpt Clara

Notcs
I
ant

to ackno vlcdgc and thank thc many fricnds

,h se convcrsations vith mc

is essay:Nancy Arm r ng,

Michacl Dtlx=idson,Pagc duBois,JuliC Hemkcr,stcPha c Jcd,susan K kPatrick,

hax

c hcll,cd me dtlIiI my tl

inl

lng on the sulDJcct of tl

an(l Kathr n she cl w,

1 J ScPh

Jt,c

n und
chim,Bh

dn y s / dch1m,cd,Johames J achim alld

Andrcas /1oscr,3 ols (Bedin:Juhus Bard,1911-13),2:86;cited in Nancy

B Rcich,C`drd sch1Imdnnj ThC ,risF dnd rhc 9mdn(Ithaca:Corncll university
Prcss, 1985),P 320;thC translation is Rcich s scc thc chaptcr cntitlcd Clara

Schun ann as Con Poscr aI1d Editor, PP 225 57

Thisis the ddc ofan essay by An and s,Pircs, mJrjcds4 9(1952)

citcd in C9n TIdnsJ

uni crs y

Fi

13 15,

n, cd Rcubcn A Browcr (Caml)ridgc: Harvard

Press,1959),P,289,

unitcd statcs Codc Ann tatcd,Titlc17,section101 (st Paul,R/Iinncsota

cst Pubhshing Co, 1977)

R cr

ZulDt,r, cs 3cf`csJfd fcs

er d/orI,,dh@n

dtJ

oJr c ds que(Pa

ub1 ai

Armand C lin,1968),P 195

5

Earl fR sco11nn1on,
T/,co9

An Essay on T1 anslatcd Vcrsc/ in nJFish TrdnsFdri@n

65l ^ stlO,cd T R stcincr(Asscn

Van G rcum, 1975),P 77

Ibi(l ,P 78

On the von an as blank pagc,scc susan Gubar, Thc Blank Pagc and Issucs

f Fem le CrCt ti ity, in

rinJ dnd scx1 dF Dercn ,cd Elizal)cth Al)cl

(Chicago: LInivcrsity of ChicagO Press, 1982),Pp 73^91;Scc als

stephanic

320

LORI CHAMBERLAIN
JCd,chdsr IhinkiI,J;TJlc R Pc gf Lucr FicI nd rhC Birr gf Humdn^ (Bl n1-

ington:Indiana univcrsity Prcss, 1989)

Th mas Franckhn, Translati n: A Pocn1, in EnfFis Trdns` Fion c

pp 113-14
9 William C wPcr, Prchcc
13^56

PP

10

to TflC i do/%mcr, in nJ'ish TrdnsF on TJa 9

1Ibcr dic vcrschicdcncn Mcthoden dcs ubcr-

sct`Cnr trans Andro Lefcvcrc,in rrtinsFtirjn ircrdr1

~/i

` if

Friedrich schlcicrmachcr,
urh ro Roscnz
oi,,

rJ

Cd Andr Lck crc(Assen

hc Gerj12dn Trdd on
r

Vc

11Gorcum,1977),

p 79
Cited in Fl la Ross Am s, co cs

ol

ns` don(1920;rlDt
r

New York:

Octa8on, 1973),pP 138-9

12

Valtt,r Kaufmann(Ncw York

Gq/sLicnce,trans

Fricdrich Nictzschc, rJl

Rand m Hc)use,1974),P 90

14

j
n,lDP11213

rJ,c /I s r Trdns

Scrge Gavronsky, Thc Trans ation: Fro ln PictV to Cannibahsla,/ s bsrczncc,

15

n)id,P,6o

16
17

Il)id,

18

Il)id,P38,

13 Gted h Amos, dr

16(1977) 53-62,esPeoally55,

GCo c steher,

r Bdb F(London

alld Ncw ork Ox cDld

uni c it)

P ss9

1975),pP, 296, 298, 300, 302

19

Ibi(l,,PP 449 39

20

Il

21

n)id,P 43

22

h1hcr incisi e critique of scn1iotics argucd along thcsc lincs,Christinc Brookc-

id,P41.

Rose makcs a si1ndar Point about stcincr

scmiotic objct t,

i~strauss; scc XVT0man

9-20;rcPHnted in Tflc Fcm

s usc of Lt

eFi6rDdq/,6(1985)

P
cs
cd susan Rubin sul0mall
Pccri
!j/in
(camb dgc,Mass:Harvar(l univcrsity PresS,1986),Pp 305-16,

sFcrn Cu`r Con cmPoId

Ulnbcrto Eco,rflc R /cc,f rhc Rcdd

P`ordrions in Fhc scm1@fics cll vFs

Indiana univcrsity Prcss, 1979),P 68

(Bl on1ington

24

Jacks n Matthcws

25 :t HLlmP"cs,

Thircl Th t1ghts on Translating Poetr)' tll On Tldns`d ion,

Latll

d Ell

Versc son1c Pracucd c

in On rdnsJdFj n, lD 65

26 PhiliP Lcwis9 Vers

rr

vdif dc y

h mmc

.4PJrrir du

cques Derridd, cd. PhiliPPc Lacouc-Labarthc and Jcan~Luc Nanc)

Gahl c, 1981),PP 253^61,csl)Ccially P 255

Terry Eaglcton, Translau n and Transformation, srkznd, 19:3(1977) 72-7
(Paris

27

s ns Je
la traducti n al)u e, in

clcratltlns,

Editi ns

esPccially73- 4,
D cons ucripn

Living On/Bord Lincs, trans,Jtlmcs Hulb t, in

nd CriritJsm(NcXs York:Conunuum, 1979),PP 75 176

28 Jc cques Dc11 ida,

29 Ibid,PP 119,86
30 Ibid,P145;J ques Dcrhda,%c r rhct rh ()robi m`b ny 'c
Tr ns on, cd ChHsue V McD nald, tlans Pcggy Kamuf(NCw York
r

Schockcn, 1985),l) 153

GENDER AND THE METAPHORICs OF TRANsLAT10N

D ncc

321

in dnsFdhon cd J SCPh F Gmham(Ithaca:corncll um ersi P Ss,

1985),
For a critiquc of Dcrrida

Liv")g On/Bordcr Lines along thcse lincs, scc

JCffrcy MChlll,an s cssays, Dcconst1 uction,Litcraturc,Histc,ry Thc Casc f

[1 rr r dc ,orr, in iF d1 Hisr
T/,cp, nd PI crice,cd,Hcrbel t L Sussman,
9

Procecdings oF thc N

rthcastcrn LIlai

crsity Center for Litcrary studics

iting and L)eferencc Thc Pohtics f Literary

(Boston, 1984), and

Adulation, in RePrescnrdr

ons, 15(1986): 1-14

mcn ds Pdrrons,Tr ns` ror dnJ"h

^gfReFiJious
iorks,cd,Margarct P,Hannay(Kcnt,ohio

Kcnt Statc Uni crsity PrcSs,

si`cnt BuF 1rr cI.odj r Jor

1985)
34

Car l Maic
, AVoman in Translati n,Rcflccung,
(1985)

r ns`dr
on

Rcvie , 17

4-8,CsPCcially4

M :riam Diaz-Diocarct', TJ
srrdr|J cs i clricnn

ing Co, 1985) For

ns` ri

JP0Cric DiscOLfIsC

u csrj ns on F minisF

Ch(An1stCl la1n/Ph adclPhia John BCnja1uins Publish~

ther vork that bc8ins to addrcss thc sPccisc ProblCm

of gcndcr and translation, sce also thc sPCcial issuc of Trdns` rjon Rc ic on
womcnin t1 anslati n,17(1985);and Ronal(l Christ, Thc T1 anslator s Voicc

An Intcr icw
ltl1HClcn R Lanc, TIdnJuFi n Rerie",5(1980)

6-17

uo q u s0661

I I inL)Hu: |A Ji ; : } Jn \ l %`T 1 :
pro"feration of trans|ator train|ng progranns and a nood of sch |ar|y pub"shing,The
pub"cations` issued by comr
the strict sense

ercia| as vl/eH as university presses` are academic in

training manua|s`encyc{opedias`journa s`Conference prOceedings`

coHections of research artic|es` monographs` and readers that gather a variety of

theoretica| statements_such as the present one (see a|so Lefevere 1992a` Schu|te

and Biguenet1992` RobinsOn1997b) A ne/k nd of teXtbook a|so begins to appear

the rimer of theory that presents research methodo|ogies to students (see Pynn

1998` H atinn2001` N1unday2o01`W""ams and Chesterman2oo2),

The conceptua| paradigms that animate trans|at
of the theor

on research are a diverse miX

es and methodo|ogies that Characterized the previous deCade/ continu-

ing trends
ithin the discip"ne (po|ysystem` skopos` pOststructura"sm` feminis m)`
but a|so renect ng deve|opments in "nguistics (pragmatics` critica| discOurse
ana|ysis`computerized corpora)and in|iterary and cu|tura|theory(postc0|0nia"s lln`

sexua"ty` g|oba"zation). Theoretica| approaches to trans|ation mu|tip|y` and

research` /hich for muGh of the century was shaped by traditiona|academic specia|izations` no
/ fragments into subspecia|ties xvithin the gro /ing discip"ne of
trans|ation studies.

At VirtuaHy the same time` another interdiscip"ne emerges` cu|tura| studies`

CrOss-ferti"z ng suCh ne|ds as |iterary theory and criticisn

`n|m and anthropo|ogy

And th s brings a renextfed functiona"sm to trans|ation theory` a concern

/ith the
socia| effects of trans|ation and their ethica| and po"tica| cOnsequences. Cu|tura"y
or|ented research tends to be ph"osophicaHy cr
inevitab

tica| and po"tica"y engaged` so it

y questions the c|aim of sGienti c objectivity in empirica|y oriented wOrk

326

199os AND BEYOND

xA/hich focuses on fornns of descri tion and c|assincation` \^/hether |inguistic` experimenta

` or historica|. The decade sees proVocative assess|ments of the competing

paradigms. It a|so sees productive syntheses here theoretica| and methodo|ogica|

differences are sho /n to be comp|ementary` and precise descriptions of trans|ated
text and trans ation prOcesses are|inked tO cu|tura|and po"tica| issues.At the start

of the nevlJ m"|enniulln` trans|ation studies is an internationa} netbA ork of scho|ar|y

colln| unities \

ho cOnduct research and debate across conCeptua| and discip"nary

div|s|ons

\/arieties of "nguistics continue to dominate the

e|d because of their usefu|-

ness in training trans|ators of technica` co|mmercia| and other kinds of non

texts

ction

Theoretica| projects typica"y renect the training situation by app|ying the

nndings of |inguistics to articu|ate and so|ve trans|ation prob|ems, Leading theorists dra /

On text "nguistics` discourse ana|ysis` and pragmatics to cOnceptua"ze

trans|ation On the lmode| of G ricean ConVersation (see Hatim and N1asOn 199o

Baker1992 Neubert and shre e1992 cf. Robinson2003),In these terms`trans|ating means co mllnunicating the fOreign text by cooperating
/ith the target reader

\maxims
accOrding to fOur cOnversationa|
\\q uantity of infor lnation` \\qua"ty
\re|eVance

or truthfu|ness`
rnanner or c|arity
or consistenCy of Context` and
(G rice1975).A trans|ation is seen as cOn eying a foreign message ith its
imp"catures by exp|oiting the maxims of the target |inguistic cOn nnunity. P rag matics-

based trans|ation theories assume a conamunicatiVe intention and a re|at

on of

equiva|ence` based on textua| ana|ysis They a|so recOgnize that these factors are
further cOnstrained by the function of the trans|ated teXt,

E rnst-August Gutt(1991)takes a cognitiVe approach by|

on another area of "nguistics

ode"ing trans|atiOn
\de"berate

re|evance theory, Here ostensive or

co|mnlunication depends on the interp|ay bet /een the psycho|ogica| \\cOnteXt or

\\cOgnitiVe enVironment
of an utterance_cOnstrued broad|y as an indi idua s store

of knoll/|edge` va|ues and be"efs _ and the prOGessing effort required to derive
ConteXtua|effects(see sperber and kAl"son1986

13-14), Gutt extrapo|ates from

this basic theOry by arguing that \\faithfu|ness

in trans|ation is a matter of

\adequate
cOn nnunicating an
intended interpretatiOn of the foreign teXt through

cOntextua| effects that aVOid

unnecessary prOcessing effort (G utt 1991

101-102). The degree to

^/hich the interpretation reselnnb|es the foreign text and

the means of expressing that interpretation are determined by their re|evance to a
target readership` their accessib"ity and ease of prOcessing,
G utt bo|d|y c|ailns that re|evance u|t"mate|y does a /ay /ith the need for aln
independent theory of trans|ation by subsunning it under the more abstract category
of verba| connlanunication H e asserts that the many\\princip|es` ru|es and guide"nes
of trans|ation handed do /n by centuries of cOmmentators are in fact\\app"cations

of the princip|e Of re|evance

(ibid,

188). His stress on cognition is admitted I

reductive it effective|ye"des the speci6city of trans|ation as a|inguistic and cu|tura

practice` its specinc textua| fOrms` situations` and audiences

\a universa| princip|e be"eved to represent a psycho|og
assumes
of our human nature

Re|eVance theOrj
ca| characterist

(ibid.)and therefore offers an extreme|y cOmp|ex yet abstrac1

guring in sOcia|factOrs

forma"zation that high"ghts individua|psycho|ogy

^yithout

1990s AND BEYOND

327

Vhen app"ed to trans|at on by Gutt` this seems to mean a universa| reader` one
characterized by an over

/he lm ng

desire for min" a| prOcessing effort/ if not for

irnnnediate inte"igib"ity Thus` in his exposition/ re|eVance priv"e9es a particu|ar

kind of trans|ation`
c|ear and natura| in expression in the sense that it shou|d nOt
be unneCessar"y diffcu|t to understand

(ibid,

102)

Other|inguistics-oriented theorists do not a|m to exp|ain the success or fa"ure

of a trans|ation` |"<e Gutt`but rather to describe trans|ated texts in

ne|y discr nnin-

ating ana|yses.The /ork of Bas" Hatirn and Ian Rl ason`a|one and in coHaboration`
brings together an ambitious array of ana|ytica| cOncepts from different areas of
r examp|es embrace a

^/ide variety of teXt types` |iterary and

"nguistiGs,
And the
re
igious`journa|istic
and po itica|`ega|and commercia

Their wOrk shows how far

Catford app"ed
"nguistic
approaches
haVe tO
advanced
over prob|elms`|most|y
the past three decades
HaHidayan|inguistic
theory
trans|ation
at the|eve|of
sentence` and he used |manufactured eXamp|es

/Ord and

H at"m and N/ason perform nuanced

ana|yses of actua| trans|ations in terms of sty}e` genre` discourse` pragmatics` and

ideo|ogy. The r unit of ana|ysis is the

^/ho|e text`and their ana|ytica| method takes

\non/een\ iterary and

into accOunt~but flna"y transcends_the differences bet

|iterary

trans|ation(see Hatim and p

qason1990and1997).

Large cOrpora of trans|ated texts began to be studied in the 1970s` despite

the onerous task of exanqining trans|ations against the foreign texts they trans|ate

In the1990s`Corpus|inguistics`the study of|anguage thr ugh vast COmputer-stored

o /erfu| ana|yt ca|too|s. The
nrst cOmputerized corpora Of trans|ations are created` and theorists suCh as Rllona
co"ections of teXts` provides trans|ation studies

^/ith

Baker and Sara Laviosa formu|ate cOnce ts to ana|yze the|m

been to iso|ate the distinct

One of their goa|s has

Ve features of the |an9uage used in trans|at1ons`features

that are not the resu|t of interference from the sOurce |anguage or s mp|e |ack of

cOmpetence in the target |anguage This continues the interest in the autonomy
of the trans|ated text that so occupied previous decades`especiaHy the1980s.Thus
far the ana|ytica| concepts have inc|uded shoshana B|um-|

u|ka s

exp"citation

hypothesis` \\norma"zation Or \\the tendency tO cOnf0rnn to patterns and practices

\|exica| density

/hich are typ ca| of the target language`

or
the proportion of
|exica|as Op osed to grammatica|xN/ords

that fac"itate text prOcessing`and\ sani-

tization or\\the adaptation of a source text rea ity to make it nnore pa|atab|e for

target audiences (Baker 1997 17-67` 183` Kenny 1998

515 see a|sO Baker

1993and 1995)
Scho|ars engaged in corpus-based studies have pointed to theoretica| prob|ems
raised by the search for universa|s of trans|ated |anguage Because the cOmputerized analysis is goVerned by \\abstract` g|oba| notions/

it nnay emphasize norms

oVer innOVative trans|ation strategies and since these notions are cOnstruGtions
\various manifestations on the surface
derived from
of a text` they exc|ude the

various interpretations a teXt may haVe in d|fferent cOntexts (Baker 1997

179`

185). Computerized trans|ation ana|ysis is focused on text production to the exc|u-

sion of reception_eXcept by the computer programmed to identify and quantify the

abstract textua| categories,

328

199os AND BEYOND

ncant trans ation atterns n

a paraHe| corpus of foreign texts and their trans|atiOns` especiaHy if the patterns
are eVa|uated against|arge
reference corpora in the source and target|anguages
N Onethe|ess`co mputer ana|ysis Gan e|uGidate sign

FOr eXamp|e` unusua| CO"Ocations of ords can be uncovered in a foreign teXt so

as to eVa|uate their hand"ng in a trans|ation, And this kind of description n1ight

be brought to bear on cu|tura| and sOcia| cOnsideratlons DOrothy l<enny interesting|y suggests that \ a carefu| study of co"ocationa

patterns in trans|ated text

can shed "ght on the cu|tura| forces at p|ay in the "terary | arketp|ace` and vice
versa

(Kenny1998

519 see a|so l<enny2001) Collnputer-discOvered regu|ar|ties

in trans|ation strategies can suppOrt historica| studies` connrlaning or questioning

hypotheses about trans|ation in specinc peri ds and |oca|es.
In the 1990s increasing attention is given to \ process-oriented

research` as

James Ho|mes termed it` /here the menta| activity of trans|ating is studied
Empirica|data are co"ected thrOugh
think-a|oud protoco|s`

here trans|ators are

asked to verba"ze the r thinking during or|mnnediate|y after the translation prOcess

(see/ for examp|e` L0rscher 1991 and 1996 Fraser 1996), These studies have
observed trans|ators at various |eve|s of expertise` bOth trainees and professiona|s

Some research emphasizes psycho"nguistic prOcedures solme aims to improVe

training` especiaHy by giving it a stronger VOcationa| s|ant` approxirnating current
trends in the profession

Think-a|oud protOco|s are beset by a number of theoretica| prob|ems that must

be gured into any use made of their data erba"zation /on t register uncOnsc ous
factors and automatic processes`and it can change a menta|activity instead of simp|y reporting t Simiar|y`subjects are sometimes instructed to

rOvide specinc kinds

of information description`for instance`without any justincat| n.And obvious y the

data wi| be affected by how articu ate and se

St"` th nk-a|oud protOco|s` as

cOnscious a subject may be.

/e" as intervie /s and questionnaires` can

erfor|m The qua"ty of the data

inevitab|y depends on the theoretica| and methodO|ogical sOphistication of the

document the practices that trans|ators current|y

experimenta| design. some studies can give a g"mpse of the trans|ator s inteHectua| |abor OVer "nguistic and cu|tura| differences` shifting through rob|ems of
Janet Fraser has
ternnino|ogy to encompass questiOns of cu|ture and po"tics
obserVed community trans|ators rendering an Eng"sh pub"c information|eanet into

seVera| minority |anguages in the Ul( (see Fraser1993)

If Observationa| studies
produce too fe /regu|arities to construct a| ode| of the trans|ation process`

writes

Candace Soguinot` \\they are nonethe|ess usefu| to test theories in the "ght of
concrete data (Soguinot 1996 77). These theories can include not just abstract
menta| processes` but the specifnc intercu|tura| dirnensions of trans|ating

Cu|turaHy Oriented research sus ects regu|arities and universa|s and emphasizes
the sOcia|and historica|differences of trans|ation This approach stenns part|y frOlla
the decisive innuence of pOststructura"slm` the doubt it casts on abstract forlma

/hich m 9ht have

izations` |metaphysica| concepts` t lnne{ess and un versa| essences`
been emancipatory in the En"ghtenment` but no /appear tota"zing and repressive
of |oca| differences

POststruCtura"st trans|ation theory` in turn` Ca"s attention tc

1990s AND BEYOND

329

the exc|usions and hierarchies that are masked by the rea"st|"usion Of transparent
And this enab|es an inci-

|anguage` the nuent trans|ating that seems untrans|ated

ation in

siVe interrogation of cu|tura| and po"tica| effects/ the ro|e p|ayed by trans

the creation and functioning of sOCia| movements and

nst|tutions,

In an eXemp|ary project that Combines theOretica|sophistication and po|itica|

awareness` "nguistic ana|ysis and historica| deta"` Annie Brisset (199o/1996)
studies recent Qu b6cois drama trans ations that Were designed to form a cu tura

identity in the service of a nationa"st agenda The extract inc|uded here re"es on
Henri Gobard s concept of "nguistic functions to describe the ideo|ogica| force of
Qu b cois

French as a trans|ating |anguage, In the po"ticized post-1968 era` as

Brisset demonstrates`nationa ist writers fashioned QuObOcoiS French into What

Gobard ca"sa\\vernacu|ar`
Bet/een

a native or naother tongue`a |anguage of cOmmunity,

1968and 1988 Qu bOcois trans|ators orked to turn this Vernacu|ar into

a\ referentia/

anguage`the support of a nationa| |iterature` by using it to render

canonica|lltlo r|d dramatists`notab|y Shakespeare`Strindberg`Chekhov`and Brecht.

In these trans|ations` Qu6bOcOis French acquired cu|tura| authority and chaHenged

ts subordination tO NOrth Amer

can Eng"sh and Parisian French

Yet a strugg|e against one set of{inguistic and cu|tura|hierarchies might insta"
others that are equa"y exc

us|onary

Sharing Antoine Berman s concern lA/ith ethno-

centrism in trans ation`Brisset points out that the Qu

cois versions`eVen when

they used a heterogeneous anguage|ike the wOrking-dass dia ect Jo

cu|t|Vated a sanleness` a homogeneous identity`
Cu|tures

u timate y

n the m rror of forei9n texts and

DOing avA/ay
/ith any ambiguity

'hose differences ^/ere thereby reduced,

uts it` \\means gett ng rid of the Other.

of identity` as she

Brisset s /ork

"|u-

minates the cuItura| and po"tica| risks taken by lminor |anguages and cu|tures lVho
resort to trans|ation for se|f-preservation and deve|opment,

The1990s /itness

a series of historica|studies that exp|ore the ident ty-fornaing

po /er of trans|ation` the llv/ays

that ansx/ver tO

^'hich it creates representations of foreign texts

Resting

^/hat is inteHigib|e and interesting in the trans|ating cu|ture

on a synthesis of various theoretica| and pohtica| discOurses` inc|ud

ng R/arxism

and feminism` oststructura ism and pOstco|onia|theory`this wOrk shows hOw the
identities cOnstruCted by trans|ation are various|y determined by ethnicity and
race` gender and sexua"ty` c|ass and nation, Here trans|ating goes beyond the
cOmmunicat on of foreign | eanings to encompass a

o"tica| inscription
Eric Cheyntz (1991) argues that strong|y ethnocentric trans|ating has under-

Written Ang|o-AmeriCan imperia ism` fronl the Eng"sh co|onization of the NeW
XA/or d

in the ear|y modern per od to Us expansion into Indian |ands during the

neteenth and txventieth centuries to Current

S foreign po"cy in the Third

VOr|d
and e|seNvhere. In the case of American Indians` native sOcia| re|ations based on
n

kinship and cOna|m una|okvnership were routinely trans|ated into the\

European iden-

tity of rO ,e'-y (Chey6tz 1991 43` his emphasis) Tejas /ini Niranjana (1992)
argues that the Brit sh co|onia| project in India
/as strengthened by trans|ations
|nscribed
ith the co|onizer s irnage of the co|onized` an ethnic Or racia| stereo-

type that rationa{ized domination. After the introduction of Eng"sh education in

330

199os AND BEYOND

India` Indians came to study Orienta"st trans|at ons of Indian-|anguage texts` and

many acceded both to the cu|tura

authority of those trans|ations and to their

discriminatory irnages of Indian cu|tures

The question of ideo|ogy in trans|ation had been anticipated by the concept

of

\nor|ms

in po|ysystelm theory` /hich is no /further refned by Even-zohar and

TOury,They cOnso"date their in

uence by revising their key essays into cogent state-

ments that avoid the tentative and somewhat o|emica| cast of the ear"er versions,
Yet in|ine

^/ith other trends in cu|turaHy oriented research`the po|ysystem approach

a|so addresses the ro e of trans|ation in \\d scursive se|f-denniti n, ie /ing trans-

|ation as an \\exp"cit cOnfrontation /ith \a"en discOurses` C|em Robyns argues

\the intrusion of a"en` convention-vio|ating e|ements is a potentia| th reat
that
to the \ common

norms

that de ne the identity of the target cOnnmunity (Robyns

405/ 407), He presents a taxOnomy of the re|ationships bet

/een the
trans|ating and foreign cu tures that nnight be embodied in the trans|ated text
1994

ilmperia"st`

defensive/

\\trans-discursive`

and \\defective. The defective

stance` for instance` is taken by the trans|atin9 cu|ture that turns to the foreign to
supp y

sOme discursive |ack at home,

Trans ation is frequent y theorized as a cu|tura| po"tica| practice that mi9ht

be strategic in bring

ng about socia| change, The 1992 essay by Gayatri Spivak

repr|nted be|olv cOnstitutes a fem nist intervent on into postc0|0nia| translation

issues, But it is a|sO a
/orking transIator s nnanifesto`a record ofthe comp|ex inten-

tions that motivated her versions Of the Benga" nction

Sp vak
Derr
\\

/eta DeVi,
^/riter Allahas

outhnes a poststruCtura"st conception of anguage use`xvhere`foHo /ing

da and de Nqan` \ rhetoric cOntin ua"y subverts |meanings cOnstruCted by

ogic and \\granlrnar` a subversion that is a|sO sOcia| in effect`

bet /een

a re|ationship

socia| |ogic` sOcia| reasonab|eness and the disruptiveness of fguration in

sOcia| practice

spivak argues that trans|ators of Third XA/or|d "teratures need

this "nguistic mode| because \ /ithout a sense of the rhetoricity of |anguage` a

species of neoco|on a"st cOnstruction of the non-lvestern scene is afoot. She Criticizes xA/estern trans|ation strategies that render Third lA/or|d "teratures
of th-it trans|atese`
/

into a sort

immediate|y accessib|e` enacting a rea"st c representation

nguistic` cu|tura|` and geopo"tica| differ

in-betvv/een discOurse` that

` an

disrupts the effect of\ sOcia| rea"sm in trans|ation and gives the reader\ a tough
sense of the speci c terrain of the orig na|
of those "teratures` but devOid of the

ences that mark them. She advOcates "tera"s n

Spivak is aware of the cOntingency of cu|tura| po"tica| agendas` /hether

Couched in theOretica|statements|"<e her essay orin trans|ation strateg

es

Different

socia|situations can change the po"tica|va|ence of a trans|ation,The metropo"tan

fenninist` she observes`
bHity`

trans|ates a too quick|y shared fen

/hen the fact is that a pO"ticaHy|aden term"ke

inist notion of aCcessi

\gendering
can t

be eas"y

trans|ated intO Benga" The ideo|ogicaHy motiVated trans|ator of Third lA/or|o

writing must be mindfu|that
what seems resi ant in the space of Eng|ish may be
reactionary in the spaCe of the origina| |anguage

l<wame Anthony Appiah a sO imagines a

\frank y po|itica

trans|ation. In the 1993 essay reprinted here` ho

/ever` h

ro e for literar

s point Of departure s

1990s AND BEYOND

different

331

a critique of ana|ytica| phHosOphy of|anguage,Appiah restates the argu-

ment against trans|atab"ity by questioning the use of the \\Gricean nnechan|sm`

lAlherein communicative intentiOns are rea"zed through inferentia| meanings derived
from conVentions, A "terary trans|ation` A

piah argues` doesn t con | unicate the

foreign author s intentions` but tries to create a re|ationship tO the "nguist

c and
/een

"terary
conventions
cu|ture that matches the re}ationship bet
the
foreign
text and of
itsthe
otrans|ating
/n cu|ture The match is never perfect and might be

\to preserVe forma|

unfa thfu| to the "tera| intentions
of the foreign text so as
\why
teXts
matter

features. Perhaps most important y`

to a community\\is not

because
there can ah^/ays be next/ readings`

a question that cOnvention sett|es

ne /things that matter about a text

A|iterary trans|ation` |"<e any interpretation`

Can pro"ferate meanings and va|ues` /hich`ho /ever` remain indeternlinate in their
re|ation to the foreign text
Appiah indicates that the indetern

inaCy is usuaHy reso|ved in acadellnic institu-

tions` in pedagogical conteXts,There \xvhat counts as a fne trans|ation of a|iterary

teXt[

, is that it shou|d preserve for us the features that lmake it

/orth teaching.

Appiah cites a trans ation project that evokes the asymmetries in the g|oba|cu|tura|
and po"tica| ecOnomy

an Eng"sh Version of an African ora| |iterature` prOverbs in

the T /i |anguage He ackno /edges that the po"tica|signincance of this trans|at on

llvou|d not be the sanne in the American aGademy as in the Eng"sh-speaking academy
in Africa. XA/hatever the |ocation` however` a po"tica| pedagogy is best served by

lvhat Appiah ca"sa

thick translation` kvhich \\seeks
/ith its annotations and its
accOmpanying g|osses to }ocate the teXt in a rich cu|tura| and "nguistiC cOnteXt
This trans|ating uses an ethnographic approach to the foreign text(Appiah

s term is

taken from anthropo|ogist c"fford Geertz s notion of \\thick description

Yet it

is u|tirnate|y designed to perform an ideo|ogiCa{ function in the target cu|ture`

cOmbating racislaa` for instanCe` or chaHengin9 XA/estern cu|tura| superiority,

Jacques Derrida s xlvide-ranging contribution to this vo|ume` a 1998

ectu
de"vered to a French trans|ators association` addresses the potentia
of trans|at on strategies by exan

re|evant trans|ation is mystifying

re

socia| effects

ining the cOncept of re|evance FOr Derrida` the

it \ presents

itse|f as the transfer of an intaGt

signifed through the incOnsequentia| vehic|e of any signiner whatsoever`

/hereas

in fact the trans|ator re |aces the signiners of the fOreign text

^/ith another signifying Chain` trying to flx a signi ed that is no more than an interpretation oriented

toXAlards the receiving cu|tu re. A|though critica| of this mystincati

sees it as
nevitab|e insofar as every trans|ation participates in an \
bet /eenness`

posit

oned some /here betxA/een

n` Derrida

ecOnomy of in-

\abso|ute re|evance` the most

appropriate` adequate` univOca| transparency` and the most aberrant and opaque
irre|evance,

H is |ecture presents txVo ractica| apphcatiOns of this thinking` both invo|ving

the French /ord `'e/Ol/e.One is Derrida s Own use ofthe /ord to render the Hege"an
ter|

^llfl,ebll/,9`a
trans|ation
that served his interpretive interests thirty years ago`
but that
u|tirnate|y under
/ent \ institutiona| accredltation and canonization in the

pub"c sphere` achieving kllidespread use in ph"osophica| circ|es and becOming

knolvn as the most re|evant trans|ation possib|e The other app"cation h|nges on

332

199os AND BEYOND

his interpretation of Shakespeare s p|ay Tl,e n/`e`chal, of 1/el,`ce according to the

in POrtia s|ine` when mercy seasOns justice` Derrida uses

code of trans ation

`e/Oye to render

seasOns, In his ph"osophica| |exicon/ re/Oye high"ghts the contra-

dictions in Hege s dia|ectics

By rendering POrtia s |ine With this Nlvord` Derrida

sug9ests that in her ega|trans ating of Shy|ock s demands for justice she seeks an

optinaa| - yet contradictory - re|evance to the Christian doctrine of mercy` since

her transIation |eads to his tota

expropriation as xve" as his forced conversion to

hen re|evant trans|ation occurs

/ithin an institution "ke the state`
Christianity

then` it can becOme the instrument of |ega| interdiction` economic sanction/ and
po"tiCa| repression` motivated here by racism
F"m trans|ation has reCeived so| e schO|ar|y attention`theoretica|accOunts that
map areas of research` as

^`e" as Case studies that attend tO cu|tura| and po"tica|

issues"ke censorship and nationa"sm(see De|abastita1989

Lannbert1990 Danan

1991 Gamb er1996). But much of the|iterature remains Oriented to

/ards prac-

tiGa| issues`despite the insights that this kind of trans|ation might yie|d for various

must preserve coherence under narrow tempora| and spatia|

subtit|ing
t necessar"y
cOnstraints (audiovisua| synchronization` number of characters)` so

6e|ds

offers a partia|communication of foreign mean|ngs`which are not simp y incOmp|ete` but re-estab"shed aCcOrding to target cOncepts of coherence

This is preCise|y the area that AbO Mark NOrnes exp|ores in his1999essay
(inc|uded be|ow) He shoxlvs ho /a synthesis of trans|ation theory xAlith

|m history

might "|uminate the cu|tura| and socia| |mp"cations of subtit"ng and sug9est
innOVatiVe trans|ation practices. A professiona| subtit|er hin

se|f` NOrnes dra /s On

J apanese |rn trans|ation to "|ustrate /hat he caHs \\cOrrupt subtit|es

in the

prOcess of cOn ertin9 speech into xVriting ltlithin the t|rne and space "nlits of the
subtit|e they confor the origina| to the ru|es` regu|ations` idio
reference of the target|anguage and its cu|ture

they cOncea| their oxvn \ teXtua| viO|ence

s` and frame of

Such subtit|es are cOrru t beCause

and pre-empt any \ experienCe of the

foreign for the audience

NOrnes uses Goethe s account of the different

epOchs of trans|ation not on|y
to trace subtit"ng practices from the deve|opment of sOund fl|m production` but tc
\abusiVe
propose a theory of
n|m trans|ation that rehes as much on Antoine

\the
Berman s eth cs as on Ph"ip Lelvis s poststructura"st approach For NOrnes`
abusive subtit|er assumes a respectfu| stance vis-a~vis the origina| teXt` tampering
kAlith both |anguage and the subtit"ng apparatus itse|f

so as tO signa|the|inguistic

and cu|tura| differences of the foreign n|m. He |magines a range of experimenta

prOcedures that inc|ude different sty|es of the trans|ating |anguage tO match th:
sty"stic pecu"arities of the screenp|ay` as

/eH as changes in the fOnt` co|or` anc

pOsitioning of the subtit|es tO co|mp|ement the visua|and aura|qua"ties of the
|r

some of the pnost compe"ing trans ation research during the 199os seeks t
cOmbine a |inguist s attention to teXtua| deta" /ith a cu tura| historian s alltlarenesE

of sOcia|and po"tica|trends Taking Eng"sh-|anguage trans|ations Of Russian |ite r~

ature` Rache| M ay (1994) ana|yzes such textua| features as deictic expressions

register shifts` and irnp"catures to expOse the revisionary im act of trans|ating c
narrative form She presents a history of the British and American reception of t

1990s AND BEYOND

/s that Eng"sh trans|ations tend to on

333

it the rich teXtua|p|ay that

"te'ature and
sho point of VieXA/ in Russian nction, she explains this tendency
cOmp"cates
narrative
n the Ang|o-American translatiOn tradition
There the dollninance
by s tuating it

of uent strategies |eads to

c|ashing attitudes tOward narrative and sty|e |n the
origina| and tar9et |anguages and this c|ash is manifested in the trans|atiOn as a
\\strugg|e betWeen trans|ator and narrator for contro| of the text

s|anguage (M ay

1994 59),

(eith Harvey ca"s on the eXp|anatory po

In the1998artic|e reprinted here`
of|

cOding in recent French and Ang|o-American

/er

camp` and|ts homosexua

nguistiCs to ana|yze a particu|ar|iterary discourse`

ction. He then considers the various

issues raised by trans|ating this discourse into Eng"sh and French` shedding "ght
nterre|ationships betxA/een trans|ation` cu|tura| difference` and seXua| idenon the

tity, A French trans|ator` for instance` omitted the camp in an AmeriGan nove|
about gay men for French cu|tura| reasons
the eXistence of a sexua| n inority
signaHed by this discOurse runs cOunter tO En"ghten|ment notions of universa|
hu manity that haVe preva"ed
n France since the Revo|ution

An American trans-

|ator`
n cOntrast` not on|y reproduced the ca|mp assigned to a character in a French

nove` but a|so recast a seduction scene in hon1osexua| terms The Eng"sh trans|ation re eCts

the more llni"tant approach to sexua| identity in Ang|o-American

cu|ture` here a discOurse "ke camp functions as a\

sen

iotic resOurce of gay men

in their critique of straight sOciety and in their attempt to carVe out a space for
their d fference.

H arvey takes a too|-{<it approach to ana|ytica|concepts`using hat lllight prOve

usefu| in describing a spec nc trans|ation strategy regard|ess of kvhether a cOncept
originated in "nguistics Or "terary criticisrn or cu|tura| studies

Interesting|y` h is

Very stress on speci c |an9uages and discourses` cu|tures and sexua"ties forces a
revision of the uni ersa"zing innpu|se in certain types of|inguistics. Thus` he dra /s

on po"teness theory` a forma"zation of speech acts by lAyhich a speaker maintains

or threatens an addressee s \\face` xvhere \\face is denned as \ the want to be
uninnpeded and the
/ant to be apprOved of in certain respects (Bro /n and Levinson
1987 58),This theory assumes a
Nn ode| Person motiVated by
rationa"ty (i,e,`

means-to-ends reasoning) and the desire to satisfy \

H arvey
fron

face-lvants (ibid)

Yet

s use of po"teness theOry reVea|s ho /gay ctiona| characters might deViate

the mode|`since they occasiona"y address face-threatening acts to themse|ves

camp inc|udes a strong e|ement of se|f-mockery, H arvey advances "nguistic

approaches to trans|ation because he makes textua| effects inte"igib|e by referring

to specinc cu|tura| and po"tica| differences (betxveen France and twO Eng"shspeaking countries` Britain and the United states), His essay irnp"cit|y questions

any universa ist assumptions in thOse approaches by suggesting that they undergo
rede nition\^`hen app"ed to specinc sOcia| situations and com|munities` |ike sexua|

minorities,

In a20o3 essay reprinted here in a revised version` Ian RllasOn demonstrates`

in effect`that M ichae|Ha

|iday s

systemic grammar might make a more signi

cant

GOntribution to trans|ation studies if a grammatica| category is studied in re|ation

to a particu|ar sOcia| issue` such as the institutiona| sites of trans|ating Taking

334

199os AND BEYOND

trans|ations of documents fronn the European Union and N ESCO` N1asOn exa mines
shifts in \\transitivity` the "nguistiC representation of rea"ty through such factors

as agent` actiOn` and circumstances. He nds

"tt|e unifornaity
or
eVidence of innuence of institutiona|guide"nes On trans|ator
behaViourof practice
instead he

\trans|ators either adhering as c|ose|y as possib}e to their sOurce teXt or`

obserVes
in departing from it`disp|aying traCes of other discOurses`faint echoes of ideo|ogica|
stances /hich are present in the environment.
Because V ason takes an e| pirica| approach` he |s guarded about the genera|izab"ity of his cOnc|usions and regards his ana|yses as \

descriptive

rather than

critica|. Yet since the documents he ana|yzes invo|ve extreme|y controVersia| prob|ems "ke pv1ad CokJk/Disease`the exanlination of transitivity faCtors actuaHy enab|es
a critique of the ideo|Ogies that infOrnn the trans|ations Perha s his essay reVea|s

not so muCh that more empirica| data is needed before the ana|yst can genera"ze
about institutiona| trans|ations` as that the "nguistic ana|ysis of such trans|ations

/hich the ana|yst necessar"y` even

can expOse ideo|ogica| deter|minations to /ards
if unintentionaHy` takes a stand

TO expose an |deo|ogy in trans|ations des|gned to

cOmmunicate impartia"y is not to aCCept it as true or right` but to treat it /ith

critiCa| detachment.

Lawrence Venuti s wOrk typi6es main trends in Gu|tura|y or ented research

during the1990s It theorizes trans|ation accOrding to pOststructura"st concepts of
|anguage` d|scourse` and subjectiVity so as to articu|ate their re|ations tO cu tura|
difference` ideo|ogica| contradiction` and sOcia| change. The point of departure is
the current situation of Eng"sh-|anguage trans|ating

on the one hand` margina"ty

and eX |oitat|on on the other`the preVa|ence of nuent strategies that r

ake for easy

readab"ity and produce the "|usion of transparency` enab"ng a trans|ated text to

pass for the or

na| and thereby rendering the trans|ator invis b|e, F|uency masks

a domestication of the foreign text that is appropriative and potentia"y irnperia|istic` putting the foreign to domestic uses Xklhich` in British and American cu|tures`

extend the g|oba| hegemony of Eng"sh It can be cOuntered by \\foreignizing

trans|ation that registers the irreducib|e differences of the foreign text

yet on}y

in domestic terms` by deviating from the va|ues` be"efs` and representations that
in the target |anguage This "ne of thinkin9 reviVes

current|y ho d svNlay

Sch|eiermacher and Berman` German ROmantiC trans|ation and one of its |ate
t

entieth-century aVatars But fo"o/ing poststructura"st PhHip Le /is and mOdern-

ist poet-theorist Ezra POund` it goes beyond "tera"sm to advocate an exper

menta"sm innoVati e trans|ating that samp|es the dia|ects` reg sters` and sty|es
a|ready ava"ab|e in the trans|ating |anguage to create a discursiVe heterogeneit
/hich is defami"arizing` but inteHigib e in different
/ays to different cOnstituencies
in the trans ating cu|ture,

The

na

cOntribution be|o /addresses a question that haunts trans|ation theorj

infOrmed by COntinenta| phHosOphica| trad|tions "ke poststruCtura"sm and the

cOntemporary po"tica| ran incations in fen inism` postco|onia"snl` and quee'
studies If trans|at ng doesn t so muCh cOmmunicate the foreign teXt as inscribe 1
lVith the inte"igib"ities and interests of the trans|ating cu|ture` hokAl can a trans|ated text reach the ethica| and po"tica| goa| Of buHdin9a con

munity /ith

foreig

,
cu|tures` a shared understanding

1990s AND BEYOND

335

/ith and of them? This question pron ts a return

to basic issues in tkllentieth-century trans|ation theory

equivalence and shifts`

audience and function` identity and ideo|ogy. The autonomy of the trans|ated text
is redenned as the target-|anguage \\renlainder

hope of bridging the

Trans|ating a|

that the trans|atOr re|eases in the

inguistic and cu|tura| boundaries an ong readerships

`ays encounters iI

cOmn ensurab"ities` different ways Of compre-

hending and eva|uating the trans|ated teXt and indeed the \ /or|d. But these
encOunters do not so much negate the cOmmunicative function of a trans|ation as
sp"nter it intO potentia}ities that can on|y be rea"zed in reception.

Further reading
Arrojo1998`Baker1996`Bassnett and Lefevere1990`DaVis20o1`Fa
`Cett1997`
Hermans1999` Lane-Nq ercier1997` LaViosa1998` Pyna1996and1997` Robinson
1997and 1997a` simon 1996and 1999` SimOn and st-Pierre2000` T r|<|<onen-

Condit1992`Tymoczko2000` enuti 1996and2oo3

C hapter 25

Annie Brisset

THE SEARCH FOR A NATI E

LANGUAGE TRANSLATION AN
CULTURAL IDENTITY
TraF,s/J

eC/by ROsa /,cy

ge'Ga lTOf,

`a/,cy R

als

ve nccd n orc d1an a n1 thcr tonguc to con

need a natlvc languagc

c int

ur o
a,
vc

Gaston N1ir n,t FfomJ,,cr

P'j J

j li
i

1990/1996

338

ANNIE BRISsET

n)ust be translatcd into a languagc that has n

vriting systcm,Throughout history,

translators have had t contcnd ith the fact that thc target languagc is de cient
,hcn it comes t translating thc sourcc text into that languagc such(lcHciencics
can bc clearly idCntiRcd as, for cxamPlc, lCxical or n 0rPh ^syntactic dc cicncies

r as Pr blcms fP lysCn1y N1orc ftcn,ho :e cr,thc dcicicncy in thc rccci in8

ith thc rclation bct ccn signs and thci1 uscrs, a relati n tbat
c dc has t d
rcflccts such things as individuahty, social l) sition, and gcographical origin of the

SPCakCrs:

lati
fr m

nc translatc r not
3HCrC,thc difHculty of trans~

thus thc rclati cly si1nPle qucstion ariscs, should

translatc argot by argot,a patois by a PatoiS,ctc

nd cs

n t

arise ion1thc lack f a sPeciHc translation language It ariscs,rather,

the abscncc in thc tar ct languagc of a subc dc equi alent t thc onc used l)y

thc sourcc text in its rcProducti n ofthc s urcc languagc Hoxx should thc cockncy
dlaloguc in Pfza
Fit,n be translatcdP Vhat French languagc didcct eq valcnt shou)d

f Bucnos Aires in translati ns fR bert Arlt s

n
clsP What varicty of Frcnch v uld corresPond t the Rman dialect of thc
i
Via Nlcrulana in a translation of Cado Eluilio Gadda sQ1 cr P sriccidCc1o br rFo(Jc
bc 11scd to rendcr the lunfa1

(l

/lfcru`dnd? XVhat is thc Frcnch cquivalcnt of thc EngIish of thc Arnerican South in
)o cls? such arc thc qucstions 1 itually P sed by thc translator, torn
Faulkncr s

bct vccn
c n)Plcx

thc s uI cc tcXt and thc targct languagc, Thcsc I)r blClns bccon1c rnt)rc

hcn hist rical ti1nc is factorcd in, Sh uld thc translator rc~crcatc thc

chng ofthc t" c PCri d fthc tcxt f

r thc c ntc 1I)orary

shoukl the archaic forn1ofthc languagc bc1n

rcadcrP Or,con crscly,

dcrnizcd to rnakc thc tcxt rn rc aCCcs-

siblc to thc c ntemPorary rcadcrP Should Dantc, shakcsPcarc, cCr antcs, ()r
Chauccr l)c translatcd int archaic languagc should Ciccro s stylc bc I cndcrCd b)
4 The choicc f a targct
vell~kno vn P htician of ,a dcrn tirucs
t11e style fa
languagc l)ccomcs c cn morc dif cult xxhcn thc tcxt tO bc translatcd is a Parody of

a aricty of thc sourcc languagc GcI rcdcI, a n1uscun1 1anguage of Grcat Poland

rcProduced and Par dicd by Gornl)ro icz in his Trtins- r`dn, ,5iS a casc in l)oint
on1dc cicncics in the rccciving s (lict)
Translation Pr blcms can arisc not only
but als

oln a surfcit of linguistic oPtions For cxan1Plc, in certain sOcictics, thc

crned
laI)guage of mcn is di trcnt iom that of womcn,and tllcsc di renccs arc go
by Particularly Strict constraints Charles Taber and Eugenc Nida have discusscd
thc Problcm fhethcr the scriPtures sh uld bc translated int thc languagc c)l
omcn6 XXrritings on thc translativc opcration abound hth such
men or of
rk, oudinh`g thc
questi ns Translat rs address thesc issucs in Prefaces to thci1
on sOCiological,gcograPbdchciencies of the target languagc,dc6cicncics arising f1
ical,or historical variation in thc sOurcc languagc.
Although the targct languagc cannot alvvays Providc cqui

alcnts of thc sourc

languagc,thc abscncc f a targct languagC,thc langua c int

vhich onc translatc`
is n ,tu a y0ted as a rmd translau n Pr lCm Onc c tlld objcc t that thcr
ha c bcen instanccs in hich translation has"1dced creatcd lan
uagcs Butthen thc1

rd crcate, l)ccausc
uld11a c to bc somc agrcc111cnt on thc l)1cani11gc)f thc
vr ng to assumc that thcsc langua es had 11o Prior existcncc and th
xx uld l)c
t

k casc in Point is thc translation c)ft

translation crcatcd thcn1fr nnvhole Cl tb

Biblc by Luthcr, a translation that ga e risC t the Gcrn1an languagc In this ca`
the dificulty of translation arosc ron1thc f`ct that thc targct languagc xx as I10t
sin81C uni

cd lan:ua:cl)ut a numbcr of(halccts:

TRANsuATION AND CULTURAL IDENT1TY

339

G od

Gcrman is thc Gcrman of the Pe PlC But thc I c Plc spcak an

numbcr of Germans. Onc must then translate into a Gcrman
tlaat sOmchow riscs abo e thc mtll plici of unddrrcn witl otlt"jccdng
in nitc

them r suPPressing thcm, Thus Luthcr attcmPtcd t

0things
d t

tlanslate into a Gc1 man that a Priori can only bc local,his

HocJ,d

LIrsc

lati n, this l

Jq

ncd s

wn German,

,but at thc samc ti1nc ele atc,by thc cry proccss of trans~

cal Gcrman to thc status of a common Gcrman, a

tla

tlae Gcrmal

hc uqt

d d

in tJ

not bcc me it lf a language cklt

ff frolll thC PeoPlc,hC had t Preserve in it somcthing ofthc l unddrF n,

of thc gcncral n odcs of cxPrcSSi n and of thc PoPuIar dialccts Thus,

vc Hnd at thc samc tilnc a consistcnt and dchbcratc usc oF a vcr

ral
languagc, full of imagcs, cxPrCSSions, turns of PhraSc, t gcthCr vith a
subtlc puri6cati n, dc-dialcctahzation of this languagc
t1

Luthcr

anslation constitutcs a srst dccisivc sel afHrmati n of htcrar

Gcrman

Luthcr,thc grcat rc rmcr, was hcncc rth c n dcrcd as a w1 Itcr and

as a crcator of a langua:c

An thcr cxamplc is thc rePlacemcnt of Latin by Frcnch aftcr thc cdict

f
i

crs-

Cottcr ts in thc sixtccnth ccntury By rcquiring that all ci il acts bc Pron unced,
rcgistcrcd and dchvered to the Parties in thc French m thcr tonguc/ : Frang is I

sct into lmotion a translation movelncnt that hclPed clcvatc Our ,ulgar

nguel to

thc cqual of and as a m del f r thc thcr m re famous languages 9As a rcsult of
this and cnsuing (lccrecs, crnaCular Frcnch
vas t bccon1c the language of la

v,

scicncc, and litcraturc, It acquirCd thC status of nati nal languagc, thc founding
languagc of thc Frcnch statc,
strictly sPCaking, translati nd cs n t ll a linguistic oid,n m re so in thc
Francc of Du Bclla than in thc Gcrmanv of Luther Translation can, ho vc cr,

changc thc rclation f linguistic forccs, at thc institutional and symbohc lcvcls, by
FdnfudJc tt k tk Pl c
f thc refcren d
Hcnri Gobard s tetraglossic analysis According
t his analysis, a cultural eld,
r a linguistic co
1nunity,has at its disP Sal four
tyPcs oflanguagc or subc dc
rn

::it PoS blC rt)r thc

l,aakr

LIF

JdnJu Je, to usc distinctions Iron

A v rn cuFdr FcInJudJc,
hich is l cal, sPokCn spontancously, lcss appr priatc
for c mmunicating

considcrcd t
II

A /c/,icu`cIr F

than for c n2il,tzn1iaJ, and thC nly lan8uagC that can bc

bc thc mothcr t ngue( r nativc languagc)

n ud c,

'hich is national r regional, lcarned ut f ncccssity,

to bc uscd for c mmunication jn thc cit

A rcre nF,df IaJuq',whcllis dcd to cdt d,ord,and w"ttm a dons

cnsurcs continuity in

1v

al d

alucs by systcmatic1 cfcrcnce t classic rks of thc

Past

A ,Fhic F Fdn ud c,

hich functi ns as the ultirnatc rccoursc, crbal rnagic,

vh se inconnPrche11sibility is considered t
bc irrcfutablc Pr f f thc
sacred ~

~ O

rcbrmisF Gcrmany,the re rendal languagc

was a n langu e h thc corPus u lCr rcx lcw,tllc goal of tl anslati n is to
In rcnasccnC France as wcll as in

340 ANNIE BRISSET

suPPlant such forei8nf rms f exPrcssion,vhich arc ie ved as ahenating,litcrally
disPossessing. Thc task of translati

n is thus t

rcPlacc thc languagc of thc Othcr

by a nati c languagc Not surPrisingly, thc natic languagc chosen is usually the

crnacular, thc linguistic birthri ht,the indchblc rnark of belonging "1Translati n

bcc mcs an act of rcclai1ning, of rcccntcring of the idcntity, a rc-tcrritoriahzing

languagc,but it clcvatcs a dialcct t

oPCrati n It docs n t create a nc

the status

ofa nad nal and cultural languagc

Translated

into QuoboCois

The inclusi n ofthc ann tation traduit cn qu

b cois

(translated int

Qu b cois)

on the c cr of Michel Garncau s translati n f lfdcbcrh can bc cxPlained by the

translation sr le as a rc~tcrritoriahzing oPcration This rcfcrencc to thc languagc

translati n is a rc

language from
lati n

ersal of usual proccdurc, vhich is t inforlla thc rcader fd1c

`hich the

vork has bccn translatcd Normally,thc languagc oftrans~

is a gi en; for rcadcrs, it is illlPhcit, undcrsto d, that t11c language

translation vill bc thc langua:e of their

vn litcraturc, A French PubhShCr vould
ncvcr P1 cfacC a bo k

by Claude siIuon, 1argucritc Duras,or~Iichel T urnier

ith

thc ann tation

vrittcn in Frcnch Thc rcadcr of a translation docs n t nccd tO bc

hat language has l)ccn uscd to translatc thc f rcign tcxt, Ho VC er, in cases

herc the readeris unhkcly t bc a arc fthc languagc c fthc original tcxt,information about the languagc of origin is norn ally Pr vidcd
vith thc cxprcssion

Translatcd from But hcn,against all n rmal usagc,thcrc is a PcrccivCd need t

indicatc that thc translation is into(Qu

t kl

b cois,

it is Precisely bccausc it cannot bc

taken br grantcd that a w rk will bc tlanslated into Qu l) c is, milarly,would

one not ritc the ann tation translated into(Dccitan on a litcrar

vork in FranccP
Thc ann tation undcrsc rcs the marginahty of thc languagc But thcrc is a con-

sidcrablc di fc rence

bctwccn the hng0stic status of0ccitan and that of Qu

Occitan is a (hffcrcnt sign systcn1 9om French, as Catalan is

Qttc bc csol s

not a rel t p sy cm om

F1cl

ch

b cois,

m spanish

menoF

ind

1 J rhc J
"

12 Thus, thc cxprcssion

v uld nc cr bc t1 anslated into Qu b cois

traduit cn

Qu b c0F rms Part of thc iclc lo cal construcuon of tllc P CSumc(l di eren
between Qu b cois and Frcnch Clcady,this annotttuon heralds thc birtla fa

languagc that translati n vi havc t bring to thc forc, or at lcast, cxPose, in the

PhotograPhic sense of thc vv rd This function f translati n, to gi e morc cxposure to thc languagc,is rcinf rccd by t11c pr hfcration f lcxic graPhical studics f

Qu b coiS Ncw dicd na"cs of Qud

c is

aPpCar almost yet rly.of thcsc,L an(lrc

Bcrgcr n s
vas the bcst~kn
n during the Pcri d undcr study1; Thc dictiona1
ms

k to

bctwcen Quob
tl

c PI

dc Cd

a tlaall tl,demc,nstr e,f not tl,cllllstr t,tl e rerlcc

and thc Frcnch f Francc T11c bll wing cxamPleS,takcn

lu
ondbo k gr Cdnd dn lcnch-J nuc`Pr qu du FIdnf c d C,,b)
c is

sinclair R binson and Donald sn1id1arc a good i1lustrati

ical endca ur

n of such a lcxic graPh~

The handb k,vh se vcry titlC is a scrious lnisnomcr,scts Out t(

angloPhone students that Canadian Frcnch is a scparate language

It ha(
the samc caPacity t Cxprcss thc
vholc rangc of human c ncerns as any other
Pro e t

TRANs,LATION AND CULTURAL IDENTITY

tongue 14 using a morc idcologically m
auth rs clivi(lc Frcnch and Qu

b c is

ti

341

atcd than naT c cate8orization, the

lexical itcms int three PSeud

_c ntrasti

groups
Cdnddcz

Trdns`d
on

Fr ncc

bcurrc(l arachidcs
l t c
c lhnc

mo

de cacahou tcs

Pcanut buttcr

skm milk

cmPlacCmcnt cn

ParlCmcntairc

Parhamcnt Hill

PCntC du gouvcrn~

ment canadien
olect rat

rclcv

dc notcs

corPs lectoral

elcctorate

Pie des n tcs au

niveau uni ersitairc

transcriPt1s

:een thc t
types

of Frcnch,the rcadcr

of thc handbo k
ill bc lcRvith thc imPression that thc French f Francc is a
N1ysti Cd l)y thc allcgcd(hffcrcncc bet

limitcd languagc,and that it is hndamenhl|inCaPal)le f cxPrcssing Qu b cois

rcality

(Dn

the thcr hand, L andrc Bcrgcron desncs

Quob cois/ as opp Scd to
syStc m,m nly sPokcn but somctin1cs Irittcn by thc Qu b c is
16The existcncc of a Qu b is languagc is als

Frcnch,as as n
peoPle

tangiblc pro f of thc cxist~

cncc of a Qu b cois pcoPlc/ in thc rcstrictive sensc of thc exPression

a PcoPlC
s mPared with aP Pulation Bergeron s Qu b cois is a languagc%ch with all
t

the tension of a sma PcoPle vh are still :ct

tv

fr

n1thcir birth n thc c c ofthc

valk among

cnty srst ccntury,still shy in the Prescncc ofgro

`n~uPs,rCluctant t
t7This exPlains hy so much importancc
is Placcd
all th sc big pcoplc,
lati
c cn

n trans_

Wc ha c

n,bccausc it provcs irrcftltably that thc Quob coiS languagc exists

startcd to bc translatcd into thcr languagcs for those vhovant to hcar ur

rnatantes hcard in

1:Con
crscly,trans~
T kyo,and Iuakc thc citizcns of Berhn drcam of our f rcsts.
(hstinctncss,to talk about N1cl

ille t

thc Amcricans,1nakc the

lating canonical works r litcrary masterPicCCs Such as lfczcbeFh into Qu

clttt

n1Pt t lcgitim

e Quob cols by de

tlting k f1

om ss tus

b cois is an

a dhlec t

R Pro es

that it is thc lan uagc of a Pc plc and that it can rcplacc Frcnch as thc languagc( f

hteraturc fc)r its PcoPlc HCrc,

cr lcs arc rc

crscd the g al of a translation is

not to Provi(lC an intr ducti nt thc Othcr or to mcdiatc thc forcign vork, It is
to
0uCh f r thc cxistcncc of the languagc
n and,by so doing, v uch for thc cxistcncc of a Qu b cois
PcoPlC
Thus,
vhcn Shakcspcarc, Chckh , and Brecht are gi cn thc task f cstabhshing
Qu b c is as a litcrary languagc in its own right,and ultimatdy as a national
the f rcign vork that is givcn a rnission-

translati

la11gua c, thCy arc also gi

cn the task f

re ecting thc rcality of thc s ciety that

sPcakS that languagc,of htcrally sPcaking for it,or of being its lnirror '
af rcign text is adaptcd r culturally translatcd/

hus, vhen

it stands to rcason that it vill bc

anslatcd

into Qu b c is 19

1 he annotation traduit cn quobocois

and, at a di erent lc el,thc Pr hfcra~

tion of lexic graPhical

v rks

arc both signs f institutional c n ictin QuCbCc Thc

battlc has begun against thc languagc that hithcrto scr cd as a referential vchiclc

This language is, of coursc, Frcnch, Frcnch is not a forcign languagc in Qucbcc,

342

ANNIE BRIsSET

as Latin or Italian

erc

in Du Bella s thuc; yet it has suddcnly bccn rcjcctcd as

hre n,thtlt ,incomPrehCnsn)lc,c nsder,hr cxamplc,tl is

er1FFusFrdF

on dc`d` n uc

quJln

cxtltact

om D %nsc

c jsc by N1ich lc Lalondc;

Thus,c cn f r thc1n st cducatcd Pc Ple in thC country,thcrc is still a

vidc gap bet vccn sp ken and

vrittcn languagc and a kind fc n ict
that could cause:rcat an8uish and tcrrible fcehngs of dichot

my vvhcn

a
h le chagrin tries to cxPrCsS itsclf, And it is truc that,in that light,

thc French language of Francc is like a sccond languagc to us,an ahnost

forcign languagc becausc it(loes not havc a strong cmotional cOntcnt

and in)1 cdiate allusi ns t

our affccts and cxPcricncCS20

Rcjecting Frcnch is tantt mount to dimlllating in rnal bilingualism,a bilingudism

that Puts the vcrnacular languagc in conflict

vith thc rcftrcntial;a languagc without

PohshCd lan8uagc from crscas, a

constrai11ts is sct against a highly rcgulated,

language thus not suitable for translating local cxPcricncc, The

chagrin that is
inCxPrcssiblc in thc Frcnch of Francc is thc

cconon1iC

Conqucst/ thc col nization/ thc s ci ~

of thc nati nahst intcrprctation of

oPPrcssi n/ thc vcry foundati n

history, both rcal and idcol gically c nStructcd21 Thc langua c conflict vvas Onc
cxprcssion of nati nahst asPirations at thc ti nc,Anothcr,in thc Pohtical arcna, as

tlac nadonah mo cmcllt tllat lcd to tl,c bi h fthc Ptalu Qu b cois ancl tllc cm _
gence oftl c Front(lc Lib ration du Qu l)Cc Thc dcman(l r tcrritorial an(lp litical

autonomy
vas

logically cxtendcd t

a dcmand for a distinct nati c language

Suddcnl , the French of France bccame unsuitablc f r c mn unication am ng

Qu b cois Thc nationahst d x uscd a s hPsistic conccPt of langua8c to CxPlain

vhy Frcnch vas suddcnly incaPablC of Cxprcssing the

affccts and exPcricnccs of
the Qu b c is PcoPlC,wbo,it w uld aPpcar,d n t sharc thc a cc and exPcri~
ences of othcr Pe PlCs and other nations A cr being in contactvith a nc :rcahty,
French had undcrgonc a transf rn ation,vith the f ll
ving rcsult: c cnvhcn thc
vv rds

are thc samc, thcy cxPress anothcr rcahty, anothcr cxPeriCncc

aPPcar t l)c thc same langua8e,but this is(lcccPtivc Qut

22 It luay

l)cc French is n

n8cr

thc samc language as thc Frcnch of Francc This argumcnt is gcncrally suPPortcd
by allegedly irrcfutablc proof - a cabular hst, Thc n anuals and dicti naries

mentioned abovc arc a develoPmcnt of this trcnd, Thc

scicnti c
als lcnd
suPPort21to thc argumcnt r thc di crcncc bctwccn d1c tw languagcs A casc in
point being thc hst f Qu t) c is words Pro(luccd by Mich lc Lal nde,which

includcs such un~Frcnch rds as

savanc,
raquCttC/ and fcu-follct !2+
ThC ycar 1968markcd the bcginning of chan8cs in Qucbcc s rclauon t thc
Frcnch f Francc T satisfx thc necds f the nati nahst causc,Frcnch vas hcld uP
as an ideological nction __ a socially and geograPhically hom gcncous languagc,
hom encOus to tllc pollt of behg totalita an W k not co nuc,tldy ectecl
to normahzati n by a small grouP of acaden1icians,and to ccns

rship by a handful

f intcllcctuals in ParisP This P rtrayal of thc Frcnch language as a frigi(l and vith~
crcd lan8uagC,as oPposed to a igorous,natural Qu b c is,has bccnvidcly dcbatcd

and denounced by rllany2s Wc vill,thus,not Pursuc the1nattcr hcrc sufscc it t

say that the languagc conHict that dc el Pcd ar und1968is clearly symptomatic of
a changc in rclati ns vvith thc Forcigncr,

TRANsLAT10N AND GULTURAL IDENTITY

Qu b cois h thc market ofsymboIic cOmmod

=`liI1guistic cot )n1unity is a n arkct Its

343

crnacular and rcfcrential languagcs are its

syn1b hc c n1Iu ditics, cach

ith its o vn usc
aluc and its o n cXChangc
alue
Thc circulati n ofthese c n1n odities is ovcrned by Po cr relations
A linguistic col munity aPPcars to t)c a sort
cxP'Cssi ns tand messdJcs circur

s ct,`

fl,tvc
dr1er in"hich
rds,

modiFics, c may aSk ursclvcs hat

vords,cxPrcssions and mcssagcs,bcgin~

ith thC alucs accordin{:: t0

hich they are consumc(i and
c c/,dnqc
,2
rulcs go crn thc circulation of

nin{::

As nati nalist QucbCc bcga11asscrting ltsclf at thc cnd

f thc1960s,its vcrnacular

and rcfcrcntial lan uagCs Suddcnly startcd co1nPcting vith cach thcr,Thus,in

thc

market ec nomy of symb lic comm (lities,thcrc was comPcbtiol)bctwcc11thc

cxchanEc alucs f thc txs languagcs,0n the cttltural lc el,t11c Qu l) cois l)1 duct
had to takc Prcccdcncc 0 cr the impo1 ted Pr duct This gave risc to a form f
Pr tCctionis1n, thc ajn1 f ^=hich vvas t

Qu b

liInit importation and circulation fn n-

cOis S)'mb lic c mm ditics in culturahnstitubons such as thcatrical Publis11ing

11c languagc c nflict

vards and :rants

1irrorcd the11c vly cngagcd battlc to conqucr thC symb hc-con moditics n1arkct,

and Production, criticisn1, and htcral^)' a

that is,the battlc to bccolllC:institutionally(l n1inant

In the thcatrc, f rcign symbohc c mmoditics

vere don1inant, but thcy
rcmained so by(lchult statistics I
l re eal,howevc1 ,t11at as t11cn IIt11)er of
Qu b cois Pr ductions incrcascd, thc cxchangc value of artistic crcations such as
rcign translatlons was morc and morc scllously er dcd Ifthey wcrc t rcPlaCc

Frcnch Productions, vhich cre clCarly d n1inant,and if thcy

crc to aPPr Priate
thc syIt1bohc capital 11cld b) thcsc Producti ns, Qu b c is Producti ns had to bc
(li
rent This was tlc rst c n ti n hrthc cmc1 gcncc of a dlsunctly Qu l9 cois
theatlical institution.Hcrc is how Jacqucs Dubois cxplains thc

law of distinctncsC

as it aPPhcs t thc litcrary institution

at thc tirnc vhen an instituti()n is bcing foundcd,

vc scc thC dCvcl

opmcnt of legiti1nacy
ithin thc htcrary sPhcrc, and this lc{::itllalacy
dc nes thc acti ity of this sPhCre as autonomous and distinctive , , ,

Thus, xx:riters Hnd tbcn1selves engagcd in the l

gic of distjI1ctncss, If

(listinctness bec mcs thc issuc for thc 1,and thatisindeed h

0nc gains

the rcc gnition f onc s PcerS and comPctit rs,thc Only vay to achicvc

rccognition is t

akc nc s vritin:culturally markcd in a vay that is

Pcrtincnt in a gi cn literary6ckl

27

In thc dramat1c arts,languagc vould fulHl thc disti11cti e hncti n that vas nccdcd
for Qu b cois Proclucti ns to bccomc institutiona y rec glllzcd and autonomous

is-;~ is Frcnch and French~Canadian Pr ductions

344

ANNIE BRIssET

The distinctive ft nction of Qu bocois

This breahng avvay int a scParatc acsthctic Particularity cl scly Para clcd c nte 1_

porary Political deman(ls,with dlth0r ram

a ons.
c ha e sccn tll

the qucst for a nati c lan uagc is ticd to the need t

,in QuebCc,

l)e diffcrcnt,notto bc n`ixed

in with thc thers in thc North Amcrican mclting pot:

nous(listincts
difforents

nc point c nf ndrc
IwC[arc]
distinct

diffcrcnt
nC

t to bc conftlscd with anyone12S

Qy b c1F

(Qucbecness)dcnnes itsclf as thc scarch for abs

lutc distinctncss,a

ill countcract thc dangcr f assilmdation, The threat f assirnilation looms on a numbcr of fr nts First, a battle n ust l,e
agcd a ainst thc
distinctncss that

assin1ilation inhcrcnt in the P

siti

n()f a franc

phonc con1munity hcmmed in by

angloPhoncS :ut, of c ursc,thc dangcr of an hcization comcs not only fr n thc

gcoPol cal s ucturcs ofQucbCc within d1c Canadlan dcradon; also comes iom

thc proxirnity of the1Jnited Statcs,

hiCh Cxerts a strong sociocultural fascination
ides QucbCc with
y all Powcrfttl,thc umted sttltes Pro
its ne /cultural modcls and cam bc vie ved,thercforc,as a sccond assin ilating front
Economically and P

liuca

A thir(l th atcning iontis immigration Thc brcigncr,who is callcd

cthnic, and a oPhonc

immigrant,

r nco Qu b c is, is seen as thc cncmy ,ithin

Mais au contrairc, pcine PeuvCnt ils Ilcs Qu b c iS]s a enturcr hors

dc lcur dcmcure sans trc ccrnos dc t utcs Parts Par dcS puissances
cstrangi rcs tant t Anglaise, tant t Am ricainc, o e, rocc1umcnt,
Itahcnnc,qui lcs rcP uSsCnt lcur bon Plaisir et lcs s umcttcnt leurs
lois, pri

il

gcs ou droits acquis dc Plus ou moins longuc date sur ce

tcrritoirc , , ,

[But n the c ntrary,they(the Qu

b cois)can

hardly stcP outsidc thcir

d
rs vith ut bcing surr unded on all si(lcs by f rcign P :ers, som c-

ti1nes Enghsh,sometirncs Alucrican,and1norc rcccntly,Itahan, vho fcel

ee P h them asi(lc and su cd thCm t thcir laws,Pri lCgcs,or
rights tbat vere acquircd a rnorc Or lcss long tin1c ago on this land

This way of thinking attributcs t

,129

the Italian,thc symbol of all iml ligrants,thc

assirnilating charactcristics of thc angl Phone Thc assilaldati n of franc

Ph nCs is

numbers. Morcover, i 11nigrants vere quick Cn ugh t decidcvhich gr uP to m del thcmsel es aRcr, the
n1inority group or thc don inant PrCstigious grouP, Imbucd 1th thc Amcrican
drcan i 1rnigrants had n t lcft c crything bchind only to end uP in thc camp of a
loni7cd, thc l scr, and thc
icti1n
grouP that insists On (lcPicting itsclf as thc c
an undcniablc thrcat, if only by virtue

thc la v f

TRANS ATION AND CULTURAL IDENTITY

345

It is easy to undcrstand vhy thcir allcgianccs go sPontaneously to thc angloPhoncS,

ho,in hct,havc traditi nally cxtendc(la warm wclcomc to immigrants,excludC(l,

ccre, fro 1 franc Ph ne institutions on linguistic or rchgious

as thcy themscl cs
cs an agent of assinailatiOn But this negativc

groundS The in11uigrant thus bec

P rtrayal f thC in11nigrant goes c

en fut thcr

It charactcrizcs thc nc vly arrivcd as

the conqucr r, thc usurPer,

vh rcccivcs sPccial trcatment. XlVc kno h
/ thc
Enghsh got
hcrc they arc;thcy havc hist ry on their sidc But
hCrC docs an Itahan

(a Portugucsc,a Greek,a Pole,a Haiuan,a Vietnamesc,a Chilcan,a Turk),d1at

barc~f
t pcasant vho just arri ed ycsterday on our soil, gct such rightsP Thcrc

is an intcrcsting transfer of blamc i11this dcpiction of thc ilx,n1igrant, f

r it is clcar

that,in rcahty,thc in1llligrant does not cxaCtly occuPy thC uPPCr social,cc

non1ic,

cultural,and Pobtical cchclons f Qucbcc society Is thiS(lcpiction not,in fact,an

n tl c mar n f
in dment spcclh l dcs ned to jusu kcelDlng immigran
sOcicty,outsidc all sphcrcs of auth

rity in Quebcc?In a Pro incc undcr sicgc/ thC

y1

f# l

exPresSing thc idca of thc

rcign Pcr

r1fJ :1tl

a Peril that had nly bccomc morc thrcat-

ening vith thc arri al f thc Victnamcsc,the

` Chilcans,and thc Tan1ils
llC Qu bcc Cst d ,di is contl e lui m mc,D unc Part,Montr al,
quise cut n2u FicuFrureI,d nc l,Jccrj cm nr dnrI~qu bJcois,"sc o CmenF,d ns
s s

nJ c mPosdnFes;d

autrc Part le grand QuobCc,quijoue la Pohuquc(lc

autruche ct s mbrc(lans
PtimiSmc tacuque I lN Sg uvcrne~
n1ents sonts pr ts sacri cr t ut cc qui nous cst chcr,langue,hist irc,
l

Pour m
[

d cc

or s sP qu6

Qucbccis a(ly& dl

l ich

against it

r Ontl.e nc hal1d,M lltKd,

hkcs t scc itself as i,,u`ricuFrurd , Fh1Is cc n i b cois,

Visccrdf,,in jrs n

coi,,Pos1r1on;on tlle

thcr,QuCbCc as a wh lc,which

Plays the PohticS f thc strich,dr vvning in tactical oPti1nism . Our

govcrn1nents are ready tO sacri cc c crything vc hold dcar, languagc,
hist ry,s

as not to(lisaPP int thcsc Pohtical refugees 13

Clearly,hcre,grouP mclllbership is not fortuitous or a natural statc of affairs It is

guidcd by nationahst intcrcsts, and l)y dehniti n d cs n t allo vf r inclusi n f
11C0-Qu b c iS Thcy havc the misfoltume of bcing what thcy arc
forcigncrs.This
argument, vvhich is(lcsigncd to Prc ent thc diss lution fthc Qu

b c is idcntity,

tacitly reProduces the d n inant/subordinatc schcma that is so vigorously dcnounccd vhcn thc grouP is sPcaking ofitsclf.Any rclationshiP vith thc Otl cr sccms
inconcci ablc outsidc this framc cork of d n ination This is because the Other is

at huk and wcars a mask,as insinuatcd by

thcr Blais s usc of qu tati n

marks,

status of Pohtical refugec suspcct

no doubt,illcgiti1natc
les
h
thcir
wn
coun
b cois al c tragic
y,Forcigncrs usc
8urcs,e

vhich makc thc fscial

Only thc Qu

r as
ictilns and abusc thc gcncrosity of an ovcrly
a falsc idcntity to Pass thCmscl cs

hosPitablc country Thc poctry of N ichel Garncau oPP SCs thc fascist undcrtoncs
f such rhet ric hs aPol gia for cr ss-brccding uscs Poctic languagc to rc cal and

acclaim thc mixed background d thc Qu b cois idcntity rai tt,ut lc ng m lo/

346 ANNIE BRIsSET

lcs anc:trcs s nt

I 1cs tran:crs

/ un I)cu(rhurabt naquois / un pcu d irlanc ssais

My blo d isa mke(l uP/n1)ancCSto1

/a litdc Irishsc tch.

j In anodler poem,

st

re hRigne /Hural naquos

jng to thc Future)

c

a enll c ll

(ca

hc e cn vritcs:

qu on r ahsc

qu b cois con11)icn n us son1rncs

ec(rurcmn cnt racistcs

b"e jamcs r sc1 cs r/hmc de n s

n1audits angl s ang s itaIicns juiI ,

icd lice~sau agcs
Pol kS-chickcn
PiS qu

n arr tc ga t ut

Ithat wC Qu

'c

b c is

d suitc.

realizc how sickcningly racist

arc

JamCs-Bay rescHations lllgg rh hmC11rscd-En ish FrC11ch_Italians cws

P laks~chickcn flied licc~sa
n
v lct

agcs

s stop that right n ks

131

The forcigncr P ses a Pr blcm PrcciScly becausc hc introduccs hctcr

gcncity,

impurity to thc Qu b cois mmunity

Nous au es
dit couran11ncnt ce PcuPlC
Pr P s dc lui1u me
n1arquant ainsi d un m t
I

intilnc ambiguit(

dc s n idcntit

N uS autrcs

sayS frcqucntly this Pc plc

ab ut itsclf

undcrhning thus vith a singlc vord

thc inti1nate ambi uity

f its

identity132

Ideally,n brcign PrcsCnce should e er st n the Qu

b cois

idcntity Doing away

mt Ji$

tr

i } tl

matlcally qcctcd

m thc grouP,con ncd t thcir own(li rcnccs Thc rst~PerS n

plural, n us, is uscd tojustio
a1 I us ki11ds fdiffercncc~ethnicity,laL1guagc,iden~
tity,and scParation Closc association bct
harmhl,and thcrcfc,rc t
esta

sh

bc dePl rCd

th para n

'ccn

nous

and 1cs autrcs is dangerous,

ThC Qu b c is

languagc is entrustcd with

and nsutcs,hc d,tk df

n cc

d the

Qu b c S r thc Frcnch languagc is n l()n:Cr su ocnt,it is becausc thc stakcs are

no longer si1uPly linguistic; thcy havc bcc n c toPol gical Langua c must bc c ~
cxtcnsive ith

a tcrI

itorv Thcrc can bc11

sharing of language or tcrritory

TRANS LATION AND CULTURAL IDENTITY

347

The enigmatic Qu((: b((: cois Ianguage3l

Gaston Miron l11akcs a(listincti

n bct vcen 1nothcr tongue and native languagc/

a distinction,he says,the Qu

b c is

vance of this distinction bct

ccn

nccd to makc34H wd cs hc cxPlain thC rclc

conCcPts that, in actual usagc, arc Onc and

t vo

thc samcP Hc does not(lc6nc vhat hc n)cans by

native languagc, but hc h lds
up as the symbol of p htical libcration

iron s

nati

it

c languagc is still Frcnch,l)ut

it is not sPokCn in thc same cultural and socioP htical circun1stanccs as Frcnch, In
fact,R//liron uscs thc n

on
hich

ti n

of a nati c languagc as an antithesis t a serics of axi ms

his vh le argumcnt is built if a natl c

languagc is to cmerge, Qucbec

QuCbCc is frccd f its col nial s ci _
economic constraints, s ncw|emcrgCcl nat e languagc can bc used ttD justi thc

n1ust rkl itsclf f its c l nial status; nCc

rcjection of Frcnch culturc Thc cxistcncc of a nati c languagc PrcsuPPosCS that its

sPcakCrs arc in thcvorld acc rding to a culture,that is acc rding to an ontology

'hich is unicluc t that languagc, and to that language only In other vords, thc

cmcrgcncc f
nati

a nati

e languagc imphcs thc chI lination of alterity 3s To acquirc a

c languagc is to be reborn in a frcc country, to havc a country entirely to

oncsclf Reclairning onc s nativC languagc naturally leads to thc idca

that exists in

f a Pure nation

the consciousncss of thc

vorkl 36 Thcir 0 vn nati c languagc or

national language is a sign of thc unity and Purity Of the Qu

the distinctive kature of what Gaston Mir n calls the

b cois

PeoPle

QLIJbJcdn hroPc,

It is

thc homo

qucbeccnsis,Who sccs himsclf,to usc Vonmann s rcjoin(lcr, as a ncw man who

comes from a scP rdrc branch of the devclopmcnt of humanity s^ N iron s nativc
lanua c doeS n t exist It is a Pohtical P stulatc

on thc rejecti n ofthc Othcr

nly

Poliucal acti

founded n an idcntit fctish and

n can rcstorc him[thC Qu b coisl

3:ThC call f
r a rcturn
een culturcs,
to his homgencity,the basis for exchangc bct
nc Thcrc secmsto bc n a varcncss of thC
t h m gcncity is not cxaCtly a subtlc
fact that therc is no such d1ing as a hom gcncous Culturc, n

homogene us

htt rattl

In(lccd,thc ldc

more than thcre is

gy of homogcn00rqccts all clialo

sm

and is,thus,a forn ft talitarianis1u39

Creatin8a diStinction bct vccn a nativc language and a m thcr tongue entails
more than the reaPProPriati n of thc nati c languagc, a languagc clcformcd and

ahcnatcd by intcrkrcnce om En ish Thc disuncti n also imPhCS r

ccti

n ofthc

mothcr tonguc, vhich,in this case,is thc languagc of a f rcign culturc,thc Frcnch
culturc,Picrrc Gobin Points out hat this distinction sPcci cally rncans to the Play
tight h ing in a socicty that bears the luarks fc l nial exPcriencc The author

CxPCricnccs cvcn l 0re Prof undly thc diStancc bct

ccn indigcnous languagc and

.ritin
f reign
c
thc
samc
linguistic
hcritagc,that is t say,
,cspccially if both ha

40Furtherm rc,sharing a languagc vith

if thcrc is d
cl rather than bi` n dFisn,
`oss sit
French dOcs not

cll
vith a sohPsistic and ntol gical conccPt f culture
A rcling to this linc f tlainbng,thc mcDthcl tongue ofthc Qu b c0s someonc
1

clsc

s languagc,in thc samc

ay that thcir nativc country, vhich has bccn dcsPoilCd

by the Enghsh, has bcc n1c someonc else s c untry Theref re, clairning onc
nati e language mcans rcjccung onc sm ther,seering a tie that,in any case,was
ne cr nourlshin

348 ANNIE BRISsET

Ya til doncqucs unc Langue Qu becquoysc, ou Quob c uayse, ou
kob k uazc distincte dc la Francaisc commc cellc-ci l

tait

nagut

latin(lans laquelle jc PuissC m cxpomcrP D aucuns aussi Pr

tranchcr ccttc quCstion quc lcnts

rc du

mPtS

tranchcr lc c rdon on 1)ihcal qui lcs

rchc la lM rc-Patric, souticnncnt PorcmPt ircmcnt quc non ct quahcnt dc barbarc&i1nPurC la Parlurc dc nOstrc
ulgairc qu il faudrait
` parlcr inePtcn1Cnt
chaticr sans Piti c mmc unc fagon tout au Plus dC
an ct ls
IIS there indced a Qu becqu yse, r Quobcc uaysC or k b k uazc
languagc distinct from French, in the
va Frcnch uscd t be distinct

om

L'c

tin,in which I can cxprcss mysel

somc are as q ck to answcr

this qucstion as thcy arc slo t cut thc umbilical cord that c nnccts
thcm t thc Mothcr Country;they lnaintain that thc ans

cr is siluPly

no,and say that the lan uagc of our

ulgar is a barbarous and impure

vay f sPCaking that sh uld bc Punishcd mercilessly for l)cin8an incPt

way ofsPeakng French141

R/Iothcr tonguc is n t thc san1cn tion for A/1ich lc Lal ndc as it is f r Gaston
Miron Lal nde sc nccpt of m thcr t nguc corrcsPonds rn rc to vhat Mir n tcrms
a nati c languagc, For Lalondc, thc mothcr t nguc is n t thc language of thc

mthcr country,a borr0vcd languagc,vith a French suPcrior lincage, dcvoid of

42Thc n othcr t ngue is truly the

all our turPitudc,thus of a lcss
ulgar Culturc

language my mllther Ila hngue ma m&cj It thc languagc of one s rotDts,hll

of bvel w r(ls. in cllt l tcJ dcsc bc, r cxam1,lC,Fes bord cs0n sh rc lte),

sb rdiF`@ns(Piles

fin sl

rc

icc),Jcs/;rd chcs(ullclC rowtla),arld sc dri rcs(cedar

+;Thc m0thcr t ngue

8r vCs),and thcr c mlnon things in our vild surroundings
is an Edcnic, nati c, natural languagc, dating fron the idyllic cra fc l nization

(when we wcrc thc col nizers) In th Se days,it was a iee languagc,a language

in Perfect harmony with the ttxrritory of thc Qu

resist, ncithcr

l)

cois,a lan8uagc n()thng could

thc bluc spruce,nor the vhite cedar,nor thc Plains,n r tbc he 11ock

sprucc,that sO a vcd our ancestors but did not leave therll sPeechlCss and unable t

+4Lal
fn

namc thcm
nde s dcsnition ofmothcr t nguc is full
stalgia for a ParadiSe
ihcn tllc Qu l) cois could in cnt their wn namcs ft,r things,whcn
l st,a timc
the Qu b c is language was Cratylean and in C ml)lctC harmony with naturc Thc
dctcrioration of thc languagc foll
af reign Po

fcd thc l ss fthc c untr to thc

cnal hands of

icr

A la cl re f

nt"nc(lu Tor nto Stock Exchangc il cn

coulc des do ars s us n s(loigts c

d

am ur P ur la bclle damc dcs l

brr u

outfourou

n 1ne

billcts

a rcs

xouF nlinii,,ini crr l,,'rrdJ, J,m sFrix

attcndais un vrai languagc l

o il n y avait que(lcs
ac
bouffcr
tout
cru tout vant
Picuvrcs pour l

crissc dc cahcc dc tabarnaque

le j

ur tl j ai pcnso hors dcs fhnt mcs adn1is Penso dc

ce qu est vi re io je n al su que sacrer Projl

:llner

TRANsLATION AND CULTURAL IDENTITY

349

In thc clCar f untain fthc T ronto StoCk Exchange

ugh our ngers likc lo c

v thr
d llars fl

notcs for thc bcautiful lad

ouF1i,,inim j

brrou JoLIdourou
I vas

of thc masters
CrrCzJ, rrrdJ, hn2

riX

cxpccting a rcal languagc in thc Placc vhcrc thcrc

vas

only octoPuS to Cat1nc con1plctcly ra v and totally ah c

crisse dc c hcc

dc tabarnaquc

thc day I thou8ht outsidc of thc acccPtablc ghosts thought about

what it is t hvc hcrc I could nly swear Pr f l ltics14s

In a lyrical,hul rous register, Paul Chamberland

als

sP cm L af chcur hurle

takes uP thc tbcmc fn stalgia for a Pure languagc unsPo ed by tllc Other

HC CxPresscs his anguish that a truc language is impossil)le and sings thc Praises
of a Paradisc l

st

ram ur n1,an1is cntrc lcs dents les clos dc la vcngcancc

[ ]
pourtant j aurais Pu tre

tendre commc(lc la dcnkllc

mais aurak hllu dcPuis t
urs volcr roulcr sur
lc musclc cl unc tcrrc f rte cascadcr sur lcs hanchcs

"

aux razzias du Plaisir M re

unc ln} )rc Ou crtc

Libcrto A/l rc

Il

Am ur

`:e put thc kcys

N/I rc(lcb ut dans le cr atl n(lu

lnondc

f vengeancc in my mouth

but I coul(l ha c bccn tcndcr likc lace

but it v uld ha c l)ccn ncccssary to yr ll

over thC musclc

f a str

ng land cascadc nto the hiPs

other
thcr pcn to the Plundcrs of Plcasurc
Libcrty N1othcr L ve R/Iothcr standing in thc creation of thc vvorld,146

of a ln

It vould

be P ssible t rcturn to thc m thcr n t fo conditi ns: shc n ust bc

al ver and she must incarnatc lil)crty The mctaphor()f inccst sits vc VVith thc

mCtaPhor f

thc hmily that is o cn uscd to describc Quob cols soocty( this httlc

socicty that colllcs togCthCr likc a fan1ily

l

)47ImPhcit in thc lnctaPh r ofincest is a

n:ing for an unrcal Past,a past that can bc rc-creatcd by staying an

0ng onc so vn

:c sCC thC f rmation f a vici us circle fn stalgia vhich,cxclusi c

PC PlC Thus,
and in vard~turnin:,rCjCcts thc C)thcr and its culturc In this n stalgia for a rcturn

to nature, thcre is also a call for a rcturn to a languagc vhich, if not l st, has yct
to rc-en1crge
H
v docs nc choosc bct vccn thc languagc of a Paradise l st and thc futilc
search for a nati c languagc; fut c bccausc the language is contan1inated by thc

contcmPorary landscaPc in
hich

rksf,oP, fc
` "

tlrehc LIsc

and Fe ~S^f,oPP1nJ~c n

Fr

alrcady havc a namc before thcy cvcn SPr ut and there are rnany rnorc ofthclll than

Jndc[corn n thc cobl and the drbrc a sucre[maplC t1 cc] P4:This is thc
vcry lcmma tllat lcd Mich lc Ldondc,lll hCr dCkncc f tllc Qu l) ctlls language,

thc b`Jd

ad Pt

the SixtCenth-ccntury FrCnch of J achiIn Du Bc ay just as Du Bcllay had

350 ANNIE BRIsSET

indicatcd French by using an Itahan text as a rnodcl And c kn
v11
highly hc
thought of Italy!RCturning to this archaic f rm f French rcPresents an attemPt to
l)ay homagc

b coyse,to

to tllc vcry rich an(l original Langue Qu

vas sPokcn frccly and vithout

d1c timc whcn it

luany unhapPy comp cati ns n the frec Canadian

49In othcr words,thc Qu b cois languagc is a nostd c languagc,an
soil,
th,a

ction,

a fantasy of a l st objcct Justi

alist rhct ric,

hich

cati n

for its cxistcncc is found in nation~

cquates a languagc vith a PcoPlC and ith a sPcci c tcrritory

Nonc thc lcss,

hcn Mich lc Lal ndc is not vliting manifcst s, shC s 1tchcs t
standard c ntcmPorary Cducatcd Frcnch to cxPlain
vhat the rclationshiP bct :ccn
the Qu

b cois

writcr and thc languagc of Qu

Thc rolc f
riters

is siluPly t

b cois

society shoukl l)c:

takc as111uch intcrcst as Possil)lC in thc

Qu b c is collcctivity and to ADDRESs THIs COLLECTIVITY IN ITs

LANGUAGE By thisI mcan wc must regeneratc thc languagc,rcdisve must gi c it ncxs' signi can cc, ll in thc gaPs
cover it, reinvent it,
nc it,l akc lo c

vith d c helP f intcrnational Frcnch, shakc it uP, rC

vhatc xX il1 but ad Pt it aS thc
vith al,and n, and do xx=ith it
to it
languagc of the x milli n who sPeak Quob c0s so
Hcrc,oncc again, ve cncountcr thc

ie v

that languagc must bc homogcncous and

unincd,as sh uld the Pc Plcvh SPCak it in thcir daily livcs.But thcsc pcoPlc ha
nc cr used this languagc in thcir literaturc (Dh, Guilty Litcraturc! You n1ust l)c
relno ed

iom y ur Placc at thC ccntrc of thc institutlon!Thc Qu

vh is (lcscrving of the titlc sh uld cnouncc literary cgoccntris111

b c is

and

writcr

f r thc

ti1ne being Pull ut fthc Prix G ncourt/ and adoPt thc languagc ofthc(Qu b coiS,

thc truc sPcCch of rcal PcoPlC The duty of` ritcrs is in fact to

hich thcy colnc

of spccch back t t11c collcctivity fron

gi

c thc Po
Cr

, to thc point :hcrc

thcy should try to havc n10rc cOntaCt vvith students, vorkcrs,in othcr ords, ith
orclinary Qu

l)

c is,c`,cn

ifit mcans going to w1 ltC among thcm

Qu b cois vorkcrs,likc thcir Frcnch counterParts,arc a

a

ant- ardC j urnal in vhich this cxhortati n

51And,ofc ursC,

id rcadcrs f CJ,dnJc,the

aPPcared!But thc c ntradicti n

is e en

morc pr und Quob cois wr crs,who thcmscl cs(lo n t sPcak thC lan8uage of

hat iS truly Parathc collcctivity, are asked t rcturn to thcir linguistic roots
doxical here is that vritcrs arc cxPccted t usc thc language f thc PcoPlc vh c
l~
Playing the role f dcn1iurgc Arc thcy not cxpcctcd to rcstorc thc languagc,cons
f
hbcrtyP
idate it,gi c it back thc
igour it had at thc tilnc of its origins,thc tin1c

T redisc ver frccd m f languagc is to rcgain libcrty itsclf,To givc the P

cr f

SPeCch l)ack t a Pc Plc is,in both scnscs of thc v rd,to allothcn1tO sPcak and

vith a languagc ~1orc to thc point, it is, in fact, t gi c thcm

Pr vidC thcn)
wht t thc Othcr t
k away with thc injunction spcak Vhitc! s2But d cs this nOt

t(

constitutc a changc in idcological(lircction?Thc nati

nahst goal, anch rcd in the

notion of diffcrcncc, docs, in fact, nccd to bc rcinf rccd by(hstincti c charac_

tcrisdcs,and languagc is tllc m stimPo ant fthcsc
(listinctness rcallV cxists Onl in thc lo vcr classcs In

givc a languagc back to thc

Yet,ths brm f

Qu b c0s

v rds, the dcsirc to

d1cr

PcoPlc ac n cnicntly ambiguous tcr 1, masks thc

htc, as thcy attcn 1,tt Pr

ideol gical rcaPPr Priation of the languagc by the
tlac al)solutencss of tlle Qu b c is (li crcnce, and thcrcl)y jusu thc dCmand br

TRANSkLATION AND CULTURAL 1DENTITY

351

trcncc guarantees
Pohtical auton 1 y, PcrhaPs n rc than anything clsc, such a di
rCc 8nition to a nc v grouP of vriters and scts thcn aPart institutionally fron10ther
writcrs This, f coursc, ensurcs that thcy have no c mPctltl n n1th sc :ho

continue to comPcte f r thc Prix Goncou1 t

Mich le Lalondc s suggcstion that
vritcrs should h c and
vritc among thc

vorkin class~~vhich L Beauheu d cs f r sc cral1nonths f thc ycar brings

to l
lnd Luthcr s dilemma as hc Pon(lcrcd thc statc of thc Gcrman languagc at a
vhcn it as not et uniscd What varicty of Gcrman
timc

uld l,e aPProPriatc

for translation?Luthcr ProPosCd thc f ll
1ng:

Wc must scck ut thc n1 thcr in hcr h mc, thc childrcn i11 thc
strCets,thc c n)mon man in thc1uarkct-Place and exarninc vhat they
are sayi11g to(hsc
cr ho v thcy sPcak;sO that ve luay translatc according
to that Tl cn thc ill undcrstand and n ticc that c sPcak GCrn an
ju

lRc d1cm,3

In Pre re rcndum ntlti nahst Qucbcc as wcll as in rcbrmist Gcrmany,thc succcss

or failure f an ideol gy

dcPcndcd on a illingncss to Communicate vith the Pc Plc

To achic c hc en ny, a gr uP nccds g1 assr

ts suPPort. This vas the casc in the
crcation of a nc v rchgious institution in Gcrman

and remains s for thc crcation

l) c is hterary
of a htcrary institution in Qucbcc Thc cmcrgcncc of a tluly Qu
institution is dcPcndent uP n thC Cxistencc of a Public T11c Qu b cois language,

vhat thc
'hich has becn cntrustcd vith this n1ission, is to intcrnational French
:crc
to
Lati11
But
thcrc
is
a
diffcrencc

Vhcrcas Latin vas

dialects f Gcr1nan

uly a foreigl languagc to thc rn thcr in hcr hon e and to thc c mluOn man in

t1

thc markct placc, htcrn ional Frcnch in Qucbcc iS und on thc ra,in thc
nCwSPaPcrs, n tclcvisi n,and in the thcatrc Nationahstidcol gy rejects thC notion

of(QuCbCc French bcing

international, In this contcxt, thc vv

has a negati c connotation and rcveals a(lcsirc to cxCludC;thc

thc

t1

anscultural

arc ncgati e

tcrizcd as international,

rd intcrnatjonar

rnulticultural and

alucs, to be fought at all costs suddenly charac~

Frcnch has l)ccn de ncd as, and dchbcratcly madc into,

af rci8n languagc,such an ideology cn Phasizes thc illcgitilnacy of Frcncb,clairning

that it is ncithcr hcard n r undcrstood in Qucbec And Pr of f this assertion is to
l)c fllund in tl c

sPccc11of rdinary Quol) c is

Morc than any thcr

litCrary gcnrc, thc thcatrc lcnds itsclf t

thc diffcrcnti-

ating rolc entrustcd to languagc pv orc than any othcr, thc thcatrc,
hich gi cs
Primacy t thC Oral, lnakcs it PossiblC t hcar thc diffcrcncc bctx1 ccn 1 Cfcrcntial
Frcnch and ernacular Frcnch,a diffcrcncc that is n ainly a PhonCtic onc

The1nyths of Quob Cois as a language oftranslation

Thc Phrasc traduit en qu bocois contains a paradox, It indicatcs,in Frcnch,that

:ork
ill bc rcad is not Frcnch This contradiction clcarl
thc languagc in vhich tbc

uageP

illus atcs

d1c conhsi n surrou11ding thc mcaning of Quol) c is

lM ther t

vhich
ngucP Lost language or the truc sPCCCh fthc Qu b c isP But

Nt tivc lan

Qu l) c iS,and un(lcr w11ich orcumstances?Charactcrizations of Qu

b c is

rangc

352

ANNIE 8RISSET

thc myth f its Edcnic rigins via thc standard Frcnch of Gast nN1iron or

Mich le Lal nde, all thc

ay to thc s ci lecta1 1 cahty of a dccilnatcd lan8uagc
fr lla

callcd oud what cIcJcs racluit m q

illustratcs thc clusi c

b is

thcn meanP Theat tIanshuol

naturc ofthc Quob c is languagc,Inc nsistcncics in thc targct

languagc from onc translator to an thcr rcflect thc Parad xcs and thc inc hercncc
f dchniti ns of(2u b c is,as vcll as thc diglossia of t110sc xX ho Spcak it,As dc ni
dol1s of Quob

c is

arious brms

itsclf fluctuate,so trtnl)dations assumc

NIichcl Garneau,tl)c translat

r of IVf

cbcrh, aPPcars t havc gi en hin1sclf thc

task f rcbuilding thc c)riginal languagc of Qucbcc, the languagc of a distant Past

whCn Quel)cc was still icc Wlth this goal,transhtion bccomcs a Philological
cndcavou1

To rcturn to tllc b th fthc sPokCn tonguc in Qt1cbec,Garncau un(lc1

took a
critablc archac l gical exPloration ofthc language

I(lug dccp(aS if digging

a cll)into the(Qu b cois langua8c until I rcachcd its ancestral sourcc,I run1n1agcd
54 Garneau alsO statcs that hc rePr duccd thc
thr ugh thc glossarics like crazy'

h not thc dialcct of the Beaucc r thc

PhonCticS f thc Gasposic dialcct, But
vas aPParcntly bascd on a c nccrn R)r grcatcr authcnticit)i:
sagucnay? His choicc

Bcgilu1i1

g vith lcxical and syntactic archaisn1s,fronn the rural P etry f oId lan1cnts

and (]asP sicn Pr nunciation (that Garncau, hke Jacques FCrr n, hnds Inorc

aud1cntic),hC crcates a sOrt ofidcal Qucbcc languagc 5D

ThC Primacy Garncau accords t thc spccch of the GasPo Pcninsula clcarly
smacks ofidc l 8y It So haPPcns that thc GasPosic was the original site f QuCbCc,
ncc it vas hcrc that Jacqucs Cartlcr landcd in 1534and Plantcd a cr ss to Claim
thc nc land. The m tivatio1 for ch sing thc GasPt Sie dit11cct is PCrhaPs uncons(lious Thc ch icc,n ne tbc lcss,is a f11nctional onc,si11cc its Purposc is to rcstorc

thC QucbCc languagc to its original truth and Purity Thc

Csulting langua:c is an

idcal languagc ~ in othcr

vords, a Pcrf ct, n stalgic, n1ythical language. It is,

indccd, thc samc languagc as thc nati c tongue callcd f r by
iron;it rePrcscnts,

htcrally, thc language of thc c

untry at its birth It is thc languagc of the

that I

vasr

acc rding

sa

agc

to Garneau,
in thc infancy of thc tall grass, 56 M0rcOvcr,

nOstalgia for this l stinnoccncc su uscs thc .h le fd c na

e
of Pcr chcvdFs d,,,

LJi

^(LitdC Am

us Hor s)or

poctry fthc auth r

F jc d il,dSsdCr des ndsoPod s

(ElCgy br tl,e Massacrc of the Nas Po(lCs) Thc languagc in G neau s cbcFh
allovs us tO hcar thc xs ords of thc mothcr t ngue that Mich lc Lal ndc calls thc

language o rny rnothcr, in a vorld inhabitcd by c Fs so dJCs, nJ u`

c rs,JPdrl crs,
hc l)coPle
nr,s L1 t9Jrincnr, ddj``cnr,an(ls cdJndrJ mr Ll cn to Lady
i

`
AIacbeth c nvince hcr
l)usband f thc11eccssit

utC CSt rganiso Pis tu sa^Pus d

Ecoutc,j
ID

mm

qucl c

i111e

r PcurP

ai d j;nourri luon lait,j sais c que c est

lcP tit q ttte aPr s to

L)cr c mmct
gazouill
su

of thc c1

a hllc,j ya

I)is j y a ra

,bcn

ava

s ju

,m mc Pe11dant qu ym ara t
"r

ra

s arracho l

s craqu(

at( tc

tctol1dcs gcncivcs

cn dcux!)

1rdcberh harks back to thc earl

Thc language in Michcl Garncau s

Quebec It iS a language both innoccnt and ancestral, a naturar

lan

da

s ol

::ua{::C imbued

TRANsLATION AND CULTURAL lDENTITY

353

ith a PrilnitivC forcc It is thc languagc of thc PioncCrs vho had to hold thcir o n
f origins,a myth
against a hostilc naturc It tics the scarch for idcntity to thc1nyth
that thc languagc itsclf he1Ps t creatc Thc ShakcsPcarian vorld,and,in Particular,
that of i dcb rh, a sacri cial tragedy of Prh11iti c iolcnce,Providcs

a Pcrfcct back~

dr p

for a Prchistorical cxploration of t11c QtlCbCc language It is a Pcrkct vchiclc

for rcconstruCting a l)ast and for l,ringir1g to hght a tirnc hcn thc languagc and

thosc ho sPokc it owcd n d)ing t

anyl)

dy ThC ard1acol gy of thc Qucbcc

languagc1 cduccs ahcnation to dcgrcc`Cr and rcturns thc languagc to its Point

here all forms of dcPendcncc on thc Othcr arc ab hshcd

f rigin,
Litcrar classics sud1 /lrdcbcFh ci1c ch0SCn vchicles hr the Quebec languagc
in an attcmPt t rcmo c thc lam8uagc s

its dialcct status and to Pr ve that it is

oll

icv of critics
caPable of ful lling a refcrcntial f nction At lcast, this is thc

rk,gavc
PoCtic
status
to
a
languagc`vhich
hithcrto had

shakesPearc thr u8h his

ants to dcm nstratc d1e richncss f thc Qucl9Cc languagc and to

:Based on an inaccuratc idea( f

Placc it n an cqual footing it11ot11cr languagcs
thc statc ofthe Enghsh languagc in Prc-Ehzabcthan thncs,this iexx l))akCs Garncau

nonc;Garneau

thc cqual of shakcsPearC and clc atcs(Qu b c is to thc status of a language at thc
he ht fi P ctic maturity Thc Quob cois in Garncatl sl dcbcrh is an anachr n~
istic langua c,juSt as ShakcsPearc s languagC is t day,In this scnsc, ve can say that

Michd Garncau s translauon mst

Pro

:iclc contcn1Porary Qucbec sPeakcrs,n t

vith a language they can actually sPeak, but rather vith a fcchng for their history
and thcir anccst1 al tics In any case,thc crcation of this anccstral languagc, nativc

languagc accordi11gto N iron, or lIl0t11Cr tonguc according to N

brings to a suCCcssful c nclusi n thc search for a languagc of onc

conditlon lor cstabhshing thc Qu

cb

lc Lalondc,

so vn,a

necessary

b cois idcntit

hat
Michel Garncau sl)hilol gical endca ors arc uniquC Gencra y sPcaking,
is termcd Qu b c()is tmnslati n attcmPts to C aL,li a dicrtl)cc bctwecn tllc
contcmPorar)French of Qucbcc an(l tl c Frcnch of Francc, In this way,it hlls in
linc with thc Plogrammc of thc nc v QuCbcc tllcatrc,whiCh, cor ng to JCan
Claude Gcr laill, n1ust restorc our national languagc to thc full vigour f its truc
;9But this lan uagc,
hich is the rctically the languagc fd`c Qu b cois
exPrcSSi n

crsit) xthCn uscd as a language of translati n Lct

nation, disPla)s ast nishing di

us l
k, r

ln thc stagc dircctions of Qu

cxamPlC,at scvcral cxtracts

b c is

translations

Chekhov,Les Tro1ss urs(rflc Thr

Robert La1onde

e sist

rs),translated by

COE tf s 1LO :lrOD s ;B H tJCO PD i1r 1t/B s

()Ts
4 lfOsP R 7R s E11rr 4 t,RD`\11`RE 1
ET D B`B
1lJ s LON C sT t/\D`=lrlNc H
s'1L E'4J 1NlJ R sT C(9Nr'(
`
NsOLE` D PRJ` T jl Ps

[1 lf`1rso\DEs

G s s

CORRFG

Nt/NFFOR D Ns TtJTRJC

s s D orRs

G NOL` ET rJT Js 1B L sT
D N R

Pr, JR lJN sI f L s

HN(9E T^Ssrs st,N cAXL

s

IJR Es

OCCtJP J TrRE B[ ON I

354

ANNIE BRISsET
N CORRrc,EJN s sD t9JR :~Ca%it un an atllourc hui que
PaPa c mort Lcjour dc ta te Isd)cllc.On gcl tJ Pens S ircr follt
Toi Isabellc, t tais tcnduc sur lc (h an, blanchc c n1n1c unc mortc
Ca hit rien qu un an Pis On Peut d j en ParlCr c mmc dc n in1
Cis F (

Tu ois,t cs-t-cn robe blanchc Isabcllc,Pis t as

PortC qu id autrc
air tcllcment cn santo! T cs si bellc(lans c tc robc l C cst a cc la
l

r bc

dc maman quc tu l as i"tcP60

Thcorctically,thc translator has reProduccd authcntic North A1 1crican rural Frcnch

Thc dialoguc uses oral Contractions such as

ExPrcssi nsl e vikr hllc

lDensais,

PiS,

aSr

and

and c cn ntc immcdiatdy i(lcnti

te robc

tllc sPCakcr

as Frcnch Canadian shc is a tcachcr and a(loct r s claughtcr, but her sPccch,full

of CxPrcssions likc t es~t-cn robc, is n t the sPccch f a culti ated PcrSOn and is

in markcd contrast to the Quob c is uscd by the translator in his stagc dircctions,
Thcsc languagc choiccs can be cxPlaincd by the fact that translat

rs f PlayS int

Qu b cOls

alWays bcgin by tlansPosin8thc ori nal setting int al wcr rc stC1

Bli adicr~General Pros rov s house bccOn)cs thc housc
f a villagc n tablc 'fbc

hkh tllcrc is a largc r m b1is t1 a )ssal n (c mlDlt te ith cc lumns) bch11d

rncd into a n1odcst hving r on

vith a vcry dol cStic and ordinary
I
atInosPhcrc vve havc alrcady notcd that Garncau has a tcndcncy to rcmo

c from

thc Original text any indicators that Place thc charactcrs in a don1inant sOcial Positi n Itc ukl bc sai(l that,in thc intcrcsts of rePrcsCnting
uVbJc r on thc stagc,thc
characters of thc righ1al
0rk undcrgo a social lo
cring in thc translation VVc

ma)wdl ask,d1cn,t

wbat cxtcnt tlDc chlDl

is a function of the sOcial P

of h nl,l S translcatcd in Qucbec

11is s cial lo :crin has a

sition of thcir characters

direct cffcct n thc languagc uscd by the charactcrs in thc translati

n,allo ving thcn

to sPCak a tyPc of languagc n1arkcd by Ph nctic, lexical, and syntactic featurcs

charactcrisdc of sPccch in Qucbcc, and Particularly charactcrisdc of the lo cr
classes And it is thc lo cr classcs
ho n1ust bc Portrayed, sit1ce Portrayal of thc
l
cr classcs rcinforccs the sovcrcigntist crcdo, based, as it is, on thc c nccPt f
the ahcnation of thc Pc Ple This ide l 8y of(lifference docs not allo : for tbc
ncutrahty of thc Frcnch sPokcn by the educatcd classcs in QuebCc,The diffcrcncc
bctwccn QucbCc Fre11ch and tllc rcnch of Francc is,in Point of hct,as ciolcctal

ne This is c idcnt invrittcn

n

stagc dircctions,

hich carry no spcci c

linguistic

arkers of(Qu b c is sPeCch

Brccht, Bonne/ mc dc s ~Tchou n(rhc Good Pe onr

sechu n),translated by G bcrt TurP
r

sOJR~

dnJ

I'END tJR D B tJ s DR ss t/PtJB FC

^Chu

endcur cl cau dans caPitale(lu sctchouan; ici

n1on traVai17c cst p niblc

l)Cndant lcs s chcrcsscs~hut

pour

trou cr dc l

que jC cours

autl

c bo11t du mondc

cau
j en vends Pas

Pis PCndant lcs Pluics bcn

cc tltIi reg,at,s1zrro1Jr ddns n

rr

c``c,Pr r CC C Csr Ftl n2 s0rc

cn Hn de c mPtC~ya peu Pr s rien quc suos Dicux

TRANsLATION AND CULTURAL IDENTITY

355

qu on pcut comptcr pour sc fairc aidcr

grandc joic
bcn rna Plus grandc
appHs P un marchand de b tail c mmc ycn PassC sou ent dans lc
coin quc dcs Dieux _Pis dcs hauts Plac S~SOnt Cn routc Pour icitC Pis
j

qu on

serait cn(lr

it dc s

je suPPoSc que lc cicl s

attendre lcs recc oir

cst tann(:

dc nous cntendrc nous plaindrc vcrs

lui dins airs62

Thc ccntral idc logica11natrix of the discoursc on Qu

b c is

ahcnad n lnirr rs the

thcmc of Bmcht s Good Person scchtr n,a hblc sct lll tl e Pr vhcc f Sechuan,

which rcPrCsCntcd all thosc PlaceS where men exPloit thcr mcn 63And Quebec
,By shccr chancc,thc srst linc f thc Play sets
is onc of thosc Places :herc Iucn
Vang is thc
thc tc,ne fc,r the theme f Qu b c0si<lcndty
cry symbol f tllc
crsi n bccomcs
Qu b c iS,Thc mt rchand d cau (wcttCr mcrChant) f thC Frcnch
in QuebCc thc vcndcur d cau ( :atcr~scllCr) This changc n ay aPPcar insigni cant,
but thc Ph netic si ni cancc ofthc cxprcssions choscn by thc Qu b c is translator

sh uld n t bc o

crlookcd.Thc vcndcur d

cau

caPturCs rnuch bcttcr thc sensc

thc p rtt ur d cau, a tcrm trcac|iti nally cmPloyed by Qu b c is to dcscrlbc the

infcriority of thcir s cial c nditi n and thcir cxPloitation sincc thc Enghsh Conqucst
Elsc vhcrc

in thc Play, thC Cxprcssion

bcc n1ing n

notrc province acquircs a modiHcr,

trc bcllc pro incc/ thcreby changin8the refCrcnt f thc(lisc urse

Scchuan bcc mes an allcgory hr QucbCc,just as Scotland d csin the Qu b cois

transIation of

dcb rJl

Hags are an insult t

lCS

ur

draPcaux clcs tranges insultcnt not

beautful sky ) This nc rekrent

themes f the dlscoursc of Qu b c is

themc that clcarl

inf rms

j aPPartiens eunc

endeur

d cau ( n

Qu b c is

Garncau s

alienati n: Quebcc

idi s ncratic

bcau cicl ~ f rcign

echoes one fthc main

is a desp iled n ion, a

translation: C)nation 1iscrablc

and c rrcsponds cxactly t

Chu

a
ater_seller) Wc n w bCgin to scc why translation int
nation ben lllisorabc

almost al :ays in 0h:cs Pr lctarization of thc languagc,6+Thc PauPcri'a~

ti()n ofd c signiHcr rc ects tlac alicnation

f tl

c Quoboc is Public r whom thc

text is intcndcd Thc ProcCdurc uscd to achicvc this is graphen1ization By graPhc

ization
c lncan thc:raPhic rCahzation of thc diffcrcncc bct vccn thc Ph neticS of

thC Qu b c is languagc and th sc f an unmarkcd Frcnch: chu / jc suis/ su

/ sur lcsr dins airs / dans les airs But this transcriPtion is not al vays func~

tional C nsdcr,for cxamplc,Jcan Claudc G m n s rctIa lad n f

H R sPccr bFe

cl

1 dd

mclri
:Ah

oui

lcs Plans,y a acht

lui qu

yacul id cp ur toutc han?,

le b is,yl a sci ,yl a sabl

a coll
Pis y l

toutc est emboudttt pis coll(:han

dou,

Breclat

nJ:

Ya tir

ParSque

a ParrC lCS panturcs,y a Pas un

hittc rustiqtlC!65

Hcrc,thc v tten rm is tamPcrcd w ht g e the lusion that therc is an irrc

concilablc(liffcrcnce bctxs ccn Qu b c is and Frcnch But h wd cs thc French

cn11)ou et
Pronunciation of lx ords suCh as achctcr,
ParcC quC/ or Part
diffcr om thc Quob cois Pr nun0ation, a Pronun0ation that is suPposcdly
,

rc ected

in Gcrmaln s sPellingP On thc samc Pagc and in the mouth of thc same

356 ANNIE BRIssET

character
vc nnd thc f llo ving:
otre ncquC F ubcrt and
ttc OnCque

66Thcre are si1nilar il

Hubcrrc
c nsistencics thr ughout thc tcxt,As
c1nentionCd
carhcr, thcsc inconsistcncics Iorn1 Part of an ide

l gical

PattCrn

the def rlucd

hat he calls ur national

Co(lc that hnttions PllmaHly as a brm of(li cnda

spcllh1g, invented by Gcrn1ain and PrcscntCd as

languagc, is in fact an in

tion and,c nsequently,af rm of exclusi n

In luany cascs,thc lan uage uscd for translation rcscn11)les that used in dran1atic

vriting,in hich an ahenated sPccch aricty is rcahstically transP Sed and takcs n
a cathartic funcu n This is vhat Michcl Trcmblay set out t achicvc His Pla) s
Pa Cd

tlac way hrimPlcmcntation of Mkh lc

langua|!

Laloncle s pr gnm

hrtllc Qu b cols

thc su

cci c(l

cd ofJou f as a languagc br thc tllcatlc h

dcal f attcntion

a great

RrIany acccPtcd it inunediatcly, vhilc()thers catc-

goHcally lcjcctcd it;howe cr,bc,th g oups sPc11t too muCh timc and
cffort on thc subjcct, in my oPinion, to the dctrin1ent of its intendcd
use in thc theatrc.

As I ha c Rcn said

SPcak f rny audacity in titing in

,it is all vcll and go d to

c
truc Joucz ,l9ut

must not forget

hat hcs bchh1d this outcast of a langua :c, this u.:ly, Poor, anacrnic

vh havc
hte
disgraccfur ctc, ctc, ctC
It is not only thc

I
aln
unhaPPy
blems
and
it
is
P
ssiblC
to
say
undly
human
Pr
Prof
:ith ut a glass f Martini in nc s hand, Rosc Ouimet s NIaudit
cul!

is the strongest cxprcssion f dcsPair that a Qu

b coise

can uttcr

Did thc audience undcrstand this in

s Be es-socurs or vas it cnough for
thcn to be sh ckcd

because it v

as

ulgarP67

Thc soci lect ch scn l)y Tremblay is functi nal It Plays a rolc in thc renc
al Oft11e
tl

c 0c
l acsthcxt

by mo ing

tllose norms that Prc,(lucc tlle eBl t f

alit)'The

naturahstic rcPr ducti n of thc lan8ua Cj lts Pe PlC into a ne va :arcncss But
Trcmblay docs not clai1nt bc suPPlanting what Prcviously functi ned as a rc r_
cntial la1 gugc, oud

iS r hlm simPly onc ofthose rc crs ailal,le h thc ritten

languagc

thc workn
class xl'odd,whilc om
tin e to tiYnc all vving mysclf the luxury( fa Lysist1 ata and a Cit dans
,euf But those
hosc rolc is t continuc to ProducC such PlayS as

Lysistrata and Cit (lans l Ocuf, thcy,t o,ought to allo

themscl cs

tbc luxury()fa Bcllcs~s curs occasionally

I cann t acccPt pc PlC
My rolC is t continue t

dcsc1 lbc

lo king

do vn thcir n scs at

cs Bc

ulgar

`cs~socurs just bccausc

it is
vard Albcc,Tcnncssce
Vilhan1s,and
John
Ardcn in Enghsh! Wcrc thc Americans and thc Enghsh ashamed
f
,thcy s11 uld rcad IE(l

coming ttD griPs with rl,cir

o1 d

?6:

N1ichel Trcn1blay sJ LIt2 Plays crcatcd an oPenin: in thc htCrary systcn1 in

QuCbcc N such oPcning cxistcd in the htcrary systcn

of France This nc

catrical form had an imPortant consequCnce; it broadencd thc translatability of

f Anglo-American Plays,
hich n0 :had a natural cquivalcnt in

the s ciolccts

TRANSLAT

DENTITY

0N AND CULTURAL

Itis dme r usto bc

QuCbCc culturc,tlaough n tin Frcnch culturc

nt1

357
anslating

Amcrican Plays ourscl cs!Thc Frcnch, :hom I much admirc i11cidcI1tally,havC d C

9Thc inadcquacy Trcmblay addrcsscs hcrc

gift of disnguring An1crican thcatrc.

an(l wtas a kature f Frcnch d1catrc oftllc dmc,as opPoscd to Qu b c is

is systt mic

thcatrc,whcrc the translatl n fw rks by Tcnncsscc Villiams,Edward Albcc, r

Eugcnc C) Ne l
vas no l ngcr faced
vith a linguistic oid, I~et us look at t
o

Qu b c is

c lollowing cxtmct Rom Dcs

tl anslati ns of tl

c un(fcr rh

EJms

t , rk t da I coukln t take no intcrcst T hcl1 ith

thc farn1!I na lca in it!I
c turned thc co
0thcr stock l se!I ve
`S an

en1, I m
druv crn into the
v ods ,har they kin bc Flcc! By;eein
C bor:

frccin

I couldn

1nysclf! I rn quittin

atch cn1burn,an

hcrc today! I ll sct rc

ll lea c Ycr lXlla vt

thc6clds back t G d, s that n

be a-goin

d1in

an barn an

t h use

haunt thc as11cs, an

human kin nc cr touCh

ll v l

cn1! I

ll

to Calif ,rni a

Translation by Robcrt RiPPs and Yves sauvageau

C b
;J
Pourrais Pas tI availlcr at1jour(l hui,,,m y scns Pas rc cur Au
(liabc la tcrrc! J la l chc l ! J
iCns (l l chcr lcs
achcs Pis l rcstc du

b tail! J lcs ai P uss s

rcnclant la libcrtc,j
cl

i0 J`as sacrer l

b timcnts
r

dcl)ar lc bois o

cst qu

n
ku ma

n1 a laisser ta lu

rc s

lu

,Pis m a

Pron1encr dins ccndrcs

mcttc mcs chamPs au b n ycu c mmc a y

d a
hun1ain qui) t uchCr nt

y vont tc libcs! Lcu

a
urd hui quc j Pars
Pis;:range,m ar gar(Icr br ler les

mc la d nnc aussi C

au1

a jamais hen d un

cmbarqucr P ur la CahR)rnia71

Translation by Michel Dumont and Marc Gr goire

CdboF:J ai Pas t caPablc dc m
m tcnt

mcttc

u ragc aui()ur(l hui

Pas Au y bela hrmd J cn`Cux Pus Lcs vachcs,j

l usses,Pis

toutc lc rcssc(lu b tad ito1I!J lCS ai amcn cs dans l bois pour

lCs

qu ys yc11t libCs!J

m me!J

Ca

lcs al l ch cs

n)

cn va d

m sOn1,ls

kittt

lil) r

cs Pis Cn hisant qa,J mc Sus lib r m ~

ur(l ho!J
a mcrerl
Pas Plus tard qu a

%u

aux b imcn ;j`a lcs r g (lcr brd ,l,ls toutc c quc j

a
laisscr au fant mc de ta rn re,c cst(lCS ccndrcs;c cSt l b n Ycu quin1 a
dcnn

la t rrc,j

a y r denncr

n10n tour,Pis y arra Pusjan1 ricn d hu-

lnain qui aP u ou re y touchcr!J

a partir Pour la Cahfournic72

i(lcs

h1guisrll
c
cxists

The(li crsity of social and rcgional lccts of vcrnacular Frcnch in Qucbec Pr

the translat r vith
t

a l)1

oad rangc of languagc Possibditics This

J the samc cxtcnt in Francc Thcre is l)o1

eaS0n
h a French translat r sh uld

not translatc C) Ncill int thc sociolcct offarmcrs of any rcgion in the country Such

a translation, l)o
c Cr,
Vould bc c nsi(lCrcd as arti cial as a translati n int

ncutral

Frcnd1,as N chcl Trcmblay is all too vcll awarc,The targct tcxt would

not lncet the critcria of accePtability sct by thc litcrary institution,

To translatc sociolects into Frcnch, thc translator has t

ntcnd,not vith an

intrinsic(lc cicncy in thc linguistic systen1 f Francc,but rathcr vith d FinJuisrjc void
in Fhc normd

c
sFcn

tDf

irs FiFeJ dru

Ideolo:y can bc dctected bchind thc

id,as

358

ANNIE BRIssET

Rcn e Bahbar has sho

n in hcr study f languagc usc and its social cll ct in thc
niI1ctccnth ccntur
to cstal)lish a ne

Fl^Cnch110

:a 1d

e17;A Qu t) c is writcr managcd to usc languagc

distinctl e dra 11atic rm

Frc11ch ritcr has evcr managcd

dC thC n mali ng hngtllstiC dcology of thc Rcpubhc to this end Two

social currcnts in Qucbcc n.adc this Possiblc~the glori cati n of differencc and

thc rcc

n fthc Qu b c0S

gnkion of an Amcrican comPonCnt in thc amrmati

idcntity Sincc Michcl Trcmblay bcgan vritin8in`o1

,abundant usc has bccn n adc

of all thc s cial rcgisters f sPokcn Frc11ch in Qucbcc,b th on thc sta e an(l
d

on tclcvision Yct, it
vOuld n t bc unrcasonablc t suggcst that
o1`ti iz0r
n f
thc Frcnch-Canadian thcatrc has l)ccn influcnccd l) the sociolcctal charactcr f the
An Amcrican tllcatrc,thc m st poPult l re n languagc thcatre in QuCbCc Onc
thing is clcar, thc usc F thC crnacular, an innovation in Q11cbec, has lcd t

the

n of a national thcatrc that does n t usc Frcnch

cmergencc and institutionahzati

lnodcls usc fthc

crnacular has als rcinforccd s vercigntist asPirati ns by turning
thc thcatrc into an idcological sPringboard Thc vernacular is thus an effecti c
vchiclc f r thc ccntral thclnc f thc s vcrCigntist (hscourse
d1c alicnati n of
(QuCbec s cicty

Why transIate into Quob cois?

nc eXPlanation for thc Phcn n1~
Thc scarch f r a languagc of onc s n oCrs
cnon of rctranslauon Thc rcjccti n of thc Frcnch of Francc, dcclncd inadequatc
r translating lt,Kign plays into Qu b cols rcality,Prr,xidCs anotllcr Thc sca1 ch
f

r a nati

ation

c languagc also cxPlains thc Phcn mcnon of rctranslati n T11c rePatri-

to QuCl)cc f thc translation of rcign worksl lthcrt

x ailal)lc

nly in Frcnch

Provide its0 n transladons f

translatlon is sccn as csscndal QucbCc is ablc t

foreign Plays,but thcyill l)c rctranslations, Rctranslation is a Particularly intercsting Phcnomcn nf olu the Point of icxl'of c nuncnts tllat arc lnadc in rclation
to It

Asitis dccmcd in)l) rtant t

lators ha

oid usingimpo1ted tl anslations,Quob

c 1 t
c bccn kno n to translatc
on1 1anguagcs thcy a

such cascs,thc translat r has t0 :ork fr

colS traI,s-

fan ihar vith

hl

intcrmcdiatc translations F r cxamPle,

Gillcs A/1arsolais translatcd strindbcr:and ChCkh

vithout kn in8 s vcdiSh r

nlcz Both uscd

Russian.Thc samc is truc of N ichcl Trcmbla s transladon ft/nc`e

`ord~R)r~

rd translations Pr vidcd by sPcakers sn1ihar 1th thc languagc of thc

:crSi0n by vork" g ith cxisting

origil)al tcxt Thc) thcn l)roduccd thc dehnitivc

Frcnch c)r Enghsl`translati ns (Dn occasion, the innucncc f thcsc carhcr trans~
lati nsis

so Pron unccd thatthc rigins ofthe(Qu

Ac mParis n oft 0translati ns

of IJ,lcFc Ion

b c is

sPcaks

crsion

r itscl

arc hardly in doubt

ic|e1Treml)lay

Elsa TrioIet

sEREBRIAKOV

sEREBRIAKOV

Donncr toutc sa`ic

Donncr toutc sa vic

la scicncc,
s

habitucr;son cabinct
de tra ail,

;la scic 1cc,

trc habitu ;sOn cabinet

de tra ail,

TRANsLATION AND CULTURAL IDENTlTY

;s n audit

irc,;dcs camaradcs

s n audit ire,;des can arades

norablcs

cncrcs

Ct,tout Cl un

359

ct,soudain,

couP,

de but en blanc,

on nc sait Pourquoi,

sc rctrou cr dans cc s Pulcrc

c toycr t us lcs j urs

sc rctrou cr dans cc cavcau,

oir

dcs gcns stuPidcs

tous les j urs

des gcns idi ts,

ocoutcr dcs Pr P S insigni cants

ocoutcr dcs con crsations

qu1ne Prcscntent Pas

lc rn indre int

jc vcux vi :rc,j omc lc succ

jc vcux

iv ,j mc le

succcs
j

"mc la cd
j

bri ,le br t

mc

la colobHto,lc bruit,

ct, lCI,

imP ssi nd &rc cn cxll

Plcurcr sans arr t lc Pass

opicr lc succ s dcs autrcs,

craindrc la1nrt

Cst l

cXil,

Plcurcr sans arr t lc Pass

Picr le succ s dcs autrcs,

craindre la rnort

.,

cn Peux Plus!

Jc n

Cn Pcux Plus

JC n cn al Pas la fclrcc!

JC n

Cn p la brcd

JC n

Et l

Et si a cc~
a,

, cn Plus,

on nc cut Pas1nc Pardonncr

on nc cut pas rnc Pard nner

n a icillcsse!

a ieillesse!74

Thc t : cxtraCts are rcmarkably silnilar C 1uParcd

ith Elsa Tri

lct

s translatlon,

Rnlchcl Tremblay s translati nc nt ns Occasional Paradigmadc diffcrcnccs(cavCau/

s
Pulcre),but his syntax bllows Triolct s alm st cxaCtly Thc similarity makcs one
w nder what the real rolc of retranslation is in Qucl)Cc In somc countocs,inter

mediate translations Play an csscntial r lc, Thcy Providc acccss to forcign vorks
that
oul(l rcmain othcr :isc unkn
vn for vant of a translator caPablC n t nly of

rca(hn thern in the original l)ut of translating thcln(lircctly int

thc languagc of
thc country75Thcre are a nun 1)er of cxPlanations for thc Phcn n1cn n of indirect
translation in(Qucbec,that is tO say,translati

n bascd n carhcr translati

ns Works

tlanslatccl in this manner dF

o'cxiSt in thc tar8ct languagc Thcrc can c cn bc
sc cral contcn11 rary translations of a sin81c vv rk.A nun11)cr of Frcnch translations
f classics from othcr languagcs ha c achic cd can nical status ~translations of
strindberg l)y Boris Vian, Pirallclcllo by BCnjamin Cron
Tri lct Gi

n1 dcls/

en thc similarity betxvccn Qu

it is dif cult t

cux, or Chckh by Elsa

cois tlanslations and thcir French

sustain thc n tion that a Quob

c iS

audiencc
oul(l nnd

thc Frcnch crsion hard t undcrstand Morco cr,

hcn the translati ns arc by

Adam v,Pitocff,

r Vitcz, nc can hardly clain that thcy(lo notrncasure uP l)ecausc

they`vcrc not translatcd by thcatrc spcciahsts VVc may thcrcforc c ncludc that,
in thc Qucbcc theatrc,translati ns imPolted om Francc arc sccn to Play an anu
nrlediating rolc, This is t;ill)crt Turp s argumcnt
XlVhcn I 1 cad the Frcnch
translation of l orhcr C urdJc,n

imagc camc immcdiately to min(1,

what was

lacking in the Frcnch translati n vas not rcHcction or cn1otion;rather,it vas c oca-

tion The Frcnch t1 anslation of

r Fher C

urd e

sakl n thing to mc 76 This samc

360 ANNIE BRIssET

a umentis usc(l by Micllcl Trcmbl and Gillcs M s l st Jusu thek wn aln s

lations, vvhich vverc mcdiatcd,Pa1 adoxically, throu8h thC

cry Frcnch translations
thcy wishcd t rePlacc:

Whcn he rcad Elsa Tri lct s translati n, Tremblav

vas struck bv its
cly H d, litCrary charactcr ,,He thercl )rc in tcd Kim
Yar shc skaya,
hosc nati e langua e iS Russian, to translatc f r hin1,

v rd by vord,thc languagc of Chekhov Thc rcsult

vas signihcant and
rcvcahng Trcmblay n ticcd that Chckh v s languagc is morc ntzFurd Ffldn
rclati

FiFcr

,and that Chckh vian dialoguc is full f undcrstatcment It was in

duced his translation
Thc rcsult,and y u
ill

this sPirit that hc pr

bc ablc t judge for yourself, is a dirccr

Chekho than Elsa Triolct s

dioi,,

It is ccrtainly closcr t

translati n,PrcciSe l)ut not ro@`iFcr

D cctor Gillcs Marsolais usccl thc samc proccdure in his Lansltati n f

As I didn t kn
vs vcdish,I
ould n t ha c darcd t

translatlon

f jlriss uFic

ilriss u

produce a French

cxccPt that I was f rtunate to n1cct Ulla Ryghe,

a Swcdish cinematograPhcr living h Qucbec

t

,77

I was d cn ablc,thanks
the

hcr c llab ration (and to hcr dictionarics!), to go dircctly t

S
cdish

tcxt and to c rrcct ccrtain n istakcs vhich had bccn carricd vcr

fr
n translation

t translati n

I comPared this tcxt to cxisting trans-

lations and
vas thcn ablc t Pr duce the rst draft of thc prcscnt
translation7S

ARcr rcworkin:the rst translation,which hc klt to bc too hteral,Gillcs Mars

arrivcd at thc samc c nclusion as 1ichcl Trcmbla

lais

Thc rcsult vas a sccond,rn rc direct,rnorc spokcn translation,a translation m rc imluediatcly accessible t

thc pubhc and,nnally,I behc

c,

closcr t thc sPirit of strindbcr879

Thc si1nilarity of argumcntation is strilong Parad xically,ignorancc of thc s urce

language led the t translat rs t disco cr thc truth of the original tcxt that

nccalcd Acc rding

n d arc morc n ural,simPlcr
and cl ser to us :O Thc litcraoncss, or arti6oahty that thc Qu b c is translat r
criticizes in French translati ns can bc sccn as Proof that the distancc bct fcen
thc crnacular and thc litera1 y languagc is n longcr thc samc in Francc as it is
in QuCbCc This is esPcciany truc r the thcatrc The ncw Qu b c is thcatre has
prcvious translati ns,and csPccially French translations,had c

to Trcmblay,the two En

ish tl anslt ti 11s

achic cd its() vn Singularity, by doing a

of tJr,dc

`ay

vith this linguistic(listinction, It has

f thc homc and the street, its status as a litcrary

languagc To conf rm to thc critcria of acccPtability in the nc v Qu b cois
tllea c cm,the anslati n ofa work hkc
dem isefJt u by B ris Vian mu
bc sh rn f its French literariness This is prcciscly vhat G, N1arsolais(hd in his
givcn thc koir,c, thc lan:uage

translation

TRANStATION AND CULTURAL IDENTITY

BorIs Vian

Gi11es Marsolais

cdn:JC ri ||vC

cl

dn:Mol,JC vC

ordinairc

quc jc suis coucht

us un

cl

grand arbrc dans une f

b ure.Je vCux m ntc r,

lc clair Paysage tout brillant

tsombre Et

cnvic de m lltcr,
molltcr jusqu au sommct,

P ur rcgarder lc clair Paysagc

o brillc lc s leil ct d r ber les cufs

de soleil, ct d(:nichcr lc ni(l

d

sOus un grand arbrc

dans unc f

monter au so11nct,Pour ir

les Ocu

ordinairc quc jc suis

c uch

r t

o d rmcnt

361

or:1

or dc ccttc niCh

e:2

Mars lais s rctranslation has rcmo cd thc P ctic scansion that rcinR)rccs thc cxPres~

sion of thc(Ircam,but,asidc m that, in what othcr ways iS his transla n

Particularly Quobt

one s0 vn

c isP

Wc arc(langcrously closc t

thc idc

gy of thc languagc

and fs hPsislll hcn a orkvrittcn in or translated int

thc French

f Francc is rcjccted on the grounds that it oukl bc inacccssible to thc Quob cois
Pubhc M niquC N ercurc, vvho playCd Mothcr C uragc in Gilbcrt Turp s
Qu l) c iS anslati n,has this tO sa
In thc Frcnch translati n thcrc arc occasional cxprcssions that I didn

undcrstand and a cliffercnt syntax;thcsc havc bcc

mc patcntly clear in

this translation I for examPle, I had had t act in thc Frcnch translation ofthc play,I`vould ha e had to rcad thc Enghsh translati n to rasP

all thc subtlctics and all thc nuanccs This is Rcn thc casc f r Frcnch
translations of f reignvritcrs:3

The French translati n,underst od l)y thc Quob cois Pubhc for dccadcs,suddenly
bcc n es Paquc and inaccessiblC to this
cry Samc Pubhc T undcrstand
tCXt,the anc Ph ne readcr in QucbCc must hcnccbrth makc a(lctour

Enghsh, that is to say,

ia a forcign languagc Grantcd,
o ccdng to in Flench translati ns

is tl

the Frcnch

by way of

vhat thc actrcss is rcally

c Poli ed languagc tbat dt tracts om tl c

original tcxt
Acc l 1ing to Gilles Marsolais,it would bc abnormal

wcrC not

tl

a foreign languagc Play

anslatcd r adaPtcd by a Qu b c0s bc rc bcing staged 4Gi cn thc

dcsirc to rctcrritoriahzc, thc nati

nahty of thc translat r bcc mcs, aPParently, a

m r critc rion r lc timizh8translad ns of lDlar stagCcl in Qucbcc and hr

cnsuHng thcir acccPtance Yet Mars l s cchocs B r`Vian,who hilnsclf frcsaw

thc ncccssity for a nc :Francicization of uFic

as Part of thC Cvolution of the

languagc of thc Frcnch thcatrc, :s

In 1968, thc languagc of thc thcatrc in Quebec undcr vcnt a revoluti n f
truly Copcrnican ProPortions (Quob c is translators had : od rCas ln for trying
t bridgc thc gap bet :ccn thc languagc of thc Frcnch theatre and thc languagc of
thc ne

tl

catrc For Trcml)lay and r many othcrs,Qu b cois

translati ns arc

c On thc stage than Frcnch translations bccause thcy makc usc f an

ralcy that cchocs c cryday sPeech And indccd, parts of the dialoguc in A/lichcl
TrcIublay s transladon f
c dI,J`d arc markedly(hffcrcnt n1 th sc of Elsa
ll

orc cffccti

Triolct s vCrsion

`nc

362

ANN1E BRIssET

Tremblay

Elsa Triolet

Jrdrind:(Dn cst touttcs

rdFin :l` us sOrllrllcs tous

des Piquc-assictte chcz lc

des Parasitcs chcz lc bon Dicu

bon Dicu,T

Toi,cOlnlnc sonia,con luc Ivan

i,c Iumc s nia,

P tro itch,PcrsOnne

c()lumc Ivan Potrovitch,

so11nc rcstc,ricn hi1
PC1
on trava lc

Toutcs

c,

t utcs!

(Dusqu

inc:Au

tl ctX

cst S nia

il

sc hsse du n1al
JrcIr1nd
s

attcntc sa

Pist

b cois

an

|tro itch Hs ont Peur qu

J dr1n

Pis( usqu i CSt

Thc diffcrcncc bct ccn thcsC t

n ftlsilP

and Qu

jar n Ellc

chcrchcnt Part ut

chcrchcnt I an P trovitch

Partout

cst

cst`avec lc doctcur,ils

Avcc lc doctcur,ds

Hs nt Pcur qu

llons!Tous, O

sonia?

inc:Au

jardin,

ici nc rcstc

i nc ricn fairc,tous nous

tl:Et o

il

ic

est s

lct?

translati ns rcflccts thc(hlfcrcncc bet

htcrtlly co(lcs r tllc thcatrc In t11e Qu

l)

`cen French

is thcatrc,thc

naturahst codc is thc cqui alcnt of thc Frcnch litcrary codc This is clcarl) cxcm^

tII,J-cI,thc naturalist codc

Phncd in Tremblay s Plays :ut in his transladon of

`ncfc
:e comparc Trcmblay s and
is f und only in the langua c emPl yCd l)y Marina If
nly a hnc hne
Triolct s translatl ns of the Play, it bec n1cs clear that therc is
vo
countries
It
is
c
cn
hnCr
i11 Ciillcs

f
thc
t
bet ecn thc thcatrical language
His
Quob
ct,ls translauonf thc Play
Mars lais s tI anslati n of lf dem
u`ic

^c`Jc
behes xx hat,as a translat r,he says fhis rk ur aPProach t intcrnatlonal Frcnch

c haVC a cabulary, a sPirit,

is f;r rcmo cd from that of our Frcnch cousins,
vcll

vhich are all our ovvn He has hiddcn this irrcconcilablc d Tcrcncc cxtrCmel

ic:ASsCz

I) ur

commcnccr! icns avcc mol!Jc nc Pms v yagcr seulc

aujourd hui, lc jour dc la saint_Jean, cntassoc(lans un train

toul lant,

au rnihcu d unc f ulc de cns qui :ous d visagcnt!Etlc train qui s arr tC

udrait voler! Non,je ne PCux Pas Jc nc

;cbaquc station, quand on
Pcux Pas!s6
k exPrcssCs hcrself in an intcrls this l)ot the languagc of an aristocratP The c
nationa

Qu b c0s as rc6ned as tllclt f11cr mistress,cvcn if oCcasionally sl1e uscs

al cal turn f PhrasC CmPhasizing hcr status as a

Chrisrin : c utcz

niP

Jcan,

ulcz- ous cnir

voman ofthc
pcoPlc

danscr avcc luoi quand j aurai

m s;rcnvcrs ddns
Oh,ses mauvals jours aPpr chcnt ct cllc est t

rcmPs a,Vcncz

v 11s clanscr avcc moi n1aintcnant'7

Cr,a(hffcrcncc bct vccn the languagc uscd to translatc and thc

translati ns,csPccially vhen thc trans~
langua:e used by translators to discuss thch
Thc1 c is,h

l
rs

`c

are Playwhghts or dircct rs,and thcrelorc bcl ng to the thcatrc Quitc

TRANS ATION AND CULTURAL IDENTITY

363

n1 their Frcnch cultural and

hn8uiStic heritage Thcy arc trying to PlacC a coFdon sdniFdirc around thcir burgc
ning
thcatre, but thcy havc fadcd t crcatc a distinctivc lan8uagC for thc thcatrc, a
languagc that could be uscd as a systcmatic and cohcrcnt languagc of translation,
clcarly, they arc trying to dissociate thcmsclvcs fr

When thc chosen targct language is a sociolcd tl

arc in11ncdiatcly struck by thc di:1

at is stincti dy

Qu b coiS,we

n, n thc ne hand,
and thc prcface and instructions to thc dircct rs or actors,on thc Other Thc justi~

sccttion r the Quebccizcation of rcign texts is

rittcn im a languagc tllat n
l;;f

;
r

sitr Fl

SSia bct vecn thc translati

thcir Quoboc iS rcadcrs that thc Play

lf

:t

;Jj

llll :a:

vas translatcd F r thc exPrcss PurP se of

putting it withn th0r rcach G lcs Mars l s ancl Jcan-Claude Germain arc,each
in his wn
,tlaC m st ol ious examPlcs f tlais tt n(lcncy Qu b c0s tra latcrs

arc inconsistcnt, in that thcy emPloy both thc vcrnacular and thc rcfcrcntial
languagc Hovcvcr,thC r le f the languagcs is rcvcrscd:the vcrnacular is uscd to
translate thc f rcign tcxt, Vhilc thc rcfercntial languagc is uscd to c

mmcnt on thc

tcxt,Translations into Quob c is therebrc Play an idcological rathcr than a mc(li

ating r lc Thc diglossia bct vccn the dial guc and thc c lllrnCntary or stagc
(lirccti ns in thcsc translati ns(lcmonstratcs to
hat cxtent thc audicnce is l)cing
lllaniPulatCd Thc discoursc on languagc used by translat
Play vrights,cnables
fr n1 vhich

thcm t introducc an idc

l gy

oftlu

rs,
vho oRcn d ublc as
cirJ to thc pubhc,a Pubhc

thcv cxcludc thcmsclvcs

Notes
1

Jak bs n, 1969, 353

R/1 unin, 1963 Scc also Lad 1irars synthcsis(1979, 85-114),

Mounin, 1963, 165

Thesc vcry qucstions

cre raised by T sa

ory

Ccr antes Publishcd Don @ixore in 1605; shoukl that st

ry l)C

contcmPorary Enghsh,such as hc vould havc uscd

at thc tilnc had he bccn an Enghshman, or into thc Enghsh of
translatcd int

todayP Thcrc can bc,as a rulc,very littlc d ubt as to thc ans ver,
r,in m st cases,a rcadcr is justi cd in cxpccting to6nd the kln(l
of Enghsh that he is accustomed to If a functi
to producc in the

n f tramslation is
1inds ofits readers thc same elllotions as tl sc

Pr duced by the riginal in thc n1inds of thc readcrs,thc ans /cr

is clcar, Yet thcrc is nced to n tice in Passing the Possibility of

exccptions
hCnC cr thc riginal author is rcad morc f r his
manner than for his lnattcr,We1nay rcad thc sPccchcs of Ciccr
f r cxamPle, chiCny that vc may havc an oPPortunity to aPPrC^
,

qucncc Ofrcccnt years thc m st el qucnt sPcakCr f

Enghsh has becn sir Winst n Churchill,and churchill s style vas

ciatc his cl

not Ciccr s stylc Should a sPccch l)y Ciccr

bc sO translatcd as
tO sound as ifit had been dch crcd b ChurchdlP N

(1968,56-7)

364

ANNIE BRIsSET

Gavcda is a synthcsis of sevcral rcgisters, thc stylcs of ninctecnth-ccntury

and of scvcntccnth-ccntury sarmatian Bar quc In his n el

,Gombr wicz rc crcatcs thc sOund of a styli'Cd way fsPeakng

P hsh st ry tellers

rrdns HFFdnr

, , ,,dchbcratcly rustic(an affection c mParable t the languagc Proust ga c

t

thc Gucrmantt s) a mlxtu that co u s uP a

Pt lishncss

of brm

Aftcr cxplaining ho an in ented language is uscd to cxP sc thC

archacol gical laycrs f this n stc
cP lishness,C.JclCnsk dcm nstrtatcs how
translators fthc n cl l,lanagcd to dcal vith vhat aPPearcd t bc dchcicntirncs,

cies in the target languagc

It secmed futilc t

k for

ac hcrcnt Frcnch modcl In cascs

hcrc thcrc vas an archaically colourful v rd in thc Pohsh tcxt,

vc turncd t0 vritcrs such as Madamc clc S ign ,Saint~Si1non,or

c cn

La Fontainc,and sirnPly b rr0 vcd cxPresSi ns silnilar to tl)c

oncs in thc origina1,Thcsc cxPrCssions Playcd thc samc rolc in thc

Frcnch tcxt (c ntrast bctwcen contcmPortily and Past timc

alcnt
P i dS,witty allusion to qu nt hrmer dmcs)as th r eq
in thc P hsh tcxt, (Dn oCcasi n, a datcd svntactic dcvicc cnabled

us to render thc nn~dc~si clc colour f ccrtain PassagCs,that lond

fm cking, hum rous distinction uscd tO describc Particularly
suPerscial charactcrs in thc n

cl

(G mbr wicz,1976,20;our tl anslati n)

E, Nida has f und a Practical ans ver to this difscult qucsti n thc sPccch of

vomen should have Priority bccausc it is vomen,not n en, vho are rcsPon_
sible f r cducating thc childrcn. Thc PrOSClytizing objcctivc that motivatcs

Nida s translation f thc Bil)lc exPlainS thiS Pragmatic soluti n to a funda-

mcntally hnguistic Pr

blCm(Nida and Tal,cr1982,32) h morC c

mmon

cascs of l,ihnguahsm or chglossia, Nida and Tabcr s choicc of Pri ritics

sirnilarl

is

m ti ated:

languagcs, or to a
language dcsignatcd as nati nal or f cial,or t a language sPokCn
vh cann t co1nlnunicatc
by an apprcciablc nun 1)cr of Pe Plc
Priority is givcn to thc larger of t

cffecti cly

in any othcr languagc

, With rcsPect t

thc lcvel of

languagc to bc uscd in thc translati n,Priority is gi cn to co 11non

language r PoPular languagc translations Ovcr translati

ns l adc

in litcrary languagc,

(ibid, 176-7)

Bcrman, 1984,46-7; our translation

Qu tcd by C Bruncau,1955,126
9 Du Bellay,D 1ns ri`FusFr rion dc F

n ue dnfu c,B ok I,Ch,V(qu tCd

by M unin, 1955, 14), Wc sh uld n t

rcjcctcd and imPugned translati

10

G bard, 1976, 34;our translation

11 Il)id
12 Trudcau, 1982, 122
13 Bergcron, 1980

f rgct, ho vcvcr,

n an agcnt f

tllis

that Du Bcl1ay

ansbrmation

TRANstATION AND CULTURAL IDENTITY

14 S Robin n tl11d D smith,PidcFjcdf Ffdn ook
N

15

cdndcfIdn fr nc (Torollto

acn1illan 1973),i,

Ibid, 1,6

102,72,74

16

Bcrgcron, 1981, 11;our translatiOn

17

Ibid,, 9

18

365

)id,8

19

Thisis ho Nida dc nes adaptati n(1982,134),

20

Lal ndc, 1979, 21;our translati n

0n thc c nstruction of
rnem ry screens and reintcrPretati ns made by

21

hicb is P rtrayCd as thc initial

graPhcrS of thc C nqucst,`
catastroPhC f Frcl ch Canada,thc=1P cLa` PSc j
"'that
Plungcd a coumtry haPPy
undcr thc Fr1)nch, intO subjcction and hull1ihation, scC WCinmann, 19s7,

nationahst hist

277-88
22

Ri ux, 1974, 17;our translation

23

I1ere is ho v the authors,both univcrsity Profcssors,descril)c thc goal of thc

Pr crjcd/Hdndboo

fC n4dicn

Frcnch: It is thc auth

rs

hopc that it
ill aid

Con11uunicati n and undcrstanding bct` CCn thc t

on1ain languagc grouPs and
als

dcmonstratc thc richncss of cxPrcssi n f Frcnch-Canadian sPccch, a

languagc attuncd to our Canadian rcality , 1973,back co cr

24

Lalondc, 1979, 53

25
26
27
28

scc,in pardcular,R/larcel, 1982and Trudcau, 1982

Rossi~Landi, 19s3, 87;cn phasis in the riginal
Dubois, 1978i44 5;our translati n
Lal nde, 1979, 53;our translation

29

Ibicl , 15,

scPt autcurs cn Proic au mal quob

30

31

Garneau, 1974;our translati n

thicr~Blais

cois, in

c Dcyoir,20Fcb

1988,D-8;our translation,emPhasiS addcd

32 Lalon(lc,1979,53 In an uclc by J G dbout,cnutlcd Ma languc,ma

n1aisOn,

c Hnd the same thcmc of thc imPurity introduccd by thc inln

grant:
In d1e illagcs and towns of QuCl)Cc,thcre arc Pa ictllally u y
nei{::hbourhoods vvhcrc buildings, bcsidcs bcing co crcd in

multicol urcd ncOn lights,arc(lcc rated in an astonishing varicty of styles

Thc passer-by sccs in thcsc l)laces thc dchri

us

cxprcssion f a shattcrcd( ulturc =hcrc stylcs,insPi1 ed l)yt11c

traditi nal Canadian h usc,the sPanish castlc,
r by Victorian
turrcts,rcn1ind us that hc1 c,in our country,PcoPlc can recon/h has M ntrcal bccn
struct thci1 univcrse as thcv ish

dis gurcdP T build An erican sky scraPers To bu d Itahan

hitc brick buildings in 1 cd-brick strects Could thc Grccks

havc bccn f rbiddcn to Put l)luc paint on thc grcy stoncs and
coukIthe Portugucsc have bccn told n

tt transforn1slatc ro

&

/C should Pcrhaps Percei c bilinguahsm in

d1is va) A single languagc is harmony,rnorc than nc lan uagc

into1 ainb xx

is vvar

s7

,But sincc languagc is thc architccture ofcmoti ns and

i-

366 ANNIE BRIssET

thought,thcrc are Places on the crgc f rnadncss

c are liv~

lng1n one
(

,Jul) 1987, 104)

11cr u
`ir

33

J-P Fayc uscs the cxPrCSSion ccttc inconnuc onigmatlquc in his PrchcC t

Lalondc, 1979(P 6)

34
35

Iiron, 1970, 118

Ibid , 118, 124

36

Ibi(1,, 118

37

Wcinmann, 1987, 315

38

Mir n, 1970, 118

39

Thc (lcsire f r a statc, to bc constitutcd in a Nation-Statc, thus

corrcsPonds ncccssarily to thc dcsire that n1 ti atcs ccrtain individuals or ccrtain grouPs `vithit1 a s cicty to in PoSC d1Cir
intcrprctation()fthe national h)tcrcst on all n1cn bcrs oftl)c socicty

hcn thc f rl
cr takc ovcr thc Po cr oft11c state, ) ou ma
cxPCct thC nati nal intcrcst thCy in okc to bc rcPrcsCntcd as all
d1e morc urgcnt and at thc san c umc allthc m re objcCti =e,so
great vill be thc desirc for l)o ver that ln tivates theln, and s
irnPeri us their detcrn1ination tO imPose on all ofsociety a conceP_
tion of itself that is dcstructi c of its habitual vay of living and
d1inking

(N1ori11and Bertrand, 1979, 138-9)

40

G bin,

41

Lal ndc, 1979, 12

1978, 107;our translation,cn11)hasis in thc o1 iginal

42

Ibid , 13

43
44

n)id
Ibid, 15

45

Chambcrland, 1969,69;our translation

46

Ibid

47

Lal ndc, 1979, 20 Thc inccst thcn1c is also found, intcrcstiI1gly, in R/lichel
Trcmblay s BoyVo1" a,b r(1974) Thc thcn)c aPPCarsi11a nulvbcr f plays,
1

btIt T

48

cml)lay

uscs it as a mctal,l1 r and nc,tjust to c

oke a sooal Problem

Lalondc, 1979, 13,

49 Ibid, 18
50 Ibid, 164
51 Ibid, 166
52 Lal nde,1974, o me amchc (Prc)tts Poem)
53 Luther,quotcd in Berman, 1984,45; our translation
54 M Garneau,production notcs for lnlcb rh at Lc Tho tre dc la RIanuhcturc;
quotcd l)y Andr s and Lcfcb rc, 1979,84

55

56
57

Ibid,

M Gar 1cau, AG,a c

gauchc,

in1974

ShakcsPcarc, 1978,41,Thc Original text is as follo

vs

v / Ho tCndCr tis to lovc the babc

:c
that1nilks mc,/I woul(l,whilc it was smiling at my hcc,/Ha
I havc gi cn suck, and kn

TRANs1ATION AND CULTURAL IDENT1TY

plucked luy niPPlC f

on

367

his bonelcss:umS/And(lashed the brains

ut,had I s vorn as you/ Havc donc t

this

(ShakcspCarc, 1962,851)

58

Andr s

and Lel b rc, 1979, 84;our translati n,

59 Thc llowhg

aPlDetlrs on tllc back co

D1J1
Ji9 diJ1ji(F

, hd/ hd

sclnsovcisci s cn sp1`cicronr-

60

61

sP

Bic

Chekh ,nd, 2

V(lomc Proz ro ryx GosFin tzJd

na d orc s

62

rlcz

:1it

lnc n , esclo

ll

Pdr

fthc play by J,-C Gcrmain,197

ved by si `cs s
Cr, c

Fonndmi,7d ko

n scl1 Ci nr, ccs

oroJ1' dcn b f
oJ7d`

P ldCn;

V zalc nakry v ut st l dlja za raka Chckh v,

s`JF

:1

insoucis s

esr sc rcsPccrcr

tl ctl

utll

G crt

klbhShcd,n n

TtlrR

Thc cxtract i8 quotCd dircctl) h^om thC manuscriPt, dCPositCd xxith thc
ing is thc origind tcxt(P,1)
National Theatre sChool hbrary ThC follo

sr s B ND,
I1NG, D
D
lr Pt/BL'Kt :lf OR

Ass RRK

R, srE T s

cH

`F

1I nJ /ch bin
sscr, r r hiCr in dcr
tIfc

HauPstaclt v 11sczuan Mein GcschoR ist m hsclig Vcnn cs cnig

gil t, lliuss iCh
cit danach laufcn, 1h1d gibt cs 1cl,bi11ich

hnc crdiCnst Abcr in unscrcr Prorin/hcrrscht ubcrhaupt g1 ossc

rasscr

Armut Es hcisst allgcmcin,dass uns nur noch dic G ttcr helfen

k nnen

Zu mcincr unaussPrechhchCn Frcudc crfahrc ich v n

cincm Vichcit1kau r,(lcr

id hc1

umkommt dass cinigcr dcr hoch

artet

Iscrdcn dir n Dcr Himmcl soll schr bcunruhgt sein wegcn dcr

stcn Gotter sChon untcrlIx cgs sind und auch hier in sczuan cr

viclcn Klagcn,dic zu ihm au tcigcn,

(BrCcht, I)cr gutc Mcnsch 0n Sczuan, in Di

s JC Cr n BcrF Fr Br cJar, 595;cmPhasis addcd)
63

64

Editor s notc in Brecht, 1975, 11

French translations use the re erse Procedurc

Thc

rnarchand d eau

CxPrCsSCs hiInself as if hc xx crc a l)1cmbcr of high socicty:

VANG~Jc suis rllarchand d cau,ici,dans la capitale clu sc

n y a p beauc up

Tch uan M n commercc est PcniblC Quand

cau,je d is allcr l in P ur Cn tr u cr Et quand il y en a bcau~

coup, jc suis sans ressourccs, N1ais dans notrc Pro incc r gnc
Tout Ic l onde dit que seuls
g noralcmcnt une grande Pau`rct
lcs (lieux Pcuvcnt cncore nous ai(lcr J iC incffable, j apprcnds
d un luaquignon qui circulc beaucouP quc quclqucs-uns dcs(hcux
d

les Plus grands sont(loj;cn r utc ct qu on I)eut aussi comPtCr sur

cux au Sc-Tchouan Lc cicl scrait tr s inquict du fait(lcs n n)brcuscs plai11tcs qui lnontcnt vcrs lui
(ibi

65

Brccht, 1976, 30,

66

Ibid, 31

67

Tren1blay, 1969, 3

68

Ibid

l,7)

368

ANNIE BRISsET

69 TKmblay,Pr
Cd

's deF

mm br

F des rq/ons fdmmd stJI Fcs T/ieuX ons,qtlr,ted in

zN u FFc ComPczJni Ja F fc1(Oct bCr1974),10

70

O Ncill,Dcsire

71

C) Nc l,nd,81

72
73

Ibid, 100,
R Bahbar(1985,280-98)has analysed thc Pr cedurcs uscd by Frcnch no cl_

undcr rh

`ms,in1959,57

ists to crcatc local c l ur She notes in Particular that tcxtual elements

CmPl ycd to crcate a rural cXtct oRcn aPpear in itahcs and must be read in
a di==trcnt tone and trcatcd diffcrcntly fr lll thc main body of thc tcxt A

n by G sand,h whch thcrc is an attcmpt to dcknd a dialcct,

the old Frcnch f Berri,
vas a failurc Bahbar points ut that thc usc of thc
dialectin thc samc c ntcxt as the national lan8uage had no in ucnce n Frcnch
n vcl likc

thought of thc tiInc shc attributcs this failurc t

thc c ntcmPorary i lCo-

sPhere, thc RcPubhcan idcal bcing t Prom tc con1munication

alnong citizcns with di crcnt m thcr tongucs Thc lcgitilllatc language

vas thc languagc of thc statc, and cvcr cffort had to bc madc t cradicatc
di
rcnccs,
logical atln

74
75

Chckh v, 1967,373; 1983,44-5

This situation can l)c aPPliCd to a c untry likc Isracl In this rcsPect, sec G
Tour , 1980,
translati n

76

TurP, 1984, 3; ur

77

Krysinski, 1983, 10-11;our translati n,cmPhasis addcd This bscrvation is

sirn ar to M. Bataillon s anal sis of thc translation of PFdr no bv E Triolct;

thc analysis ends vith thc f ll

ving obscrvation The translation traP in Elsa s
, rk is that shc is sPlcndi(lly nui(l This PohshCd translati n,adds Bataill n,

corrcsPondCd exactly to
hatvas hapPening in thc theatre of thc nftics9
sixi mcs

78

dssises de`d Frdducrion

rd`rc(Arlcs:Actcs Sud1989),82-5

Marsolais, 1977, 11;our translation

79

n)id

80

Krvsinski, 1983, 11

81

strindbcrg, 1985, 13,

82

Ibid,, 14,

83

1rr

1acDuf,1984,14,

84

~1ars lais, 1977, 12

85

Ibid

86
87

strindbcrg,nd,52
Ibid,5,8

Chapter 26

Gayatri Chakra Orty s i ak

THE POLITICS OF TRANSLATION

T fP ;|

F&sl :

: ff

; 1 J

::

as thc proccss of rncaning construction1

In lny viC`v,languagc rnay bC Onc f rnan clemcnts that allo v us to make sense

f
chancc, f thc sub individual f rcc~ clds f bcing ,hich chck into placc in(liffcrcnt
situations, s cr C fr thc straight or true linc of languagc in-thought NIakng
sense of ourselvcs is
vhat Produces identity. If one fccls that thc Pr duction f

identity as sel rneaning,not just1neaning,is as Plurahzcd as a dr P of vatcr undcr

an1icroscoPc, onC iS n t ab ays satis cd, outsidc of the cthico~P htlcal arcna as
such,with gencrating though n onc s own (Assuming idcnti as r n may
bc unsatisfact ry in thc cthic -P htical arcna as
vell, but considcrati n of that
novv vould takc us too far aHcld.)OnC f thcvays to gct ar und thc c n ncs f
one s idck tity as nc ProducCs Cxp sitory Prosc is to vork at s meonc clsc s titlc,
as onc works wiCh a languagc that bcl ngs to 1any othcrs,This,aRcr all,is onc of
of things, of oursclvcs I an1thinking, of course, of gcsturcs, PauSes, but als

the scducti ns f translating It is a sirnple

1in1ing of thc rcsponsibility to thc tracc

f thc thcr in thc sclf

RcSP nding, thcref rc, t

N ich

lc vith that frccing sensc of rcsponsibility, I

can agrce that it is not b dies f1neanin8that arc transfcrrcd in translation And
fr

n1the ground f that agrecmcnt I vant to considcr thc r le played by languagc

r thc clfcnr, thc pcrson vh acts, c en though intcntion is not fully Prcscnt to
itsclf, Thc task f thc fc 1inist translat r is to considcr language as a cluc t thc

v rkings of gcndered agcncy.Thc vvriter is

'ritten by hcr language,of coursc,But
f

1992

370

GAYATRI CHAKRAVORTY sPIVAK

thevrith1g f thc vritcr

ritcs agcnc) in a xx ay that 11ight bc diffcrcnt s n that
of thc British v n1an/citizcn vith thc11ist ry of British fcn1inism, focuscd n thc

task f ccing hcrsclf i

s impcrial Past,its Ren racist prcscnt,as

cll

ln Bl ltain

as its n1adc in Britain histor

f rnalc(lon1ination

Translation as reading

j;

i;li

;:ll

krcnccs,wc rCmaln saR sakty is tbc aPPropriatc tcrm here,bccausc

c are

talki11g of risks,

f iolcncc

t t11c translating n cdium,

I felt that I vas taking thosc risks

vhcn I rcccntly translatcd sOn c latc cightccnth_

ccntury Bcngah P ctry,I quote a bit fr n)rny

Translator s Prcfacc

I111ust o crComc vhat I as taught in sch thc highcst mark for thc
most accuratc collcction of synonyn1s,strung togcthcr in thc rn st Pr x-

irnatc syntax I rnust rcsist both thc solcmnity of chastc Vict

rian Poctic

ProsC and thc R)rccd sh1 l,licit) f Plain Enghsh , that ha c imposcd
themscl cs as thc norn1 , Translati n is thc most inthuate act of
rcacling I surrcndcr to thc tcxt vhcn I translatc,Thcsc s n8s,sung day
a cr

day in h111ily ch rt1s bcforc clcar lnemory bcgan,ha c a Pecuhar

intirnacy for lue Reading and sur1 endeI in: takC n ne n1eanings in
such a casc,Thc translat r earns Pern1ission to transgrcss11orll the t1
acc
of the other ~bcf rc m clll ry in thc cl scst PlacCS f thc self2

H r

1
:

J
i :Ij;
}s{tI

Fc i

Languagc is 11ot cVcrything It is onIy a
i:I

:i

;;:

:;

closc to it.By jugghng thc disrupti

;;

vhcrc the self loscs its

:1 : 1: i

j1

1I1

c rhct ricity that breaks the surfacc in n

j

ital cIuc t0

t ncces-

t l fl::l

l
;

;f
ltf !
1

IJ

|;

`i:

:i

iil
|lj

j1

li|;I il

j|

i)

 THE

POLITICs OF TRANsLATION

371

defcrrcd int an ther self vh rescmblcs us,h

vc Cr rninirnall ,and vith vvhom

we can communicatc.)Btlt a m rc homdy Staging ofit occurs across two eJthly

languagcs,Thc cxPcricnce f containcd altcrity in an unknovvn language spoken in
a di"erent cultural lnilicu is uncann

Lct us no /think that,in that thcr language,rhctoric may be disruPting logic

in thc matter of thc Producti n of an agent, and indicaung the f unding violcncc
f thc silcncc at work within rhcto0c L c all ws ustojumP mw rd to worcl
by mcans f clcarly indicated c nncctions Rhctoric must
ork in thc silencc
: :

F
)

% l

r :TiJ`F

nshiP by vhich a rld is madc fr the agcnt, so that thc agcnt can act in an
cthical vay,aP htical vay, a day to-day vay; so that thc agcnt can be ah e,in a
human va ,in thcvorld,Unlcss onc can at lcast c nstruCt a modcl f this f r the
othcr languagc,thcre is n rcal translati n
ti

unf rtunatcly it is only to casy to Pr ducc translati ns if d1is task is c mplctcly

ignorcd I uysclf sec no choicc bctvvccn thc quick and casy and slaPdash
vay,and
translating cll and
ith difHculty Thcrc is no rcasonhy a rcsPonsiblC transla~

tion should takc morc tin1c in thc doing Thc translator

morc ti1nC,and her lo

c f r the text n

s Prcparation1night take

ight bc a matter of a rcading skill that takes

patience But t11c shccr matcrial producti n ofthc tcxt nccd not bc sl vv

ith ut a sensc of thc rhct ricity of language, a sPccics

f ne ~c loniahst
ConstruCtion of the non~ :cstCrn scene is afoot No argument for c n cnience can
bc Pcrsuasi c here That is al vays the ar ument, it sccllas. This is whcrc I tra
fr n1

A/lich lc Barrett

s cnabhng notion of thc question

structurahsn1,Post_struCturahsn1has sh

cl

f lan uagc in Post-

vvn somc of us a staging ofthc agcnt`vithin

a thrcc~ticrcd noti n oflangua:c(aS rhct

ric,logic,silcncc) We must attcmPt to

cntcr or dircct that staging, as onc(lirccts a play, as an actor interPrets a scriPt,

That takcs a diffcrent kind f cFfort fr m taking tI anslati n to bc a mattcr of

syn nylll, syntax and local colour
T bc nly critical, t defer acti n until thc Production f the ut
Pian trans~
lator,is impractical Yct,whcn I hcar Dcrrida,quitc justiHably,Pont
ut thc
(lif6culties l)ct vccn Frcnch and Enghsh, evcn vhcn hc agrccs to sPcak in Enghsh

I must sPcak in a lan8uagC tllat is not my own bccausc that will bc m

rc just
vant to claim thc ri8ht to thc samc digni cd comPlaint f r a v man s tcxt in
Aral,ic r ictnamcsc+
Itis m K ju g c acc6s to thC largcst numb
fkm ists Th cfo thesc
tcXts must bc maclc t sPCak En ish It is m R just to sPcak the languagc of tl c
maJori whCn thr ugh hosutali a largc numbcr f lcSmini s givc tllc rcign kmi
nists thc right t sPcak,in Enghsh.In the case fthc Third Workl f reigncr,is the
law fthc m rity that f dcc rum,thc cqttltc blC law f dcmocracy,or the law
f thc str ngcst? VVe lmight focus n this confusion Thcrc is n thing ncccssarily
I

mcrctricious at) ut the wcstc

m minist

gazc(ThC naturalizing fJacqucs Lacan s

skctching out of thc Psychic structurc of thc gazc i1

iour has alxs'a iS

terms of grouP Pohtical behav~

sccmed to mc a bit shaky) On thC thCr hand, there is n thing

esscntially n blc ab ut

thc law f the maj rity C hcr It is mcrcly the casicst way

fbein8 dcm cratic ith lninoritics,In thc act of

h lcsale
therc can bc a l)ctrayal of thc dclnocratic idcal into thc la

translation int Enghs11

v of thc str

ngest This

372

GAYATRI CHAKRAVORTY sPIVAK

hapPens vvhen all the litcraturc of the Third

V rld gcts translatcd int

a sort of

vvith it translatcsc,s0that thc litcraturc by a voman in Palcstinc bcgins to rcscmblc,

in thc kcl f its ProsC,s0mCthing by a man in Taiwan Thc rhct

ricity of Chincse

and Arabic!The cultural P htics of high-gr0 vth,caPitahSt ASia-PaciHc,and(lc astatcd Wcst Asia! Gcndcr(liffcrcncc inscril)cd and inscril)ing in thcsc(hffcrcnccs!
F r

the student, this tcdious translatcse cannot comPetc

vith thc sPcctacular

styhstic exPeri1nents of a Monique Wittig or an Ahce Walker

Lct us c nsklcr an cxamPle herc attCndi11g to thc auth r s styhstic cxPcri
ments can producc a diffcrcnt text Rrlahas
cta De s Stanadayini is a ailablc in
i

Vo ersions5Dcvi has cxPrcsSCd apPr al for thc attcntion to hcr signature stylc

tn thc crsion entitled Brcast-gi cr Thc altcrnati c translati n gi es the title as

Thc Wct~nurse ,and thus neutrahzcs thc auth r s irony in constructing an uncanny

vord;cn ugh likc ct~nursc to makc that scnsc,and cnough unhkc to shock It
is as if thc translat r should dccidc to translatc D lan Thon as s fa1n us titlc and

opcning linc as

IDo not go gently int

that good night

Thc thcmc of trcating

vcr-as~co 11nodity and thc breast as metonyn ic

d1c brcast as organ of labour~p
Part^ bjCct standin in for ther-as-objcct_

thc vay in vhich thc story plays xly ith

s bod - is l st cvcn bef re u

Marx and Frcud n thc Occasion of thevoman

cntcr thc story In thC text Mahas vcta uses Pro crbs that arc starthng c cn in thc
rct-nurse lca cs thcn ut Shc decidcs not to try
Bcngah Thc translator f Thc
to translatc thcse hard bits
t

f earthy visd ln,cntrasting ith class~sPeci c acccss

m dernity,also rcPrCscntcd in thc story Im fact,if the t vo translati ns arc rcad

side by sidc,thc l ss of thc rhctorical silenccs f thc Original can l)c felt fr

m ne

to thc othcr
First,then, the translator must surrcndcr t

thc text she rllust sohcit the text

v thc lilnits of its languagc, bccause that rhetorical asPect

tO sh
silcncc of thc abs lutc fraying of language that thc tcxt

manncr Somc think thisisjust an ethcreal way oftalkn

Phy Butn

ill p int at the

ards off, in its sPCcial

about litt

raturC or Phil

amount oftough talk can get ar und the fact that translati

S _

n is the rn st

intiluatc act of reading unless thc translator has earncd thc right to bec

mc thc

inti1nate rcader,shc cann t surrcndcr t the text,cannot rcsPond to thc sPecial call
of thc tcxt
The PrcsuPposition that

^fomcn havc a natural or narrativc-hist

rical sohdarity,

mcthing in aoman r an undiffcrcntiated men s story that spcaks

to another
man vvithout l)cnc t of languagc lcarning, n i:ht stand against thc
that thcrc is s

translator s task of surrcnder Paradoxically,it is not Possible for us as cthical agcnts

/c
to imaginc othcrncss r altcrity maxi1nally,

ha c to turn tllc

thcr intO sOmc-

thing likc tlac sclf in rdcr t bc cthical To surrcndcr in translati n is rnore crotic

than cthica16In that situation thc good~vv hng attitudc shc is just likc mc is not

Cry helpful In s far as Mich lc Barrett is not likc Gayatri sPi ak,thCir fricndshiP
is m rc cffccti c as a translati n. In ordcr to carn that right of fricndshiP r
surrcndcr of identity, of kn
ving tllat thc rhctoric of thc tcxt indiCatcs the lirnits

flanguagc for you as long as you are vith thc tcxt,you have t l,c in a different
vvith thC lamguagc,not cvCn only vith thc sPCciHc text.
Lcarning about translati n n dle job,I came t think that it v uld bC a Pracvas such that
ith thc language bcing translated
tical helP if nc s rclationshiP

relati nshiP

somcti1ncs Onc Preferred t

sPcak in it about inti1natc things This is no more than

, THE POLITICS OF TRANsLATION

373

a Practical suggcsti n, not a thcorctical t cquircmcnt, uscful cspccially bccausc a

oman writcr
``

stagin

ho is
ittingly or un

`ittiI1gl

a kminist

_an(l ofcoursc all woman

vnl rClatc t thc thrcc~Part

cn h1 this broad scnsc ~

of(agenc) in) lan8uage in vays(]chned out as pri atc , sincc thcy 111ight

1tcrs arc not

ftn)"1ist

qucsu n the morc l)ubhc lin8uistic n1anoeu rcs

f intirnacy
vith thc medium, In Sudhir

orfd, a song about Kah

vritten by thc latc nincteenth-ccntury

m nk ivekananda is citcd as Part f thc Pr f of thc

archaic narcissisn
of the
Indial icl malc7(Dc i makcs thc samc Point with a l ht touch,with rckrcncc
to Krsna and Si a, t h)g it to sexisn1 ratl cr than 11arcissinn and
ith ut PsychoLet us c nsjder an cxamplc of lack

Kakar s f/,e Jnncr

analytic PattCr)
Fr m

Kakar s(lcscriPti n,it vvould not be P ssiblc t ghlnPSc that thc(lisciPlc

stanCcs of Vi ekananda s comP sition

h bccamc a Ramakrishna nun, a whitc voman

of thc s ng as an I1 lshwoman
among malc Indian n1 nks and dcv tcCS In thc acc unt Kakar rcads, thc s ng is
vith thc riginal languagC
translatcd by this `von1an,
hosc train"1g i11 inti1nacy
xx ho givcs thc account of the singular circun

is as Painstaking as one Can hoPe for T11crc is a strong identihcati

n bctvccen Indian

crnbraced
`as callcd, als

vhat shc undcrst d t bc thc Indian Phil S phical

vay of lifc as cxPlaincd by
/ivekananda,itsclf a Pccuhar,rcsistant conscqucncC of the culturc of imPcriahsn1,

as has bccn P intcd out by many For a psychoanalyst likc Kakar, this historical,

ea c
PhiloSoPhical and indced scxual tcxt of translation should bc the tcxtile to

ith Instcad, thc Enghsh versi n, gi en by the an nym us klisciplc , ser cs as

no lnorc than thc paquc cxhibit Pr idil)gt` idcncc of thc ahcn fact f narcissisn1
It is n t thc sitc tbe exchangc languagc
At thc bcginni 1g of the Passagc qu tCd by Kakar,thcrc is a rckrencc t Ran)

Prasad (or Ram Pr shad) Kakar pro i(lcs a botn tc Eig11tcCnth ccntury singcr

and Poct :h sc songs f longin8 for thC NIothcr arc vcr) Popular in Bcngal
hat I an1 c alling thc abscncc f
I bchc c t11is f tnotc is also an indication of
and Irish nati nahsts at this l,criod; and Ni cdita, as she

lnt11nac

ivckananda is, an)ong ot11cr th"1gs, an cxan1plc of thc pccuhar rcacti

construCtion of a glorious India undcr thc Prov cation of in1Pcriahsm The rejcc-

tion of Patriotisn1 in fa our f Kah rcportcd in Kakar 8PasSage is PlayCd ut

in this hist rical theatrc, as a choice of thc cultural ftmalc sPhcre rathcr than thc
col nial1nalc

sphere:It is undoubtcdly

truc that f r

sen Pr viclcs a kind of idcal sclf scn had tra

such a6gurc,Ram PrOshad

cllcd back fio1n a clerk s job ir

colonial Calcutta bcforc the Pcrmanent scttlc1ncnt ofland in 1793to bc the court
poct of onc ofthe great rural lando n ers vhosc s cial tyPe,and vh sc conncction
to nati c culture,
vould bc transf rn)cd by thc Scttlc111ent In thcr rds,
Vivckananda and Ran)PrOshad arc t
o11nomcnts of col nial discursivity translating
thc Hgure f Kah Thc dynan1ic intricacy of that(hscursive tcxtilc is m cked by thc
usclcss f tn te

Itv uld be idlc11ere to enter thc(lcbatc ab ut the idcntit

f Kah or indccd

thcr goddcsses in ndu P lytheisn But sin1ply to contextuah7c,lct rne add that

it is Ran1 Proshad about vh sc P etry I ` rotc tl c T

anslator s Prcfacc quOtcd
carher Hc is by no n1cans silnPly an archaic sta8e_ProP in thc disciPlc s account of

Vivekananda s crisis , son1c morc lines

on 1ny

Ram Proshad playcd

Prc%cc
`

374

GAYATRI CHAKRAVORTY sPIVAK

vith his m ther t nguc, t1 ansvaluing thc

ords that arc hea iest with Sanskrit
n1caning I ha c bccn unablc to catch thc uttcrly nc but uttcrly gendered tonc of
affectionatc bantcr

not only,not cvcn largcly, longing ~ bct`veen the P ct and

Kali unlcss Ni c(lita mistl anslated,it is thc dif%rcncc in tonc betwccn Ram
Pr shad s

innovating Playfulncss and Vi ckananda s high nati nahst solcmnity

that,in spite of the turn fron1nationahsn to thc

othcr,is historically signi cant,
The Pohdcs of thc translatl n of thc culturc ofilupcHahsn1by the colonial subjcct

has changed noticcably And that changc is cxprcsscd in the gendcring of thc
oicc
poct s

How do wol cn in ContemPorary Pol),thCism rclatc t

this Peculiar mothcr,

Ccrtainly not the Psych analytic bad Inother vvhom Kakar dcri cs from Max Wcbcr

n1isrcadin8, not C Cn an organized Punishing mothcr, but a child~rnothcr

=h

vith astringent violcncc and is als

a m ral and affectivc m nitorP9
PuniShcS
()rdinary :omen, not saintly vomCn, XVhy takc it f r grantcd that thc inv cation
of goddcsscs in a hist rically mascuhSt polythCist Sphcrc is ncccssar y fcn inist? I

think it is a wcstcrn and malc-gcndcrcd sug cstion that PowCrful

v l,nCn in thc
s kta(saktl rK h-
orshiPPing)traditi n take Kah as a role1nodcl m
,cen goddesses
Mahaswcta s Jash da tells me m rc about thc rclationshiP l,et
ng ordinary vomcn than thc Psychoanalyst And hcrc to the CXamPlc of
and st1
ron8 can bc offcrcd Thc French
an intin atc translation that goes rcsPectfully

iF of a Bcngah artist translated s me f Ram Pr shad sen s sOngs in the t vcntics

to accon Pany her husband s Paintings bascd on thc sOngs. Hcr translations arc
n

arred by the Perasive orientahsln ready at hand as a(liscursivc systcn1 ComParc

two passagcs,both anslaung the

sam c Bcngah,I havc at lcast tricd,if%ilcd,t

catch the unrclenting1uockcry of sclf and K5h in thc rigina

Mind,why odoosc{i mM thcr?

Mind minc,think powcr,br cc(lom sd wcr,bin(lb wer with lovc
r

Pe

In tilnc,n ind,v un1indcd

not ur blastcd lot

And Mothcr,(laughtcr~hkc,b und uP housC_fCncc to duPc her(lCnsc
and dc tcd fello

0h vou ll scc at(lcath h wn uch N1un

A couplc n1inutcs

es

v u

tcars,and lashings of vater,co lung Purc.

Herc is the French, translated by me int

v cabular

an Enghsh comParablc in t ne and

Pourquoi as-tu,rnon mc,dolaiss lcs PiCds dc M P

O csprit,m ditc Sh kti,tu bticndras la d h rancc
Attachc~lcs ccs PiCds Saints avcc la cordc de la d

Au b n momenttu n as ricn u,c est bien l

t n

ti n
lllalheur

Pour sc joucr dc son Hd le,Ellc rn cst apparuc

roParer ma cl turc

C est la rn rt quc tu c mPrcndras l amur dc

1ci, n
crscra quclqucs larmcs,Puis n Puri cra lc licu,
Sous la f rme de ma sllc ct n1 a aid

i THE POLITICs OF TRANSLATION

XlVhy ha

375

c you,my soul[n, n n,c is,adn ittedly,less hcavy in Frcnchl,

lcR Ma s ctP

Ol,aind,1ncditatc uPon shokti,you vill obtain dchvcrancc.

Bind th se h ly fcct`vith the r Pe f dC ti n,
In good tirnc you sa n thin8,that is indecd your s rro /
T Play :ith her faid1ful
I11thc f rm ofFny(laughtcr
It is at dcath that

ne,shc aPPcarCd to mc
and hclPcd me t

ou v l understand N1a

Hcrc,thcy will shcd a fllw tcars,tllcn Pu

rcPair n y

cnclosure

s lo c

tl

C place

And hcrc thc Bcngah:

FJ=
.,
S
\
r
rw

: ~

\
~

Ftl

"

} l i{

I hopc thcse cxan Ples dCn1 nstratc that(lcpth of comn1itrllcnt to correCt cultural
pohtjcs,felt in thc dctails f Pcrs nal lifc,is someti1ncs not cnough Thc hist ry of
thc languagc, the history of thc author s momcnt, the history of the language in~
and-as_translati n,rnust n:urc in thC vea ing as vvcll

By logical analysis,wc don t ju mcan wh thc philos Phcr docs,but als

reasonablcncss~that vvhich vill

all

v rhct ricity to bC aPProPriatCd, Put in its

Placc,situatcd,secn as only nicc Rhctoricity is Put in its Placc that vay bccausc it
(hsrupts VVo1ncn vithin malc-dn1inatcd socicty,
hcn thcy intcrnahzc scxisrll as
normality,act out a sccntario against fcminism d

t is brmally analo cal

thiS

Thc relati nshiP bctvvccn logic and rhct ric,bct vccn gran11nar and rhct ric,is also
a relationship bct :ccn sOCial logic, social rcas nablencss and thc(lisrupti eness()f
h uration

in social practice Thesc arc thc

rst t vo

Parts of our three_Part rnodc1

But then,rhetoric Points at thc Possil)ihty of rand mncss,of contingcncy as such,

disscn ination,

thc falling aPart of languagc, thc P ssibihty that things 1uight not

dwa bc sCmioti lly alllZed (My ProblCm with Kristcva and thc re_
is that shc sccms to vvant to cxPand thC Cmpire f thc mcaning ful by
grasPing at vhat languagc can only Point at) Culturcs that lllight n t ha c d1is
scn1iotic

sPeci c thrcc~part n odcl

ill

still have a d n1inant sPhCrc in its traf c vith

and contingcncy Writcrs likc Is Amadiumc sh

sphcrc as bi logically dctcrn1incd,onc still has t

languagc

us that,
vithout thinklng of this
think in terms f a sPhcrC dCtcr~

1ined by dc nitions of secondary and Pri1nary scxual characterisdcs in such a vay

that the inhabitants f thc thcr sPherc are Para-Subjccti
d n inant

grouPs

c,not fully subjcct ll Thc

vay of handhng thc thrcc~Part ontology of languagc has to bc

lcarnt asve _if thc sub rdinatc vvays of rusing vith rhctoric are to bc discl scd.

To(lccidc vhether y u arc prcParcd Cnough to start translating,thcn,it Fnight

hClP if you havc graduatcd int spcaking, by ch ice r PrcfcrCncc, of intirnate

376

GAYATRI CHAKRAVORTY sPlVAK

vorkcd my a)r back to n1y carhCr

mattcrs in thc language of thc Original I havc

cnicnce
or Classr 1Con enicncc or
point: I cannot see hy thc Pubhshcrs con

tirnc con enicnCc for Pc Plc h do not ha c the tirnc t lcarn should rganizc the
l

construCtjon of thc rcst f thc v rld for

`cstcrn fClninis

n Fi e years ago,beratcd

ne ought to be a bit m re
as unsistcrly, I vould think, Well, you kn
ctC,

,but thcn I askcd n1ysclf again,

:F ;I1 lJ:;

gi

ing

What an1I gi ing,or givh1g uP7To vh n1am

:fJ

:`l

: l

not PrCtend to bc a Lnarg"1al But surcly by den1andit g higher standards of transla~

rigina17
tion,Ia1n not lnarginahzing n)yself or thc language of thC
orks
t structurc
this
thrcc~Pa1
I havc learnt thr ug1 translati1 g [)cvi h
`

differcntly fr

m Enghsh in my native languagc And here anothcr l"st rical

W rld

ir ny

JIl

translation tradc I1 t0aCCePt that thc vvhccl has comc around, that thc

1= i

t
v

l :

l{

kt

c niont

thc ltlt a th

sccl q rc

ant h the sPace d

Jj
ni

| l

tn :;1:lr f { rI l i

Gendering is an a k vard11c v
gcndcring could not bc translatcd into Bcngali

vord in Enghsh as vell Akhter is Pr f undly in ol cd in international fcn1inism,

orkl I coul(l not translate gendcr into thc us kn1inist

And her basc is Thh d
n, betvvecn a suPerlative rcadcr f thc
contcxt for hcr. This n1ishring of translati
s

cial text such as Akhtcr,and a carcful translator likc lnysclf,spcakil`g as iends,

has addcd to lu scnse of thc task of thc translator

Goda11d0ad is a cxible sta11(la l,likc all andards Hcrc anothc1 lcssc,l)0f

sI
P

t1i

THE POLIT1CS OF TRANsLATION

Pubhshing houscs routinc y cngage in luatcriahst confusi
translator1nust bc at)lc to nght that IuctroPohtan n

377

n ofth se standards Thc

atcriahslll vith a sPecial kind f

flcdgc,n t rnerc PhiloS Phical c n ictions

sPeciahst s kn

In ther
ords, the Pers nvho is translating must ha c a t ugh scnsc of thc

sPeciHc tCrrain f thc original, so that shc can nght thc racist assumPti n that all

Third W rld w men sw1 itin8iS good I am oRcn aPPr achcd by womcn Who
xl,ould l c to put Dcviin wkh just In a11womcn writtsrs I am oublcd by this,
bccause Indian womcn is not a mhist catcgory.(ElsCwhcre I havc gucd that
f collS

udlllg c S f kn wlc( c~ tlld not ha c ntational

`PistcmcF~waF
namcs
cithcr)13Somctimcs Inclian w mcn writhg means AmcHcan w mcn w ting
v mcn
r British

riting, cxccpt for national

rifin, Thcrc is an etlln _cultural
agcnda,an obhtcrati n of Third W rld sPcci city as vell as a denial f cultural citi
zenshiP,in calling thcrll luCrcly

Indian

lMy inidal Point vas that thc task of thc translat r is to surrendcr hcrsclf t

thc

hnguistic rhct ricity of thc riginal text Alth ugh this P int has largcr Pohtical

t unirnPortant1nini1nal conscquCncc f ignoring

this task is thc l ss f thc literarity and tcxtuahty and sensuahty of thc

vriting
irnPhcati ns, vc can say that the n

(Mich lc sw rds) I ha C w rked my way to a sec nd Point,that thc translat

must bc ablc to(liscrin1inatc on thc tcrrain of thc riginal Let us d vcll n it a bit

longcr,

I choosc Dc i bccausc shc is unhkc hcr sccnc I ha c hcard an Enghsh

f shakcsPcare criticism coming fr m thc
cmcnt,wC arc als dcnicd
thc right to bc critica1, It vas of c ursc bad to havc Put thC Placc undcr subjuga~
tion,to ha c tricd to nakc thc Place Cr
Shakcspcarcan suggcst that cvcry bit
subc ntincnt was by that

irtuc

resistant By such a ju(

"thofCalculatcd
But that
docs
not1ncan that c crythi11gd at is con1ing out
that Placcrcstrictions
aRCr a ncgotiatcd
indc-

Pcndcncc ncarly fty yCars ago is ncccssar y right Thc old anthropological
suPpoSiti

n (and that is bad anthr P logy) that CvCry Pcrson fr m a culturc is

nothing but a vhole exan Plc f that culturc is actcd ut in my colleaguc s sugges-

tion, I rcmain intcrestcd in

v11tcrs
vh arc against thc currcnt, against thc
mainstream I rcmain con inccd that thc intcrcsting literary tcxt n1ight bc Prcciscly
thc text where you d n tlcarn what thc m lty vicw of m ority cultural rcprc
1

scntation or scl rcPrcSCntation of a nation state n1ight bc, Thc translator has to
makc hcrsclf ,in thc casc of Third W rkl vomcnvriting,ahnOst bettcr cquiPpcd
than thc translat r vh is dcahng vvith thc xs,cstcrn Europcan languages,becausc of

thc fact that thcrc is so much ofthc ld colonial attitudc,shghtly disPlaced,at vork
in the translation racket P st_structurahsm c n radicahzc thc cld f PreParati n
s that sirnPly boning uP on thC language is n
t enough; thcrc is als that sPecial
rclati nshiP

to thC Staging of languagc as thc Producti

attcnd to But thc agcnda of Post^structurahsn

n f agcncy that onc must

is lnosdy clsc vherc,and the rcsist-

ancc to thcory am ng mctropohtan fclllinists

vould lcad us int yet another
narrat1 c

Thc undcrstandiI1g ofthc task f thc translator and thc practicc of the craft arc
relatcd but diffcrcnt Let me summarize ho I vork At rst, I translatc at sPccd
If I st p to think ab utvhat is hapPening to thc Enghsh,if I assu1nc an audicncc,
ifI take thc intcnding subjcct as rnorc than a sprin:board,I cannotjumP in,I cann

378

GAYATRI CHAKRAVORTY SPIVAK

surrcndcr My 1 clationship
ith Dc i is casygoing I am ablc to say to her I
surrendcr t you in y ur
liting, not you as intendiI1g subjcct 1 hc1 c, in fricnd~
Sl

iP,is anot11cr knd ofsurrendcr,surrendcring to t11e tcxt in this xl

n ost
ay1neans,
crsion this :ay,I rcvisc I revisc

ofthc t11ne,bcil)g litera1, Vl)cn I havc pr duccd a

not n tcrms of a Possible audicncc, but by thc protocolS of thc thing in front f

mc,in a sort of Enghsh And I kccP h Pir1 that thc student in thc classro

bc able to tbink that thc text is just a Purvcyor fs cial rcahslu if it is t

anslatcd with an cvc toward thc d narnic sta ng flanguagc min cd in the rcvi c,l1by

n t

thc rules of the in-bct veen disc urse Produccd b a litcrahst surrcnder

Vain h Pe, PerhaPS, f r thc acc untabilit is diffcrcnt W11cn I translatcd

:ic vcdin a m
jOurnal br d1c1i
Fd fr n m rc,
71c,I was re

cqucs DerH(la sD
Jt

lD1

and last ti1ne h1the casc of rn

translati

ns f Dc i,I ha c al1n st n fcar of bcing

accurately judged by my rcadcrshiP herc It1nakes thc task m

rc danger us and

morc risk ,And that for mc is d)c rcal diffcrcncc bctween translating Dcrrida allcl

i, not mercl t11c rathcr mOrc arti 0al dil

translating Mahas vcta Dc

lt

re11cc

bct ccn dcc nstruCti c Ph os phy and lDohtical ction

ThC oPPoSitC ar:umCnt is not neatly truc Thcrc is a large numbcr of PcoPlc

in thc Third World vho rcad thc ld imperial languagcs Pcoplc1 eading currcnt
fcn1inist Hcd n in the Eur Pcan languagcs v uld Probably read itin the aPPr Priatc

ial language And thc samc gocs for Eur Pean Philos Ph ThC act of transthc Third World languagc is oRcn a P htical cxcrcisc of a differcnt sort
king forvcard,as f this vcriting, to lccturing in Bengah on dec nstruCtion
I an 1

ledgeable b th in Ben:ah and in

in F1 ont f a highly sophisticatcd audicncc^ kn
dec nstruction( :hich thcy read in Enghsh and Frcncb and s n1ctj cs vrite about
in Bcngah),at JadavPur Uni crsity in Calcutta It wdl bc a kind()f testlng f thc

in

PC1

lating int

P St^colonial translat

r,I think

Dcmocracy changcs int thc law f rcc in thc casc of translati n m tlle

Thh d
rkl and n cn cvcn n)orc bccausc of thci Pccuhar rclati nshiP to xx hatcvcr you call d1c Pubhc/PrivatC di iclc A neatly rcvcrsiblc argumcnt vvoukl bc
Possiblc if thc particular Third WoI ld countrv had Corncrcd thc Industrial
Rc luti n nrst and cmbarkcd nm noPoly impcriahst tcrrit rial capitahsn as onc
fits conscqucnCcs,and thus becn ablc t in11) sc a languagc as international norn1
so ncthing likc that idi tic joke:ifthe scc nd World VVar had gonc(h=Rtrcntly thc
United states voukl bc sPeaking JaPancsc

such cgahtarian rcvcrsiblc jud emcnts

arC aPpr Priate to countcr-factual fantasy Translati nt cmains dcPcndcnt upon thc
languagc sk1l of tllc malority A Promine11t Bclgian t1 ansladon theo1 ist sol cs thc
Pr blCn1by suggcsting that,rathcr than talk about
Passi n is inv lvcd, ne sh uld sPeak ab ut thc

thc Third VVorld,

hcre a l t f
EuroPean Rcnaissancc,sincc a grcat

dcal f
vholcsalc cr ss_cultural translation fr n1 CIraeco-Roman antiquity `vas

undertakcn thcn VVhat ne vcrlooks is thc shccr authority ascribed to thc

nals in that11istorical Phcnon)cnon Thc status ol a languagc in thc

rigi

vorld is hat
^

onc rnust considcr vhcn tcasing out thc p htics oftranslation Translatcsc in Bcngah
can bc dcridcd and criticizcd by large gr

uPs ofangloPhonc and an81ograPh:cngahs

It is Only in thc11cgemonic languagcs that thc l)cncvOlcnt d

not takc thc li1nits of

ill into account That Phcnon)cnon bccon1cs

vn oRcn unil structcd good
hardcst to nght becausc thc indi iduals involved in it are8Cnuincly bcmcv lent and
thei,

ou are identi cd as a trouble lnakcr This bccomes particularly(hIHcult vhcn thc

' THE POLITICs OF TRANsLATION

379

mctroPohtan lt n`inist,
vh is s n1ctilucs thc assilnilatcd Post-colonial, invokcs,
indeed translatcs,at o quickly sharcd fcn1inist notion of acccssibility.
If you vant t makc thc translatcd tcxt acccssible,try d

i11g it for thc Pcrs

vh `rote it The Problelll comes Clcar thcn,for shc is n t

ithin thc samc history

f style

hat is it that you arC lnaking acccssiblC?Thc acccssiblc lcvcl is thc lc

cl
f abstraction
cady f rmcd,
vherc nc can sPcak indi~
`here thc individual is ah
idual rights, When you hang out and
ith a languagc a 9ay i l your o n
l
g sc" )s that) u ant to usc that languagc by prcfercncc,son1Ctin1es, vhcn
l

you discuss son cthing co1nPhcated, then you arc on thc

=ay to making a di1nen~

sion of thc tcxt acccssiblc to thc rcader,
vith a light and casy touch,t
vhich shc
docs not acccdc in hcr e eryday If you arc rnabng anything else accessible,thr ugh
a languagc quickly lcarnt
vith an i(lca that you transfer content, then y

u are

betraying the tcxt and sh

ving rathcr dubi us Pohtics

Ho:
vill
v n1cn s sohdarit bc n1casurcd hercP Ho v xx1ll their c lllrnon
expcricncc bc rcckoned if nc cann t in1aginc thc traf6c in acccssibility going both

vaysP I thh1k that idca shouId l)c givcn a dcccnt l)urial as gr und of kn
vledgc,
togcthcr vith thc idca f humanist1"1ivcrsa"ty It is good to think that vomcn havc

somcthing in con11uon, vhcn nc is approaching v mcn vid)

h n1a rclationshiP

vould n t thcr visc bc P ssiblC It is a grcat rst stcp, But, iF y ur intcrcst is in

lcarning if thcrc is vvomcn s sohdarity,hovv about lcaving this assumption, aPpr

priatc as a mcans tO an cnd likc l cal ()r global social

v rk, and trying a sccond
stcpP Rathcr than in1agining that men automatiCally ha e so1uething idcnti ablc
iI1 col111non,
hy
10t say, hun11)ly and Practically, m 6rst c bhgation in undcrstanding sohdarity is to lcarn hcr 111od1cr~t
ngue You vill see inuucdiatcly`vhat

the differenccs are You

vill

also f cl thc s

hdarity cvery day as you make the

attcmPt to lcarn thc languagc in hich the ther v man lca1 11t to rCCognizc rcahty
at hcr rnothcr s kncc,This is I)rcParation for thc intilnacy of cultural translati

n If

you are goin to bludge n somconc clsc by insisting on your :crsion of s lidarity,
you havc thC bhgation to try out this cxPerilllcnt and scc h far your sohdarity

goes
In tbcr
rds, if you arc intcrestcd il) talking ab ut thc thcr, and/ r in

mahng a clahu t bc the thcr, it is crucial t lcarn od1cr langua cs This should
be distinguishcd " lll thc lcarncd traditi n f languagc acquisition for acadcn1ic
: rk I an talking ab ut thc imPortancc of languagc acquisition for thc w man
9om a hegemonic m nolinguist culturc who makes cvcryb ly s li miserable by
insisting on
von1cn s sohdarity at her Price I am uncon1fortablc
vith notions
of fc 1inist sohda ity
vhich arc cclcbratcd vvhcn c erybody h) olvcd is similarly
vhich
vomcn all ovcr the
vorld
ProducCd Thcrc a1 c c untlcss languagcs in

ha e gr
n uP and becn fcmalc Or
n1h1ist, and yct the languages

c kccp on
lcarning by rotc are thc P
verRIl Eur Pcan ncs, son1Ctin1es the Po
`Crful Asian
oncs, lcast oRcn thc chicf African ones The
other languagcs arc lcarnt nly l y
anthroP l gists vho il,usF Produce kn0 vledge across an cPistcluic(hvide They arc
genera y (th u:h not invariably) n t intcrestcd in thc thrcc~part structure
c
are discussing
If :e are discussing sohdarity as a thcorctical Position,

`cn,ust also rcmcmber

that n t all thc vorld s

mcn arc litcratc Thcrc arc traditi ns and situations tbat

rcmain obscu1 c becausc c ca1111ot sharc d1cir liI1guistic constit11ti n

kis om this

380

GAYATRI CHAKRAVORTY SPIVAK

anglc that I ha c felt that learning languages lnight sharPcn

ur o vn

presuPPoSitions

about hat it rncans to usc thc sign

voman Ifvc say that things sh uld be acccs~

sible t us,
ho is this us P Vhat d cs that sign mcanP
Alth ugh I havc uscd thc cxamplcs of

v men

all al ng, thc argun cnts aPPly

acrOss thc b ard It is just tllat womcn s rhctoricity may be doubly obscurcd I(lo

not see thc ad antagc of bcing comPlCtCly f cuscd n a singlc issuc, alth ugh

onc must estabhsh Practical Pri ritics In this b k,

c arc conccrned ith Post~

structuralisln and its cffect n fen inist thc ry
Vhcrc somc post-struCturahst think~
ing can bc aPPhcd t the c nstitution of the agent in tcrms of the litcrary oPcrations

f languagc, vomcn s tcxts rnight be Pcratin8diffCrcndy becausc of thc s

cial(li+

fcrcntiation bct vcen thc scxcs.Of coursc thc Point apPhcs8cncrally to the c

Pri ate

lonial

languagcs
hcn I
vas talking about languagc lcarning But even ithin

thosc privatc languages it is rny con

iction that therc is a(liffercncc in the vay in

vvhich thc staging oflanguage Pr ducCs not only the sexed subjcct but the gcndcred

agcnt,by a ersion of ccntring,Persistcntly(hsruPtcd by rhctoricity,indicating con-

tingcncy,unless dem nstratc(l otherwise,this f r mc rcm ns thc c n(lition and

effcct fd n inant and sub rdinate gendering If that is so,thcn xx'c ha

c sOme rca-

sOn to R)cus n omcn s tcxts,Let us use thc ord roman to namc that sPacc

para-subjects dc ncd as such by thc social inscriPti n f Prirnary and sccondary scx-

ual charactcristics,Then vc can cautiously bcgin to track a sort of c

llllllonahty in

being sct aPart, vithin thc differcnt rhctorical stratcgics of diffcrcnt langua8es But
hcre,hist rical suPcri rities of class must bc kcPtin mind Bharati Mu crjCC,

c cn

Anita Dcsai and Gayatri sPi ak(lo n t havc thc samc rhct rical
8uration fa8cncy
as an ilhtcratc d mcstic scr ant
Tracking co 11nonahty through resPonsil)lC translati n can lead us into arcas of
(lifFcrence and(liffcrent(liffcrcntiations This rnay alSo bc in

Portant bccausc,in thc

hcritage f imPcrialism,the kmalc legal subjcct bears tllc mt rk of a lurc f
Europcanization,by contrast with tllc fthmale anthroPol cal r httSrary subjcct

fr rn

thc area F r cxample,thc divisi n betvvecn thc Frcnch and Islan1ic c dcs in

modcrn A cria is in tcrms of hmily,ma iagc,inheritancc,lc timacy and kmale

social agency Thcsc are diffcrcnccs that vve must kccP h`
1ind And
vc n1ust
hon ur tlac di erencc bctween cthnic min Hties in dae First W rld and mtll rity
P Pulati ns ofthc T1 ird
In c nvcrsauon,Barrctt

:1

had askcd1ne ifI n

v inchncd morc t
vard Foucault,

VIf

contributcd t Frcnch this rdinary languagc doublct(thC abdity to kno f[asl)t

takc its PlacC quicdy bcsidc v u`oi Ji (thC wish to say meaning to mcan)

On thc mOst rnundanc lcvcl,P u o r_scz oir iS thc sharcd sk

lvhich all

vs

us

to makc(c mmon)sensc f tllings It is ccrtainly n t only Power/kn wlcclgc in thc

scnsc of Puissdncc/conndissdncc Thosc arc aggregati
c institutions Thc c mm n

ay

in
hich one n akcs scnsc of things,on thc

individua1.

thcr hand,l scs itsclf in the sub~

THE POLITICs OF TRANSLATION

381

Loohng at P u oi'_s /oir in tcrms of vomcn,onc ofrny f cusCs has bccn ne

ilxllnigrants and thc changc of n1 thcr~t nguc and Pouvcl1r-sd oir bct vecn rnothcr and

daughtcr

VVhcn the daughtcr talks rcPr ductivc rights and thc m thcr talks
honour,is this the birth r(lcath of translation?

Pr tecti1

Foucault is als interesting in his nc v notion of thc cthics of thc carc for thc
self.In ordcr t bc ablc t gCt to the subject of ethics it rnay bc ncccssary to look
at thc va s in vhich an individual in that culturc is instructed to carc for thc self

th than thc imPcridis1n~sPCci6c

culao n u n tl.at the cthical sulDlcc t is ven

as human,In a sccularis1n vhich is structurall idcntical vvith Christianit

1aundcrcd

in thc blc h of m ral Philos Phy,thc subJcct of c thics h hcelcbss Breahng otlt,
Fou ult w in csugaung tl.er w s f mahng scnsc of how tl e su ect bec mes
cthical Tlus is f intcrcst bccause,givcn thc connection bct vcCn imPCriahsln and
sccularism, thcrc is aln

ay of gctting to altcrnati c8encral voiccs cxccPt

st no

throu8h rchgi n Andifonc d cs n t look at rchgion as rncchanisms of Producing

tl

te t, ne

gets

a"o

kl ds

of0ntlammt n

kt

culttl1 al

:cthical Philos
Phy ha Ct bc interested in reh~
P htics and its c nnections to a nc
gion in thc Pr ducti n f ethical subjccts Thcrc is much room hr minist work

hcrc bccausc
arc of rchgion as a cultural
cstCrn fcn1inists have n t so far bccn a

orking on
instrumcnt 1 athcr than a mark of cultural dircrcncc I am currcntly
Hindu Pcr rmati c cthics with ProfkcssOr B K Mat d Hc is an cnl btcnc(l malc
kminist I am an acti ,c minist HclPcd by his lcarning an(]his opcnncss I am
lcarning to distinguish bet vccn cthical catalysts and cthical motors even as I learn
to translatc bits of thc sanskrit cpic in a vay diffcrcnt fron1all the accePtcd translati

good Enghsh ,but on that

ns,bccausc I rcly not only on lcarning,not only on

hich I ha c
thrcc-Part SchCmc of

lcngthily sPokcn I h Pe the results vill PlcasC

rcadcrs If c arc going to look at an cthics that c1 crgcs fron1s mcthing othcr
than thc historicall

secularist idcal - at an cthics f scxual(liffcrcnccs,at an cthics

that can coniont thc cmcrgcncc of hndamcntahsms with ut apology or dislnissal

0jr and thc carc f r thc sclf in
c of thc Enhghtcnmcnt~thcn PotIvojr-scz

Foucault can1)c illuluinating And thesc thcr ays bring us back to translation,

in thc nan

in thc gcncral scnsc

Translation in general
I want n w to add tw scctions to what was8enerat
d om thc initial con crsa
tion vith Barrctt, I vill d
cll n thc politics f translati n in a gcncral scnsc,by

vay ofthrcc cxamplcs of cultural

translation

in Enghsh,I
ant to1nakc thc P int

that thc lcssons f translati n in thc narr

v scnsc can rcach much furthcr.
F ,J
11a1 t

M C ctzcc s fo ,15This book rePK n

s desirc to gi c

tl

oicc to thc nativc Whcn Susan Bart

c imPr Phdy f tl c domi

n,thc cightccnth-ccntury

En i w man om Rox n ,attemP tcl ttx h a muttSd Friday(i mR b nson C sot l

to rcad and .ritc Enghsh, hc dra vs a11incomPrChensible rcbus n his slatc and

viPCs it out, vvithhokls it, Y u cann t translatc n a PoSiti n of rnon hnguist

SuPeri rity Coetzec as vhite creolc translatcs R bins Crusoc by rcprcscnting Friday
as thc agcnt of a vithholdin:

/hat Nan _hcr motller

s llow sla c ancl icnd

told hcr she had forg ttcn, along

vith thc languagc shc told it in Thc samc

actcr of thc nO el,rcmcmbcrs

rt r

JJ
c
rI Tu I:i
; LT k
:

:I :

thc author rePrcsCnts
vith violcncc a certain l)irt11in_dcath, a dcath~in~birth ()fa
St ry that is n t to translatc or PasS On,strictly spcaking,thcrcf rc,an aP ria,and
vith thc mark f untranslatability on it, in thc l) und b k,
yct it is PasSCd on,
Bc` vcd, that vc hold in ur hands C ntrast this t thc c nHdcnce in acccssil)iht

in the h usc of po
cr,

vhcrc history is vaiting to l)c rcstorcd

Thc scenc of violcnce bet vccn mothcr and dau8htCr(rCP rted and Passcd n

by thc daughter sethc to hcr daughtcr Dcnvcr,

vho carries thc nan e ofavhite

trash girl,in Partial ackn
vlcdgcmcnt of vomcn s sohdarity in birthing)is,then,
thc condki n f0m)PoSSl"li
f Bc
d:17
Sl)c Pickcd I c

uP and carricd me bchind thc smokch usc Back thcrc

ShC Pcned uP hcr drCss front a11d liRed hcr brcast and pointcd undcr
it Right on her ril) vas a circlc and a crOss burnt right in the shn shc

am This, and she Pointcd

Ycs,A/1a am,
But ho v ill you kn0 vn1cP
R/1ark n1c, to / I said , ,

said, This is y ur ma

said ,

Did shcP

askcd Dcnvcr shc slappcd my hcc

Vhat

for'

I dicln t

undc tand k tllcn Not dllI had a mark f my own, ll, 61)
This scene,of clailning thc brand fthe xx ncr as my oxs n ,to crcatc,in this br kcn
chain frnarks o /ncd l,y scparate vhitc rnalc a8cnts of Pr
ken chain

ofrc mem ry h(cnslavcc daught s

as a

cn

fa

Pcrty,an unbr

h tory not to be P scd n,is

of necessity morc Poignant than Friday s sccnc of ithheld =riting frolll thc vhitc

voman vanting to create history by giving hcr

ovn languagc And thc lcsson is
thC(irn)P Ssil)ihty of translati n in thc general scnsc Rhct ric P intS at absolutc

but hd c v g ltt

:%5

With this inv cation of c ntingency,

vhcrc naturc n ay bc the 8reat b dy
with ut rgans of woman ,wc can ali8n urSCl Cs wid1Wilson Harris,thc auth r

: : u

Tflc Gqydnd@drrcF, r whom trees aK tllc

lun s of tlac bC

1S Harris halls

thc(re)birth f thc nativc imagination as not1ncrcly thc trans lation but the transsubstantiation
f thc spccics What in m rc
rkaday language I havc callcd thc

 THE

POL1TICs OF TRANsLATION

383

obhgation f thc translat r to l)e able to jugglc the rhct rical silcnccs in t11c t

languagcs, Har1 is PutS thiS

Enghsh

11c

`ay, po"1ting at thc nccd for translating d

c Carib

Caril)l)can b nc flutc,n adc ofhu111an bonc,is a sccd in thc soul of

thc Ca11bbcan It is a Prirnitivc tcchnology that

c can turn ar und
CrsionPl C nsun1ing our biases and Prcjudiccs in oursclvcs wc
Itrans
caI)lct the bonc flutc bclP us opcn ursclves rathcr than rcad it thc Ot11cr
ay as a mctony1nic lc ouring of a bit f flesh I9Thc link f lnusic
xx

vith cann )ahsm is a subhmc parad x,

hcn thc rnusic ofthe bonc llutc
opcns the d ors, absenccs Ho in, and thc nativc in)agination Puts
togcthcr thc ingrcdicnts f r quantun1 immt|diacy out f unPrcdictable
resources

Thc bonc Hutc has bccn ncglcctcd l y Caribbcan vritcrs,says

ils n Harris,bccausc

1ting l)rizc- vinning hction Progressivc

Progressi e rcahs111is a cha1 isluatic vay of
rcahs1u measuresthc bonc Pr
lati n

gressi e rcahsm is thc t

_cas acccssibihtv of trans_

as transfcr of substancc

Thc Progrcssi e rcalisn1 fthc cst disn1isscd thc nati c imagination as thc PlacC
of thc fctish Hcgcl
vas l)crhaPS thc grcatcst sVstclnatizcr this disn1issal, And
in its prcscnt charis1 atic incarnation s

Psychoanalytic cultural criticisn

mcthucs

mcasurcs thc l) nc
vith uncanny PrCciSi n Itis I)crhaPs not f rtuit us that thc
v
givcs
us an account of Icgel that is thc cxact PP SitC of Harris s
Passage l,clo

ision The parad x fthc subhme and thc b nc11crc lcad to n n_languagc secn as
inertia, vhcrc thc structurc of PaSsage is n1crc logic Thc authority of thc suprcmc

language makcs translati n in1PosSil)le

Thc Subhn1c is thcrcforc the Parad x f an object

hich, in thc
cry
held of rcPrcScntation,Pro ides a
ic v,in a negative
ay,ofthc din cn~
sion of what is unPrCse11tablc Thc b ne,the skull,is thus an bjcct

vhich,b)n eans ofits Pr

cc,hlls ut thc :oi(l,thc impossibility of thc
Sipi ing PrcsenFdrJt,n I thc sd)jcct Thc ProP iuc,n Wealth
thc Sclf rcPcats at this lcvcl thc ProP
Pr POSiti ns arc Hcgcl

siti n Thc

tion
vhich is at nrst sight absul^(l, nonscnsical,
tcrn

sPirit is a b nc Iboth

'ith a Pr PoSi
vith an cquation the

in both cascs we arc dcaling

s of hich arc incomPatiblC;in b th cascs xlc cncountcr the same

logical st1

ucturc of PasSagc

thc subjcct, totally lost in thc mcdiun f

languagc(langua c of gestLlrc and grimtaccs;langua c ofH tC ),hn(ls

its bjccti cc unterPart in the incrtia of a l` n lan uagc objCct(skull,
111oncy)20
Iils

n Harris s vision js abstract, translating NIorris

h1t

an

`vcathcr
occanic 'crsion f quantun1Physics But all thrcc cultural t1 anslat
rs cited in this
scctio11ask us to attcnd to thc rhct
the crc

lc

ric vhich p ints to thc lin its of translation,in

s, thc sla c~daughtcr s, thc Carib s usc of Enghs11

Lct us lcarn the

lcssOn f translati n from these br hant inside/ utsiders and transIate it into thc
situati n of ther languagcs

384

GAYATRI CHAKRAVORTY sPI

AK

Reading as translation
In conclusi n, I vant tO sho/h
the P st~c lonial as thc utsidc/insi(lcr translatcs vhitc thcory as sbc rcads, s that shc can discrirninatc on the terrain of the

origi11al shc
ants to11sc
hat is uscful Again,Ih
thc translat r in thc narr scnsc

Pc this can Pass n a lcss nt

Thc link fn1usic

vith cannil)ahsln is a subh uc Parad

T r:Nr

: L

x,

I bclicvc XAfilsOn

F:; ;l;: f1

ical acc unt of the aesthctic subhme in Enghsh(hscoursc, ostcnsil)ly far fr

b nc

flute,bc f1Isc Byvay f

s

iI

ans
cr, I
dl lsc 11y

n) thc

rCadi11g of Pcter dc B

: J : 11 iIi;?: t
: l T.11 r :|

lla

1S1 ;II1i

P,4:
Vhat was it t bc a subjcct in thc cightecnth ccntur)? ThC rcadcr~as
translator(RAT)iS Cxcitcd,Thc long ci 11tccnth ccntury in B t n is thc acc unt
of thc constitution and transforn

ati n ofI1ation int

c1nPirc Shall
e rcad that
StoryP Thc bo kvdl lcast t uch on that issuc,if only to s vcr c A11d omen`vill

n t be sccn as touchcd in thcir a cncy f r1uati n

by that change The book s strong

fen1inist symPathies relatc to thc Enghshxloman only as gt:ndcr
ictiln, But thc
cruditi n f the tcxt all
/s ust think that this s rt of rhct rical rcading luight
/hat is it t bc a P st-c l nial rcadcr f
bc thc mcth d to Pen uP thC questi n

ThC rq>rcscntativc adcr d c Discoursc ofrhc

nial Has that hw of d1cn rity l)ccn t)scr`cd,or thc

English in thc twcnucth ccntur)P

su3 mc wi bc P st c
la

v f thc str ngP

c)nP

72 RAT co1 cs to a discussion of Burkc On thc subhn

Thc intcrnal rcsistancc of Burke s tcxt,, rcstricts t11c full Play of this
t PC[Power

as

a tl oPe artictllajn8d c techn l cs f tllc sublimc],

thcrcb) dcfCating a dcscriPti n of thc subhmc cxPcriencc uniqucly in

ercd[sic subJCd Put bricf ,Bul e,br a number

f rcasOns,among hich
e must includc Pohtical ain s and cnds,st
Ps
sh rt f a discourse on thc subhmc, and in so doing he reinstatcs thc
tcrms of tllc cnPo

ultimatc P wCr ofan acljaccnt disc ursc,tlacol gy,which locatcs its own
scl

authcnticating po rcr grirnly vithin the b undarics of godhead

Was it also bccausc Burkc v as (lccPly in1Phcatcd in scarchi 1g out thc rcccsscs f
the luental thcatre f thc Enghsh lnaster in the c lonics that hc had s n1cn tion of
ferent khds of subjccDt and tllcrc rc,likc sOmc Ku z bc rc conmd,rccOilcd
in h rr r

bcbK thc sublimcly emP

Cled sul)jcttP was it bcmtlsc,likc sc,1uc

::{l1

:ff1F

l; ;lIl
r
er discourscrs on thc subhn c,
oPCnS doors for other RATs to cngage in such scholarly sPcculati ns and thus cxceed
and cxPand thc l)o k
SL,b j 9C,

in noticing Burke s diffcrcncc fron

thc Otl

PP 106, 111^12, 13 RAT comcs to thc English Nati nal Dcbt,B1 idsh
coloniahslu :as a violent dcc nstruCtion of thc hyphcn bctxx'ccn nation and statc2;

In imPeHalism thc na0 n was subl(im)atcsd int cmPirc Of ths,no clue in J,c

 THE

POL1TICS OF TRANsLAT10N

385

unding in 1696,and thc transforthc anccstor of thc mdcrn chcquc, had s mething
hkc a rclati nshiP vith thC f rtuncs ofthe East India C mPa11y and thc foundin r
Calcutta in1690,The ndFior
z`dcbt is i11hct thc sitc f a crisis lnana8cmcnt,xs hcrc
tllc nadon,sublime cd as m tlladng su cd of ldCology,changcs thc gn

dcbtor into a catachrcsis r false luctaph r by vay of an accePtance f a Pcrlna~

ncnt (hscrcPancy bCt ccn the total ci1 culating spccic and thc dcbt
, T11c Frcnch

\ ar, ccrtainly thc immc(hatc ef cient causc, is soon

vovcn into the vastcr textile
Djsc

rsc Thc Bank of England is(hscusscd,Its f

matiOn of lcttcrs of crcdit t

D scoursc Cannot sec the nation covcrin

for thC c lonial econ my.As
on thc Occasion of thc racc~sPeciscity f gcndcrin:, So n thc(liscoursc of n ulti_

of crisis /le

natiol1al capital,the argun1cnt is kePt don

cstic, vid1i l

England, Eur

Pcan24RAT

snuflles ff, disgruntled shc nds a ki11d fc mfort in N ahas

eta s livid H8ura~

tion of the
n1an s body as body rathcr than attend to this hist ry f the Enghsh

body as

ice in rclcr to rcturn to lit]itS l St htcrality

a dis gurati e dc

as translati n has nis rcd

c)nP 140RAT c n1es

sccn as dcmandcd,
to 11ention

Rcading

hcrc,
to thc cldcr Pitt. Although his functionahty is initially

by the incorPorati n of nati n ,it is not possiblc not at least

cmPirC vhcn sPcaking of Pitt sv iCc:

rks its d ublcd intervcntion into the sPirit and

`
charactcr of thc thucs;at oncc the suprcmc examPlc ofthC Pri ate indithe v icc c)f Pitt

vidual in thc scrvicc of thc statc,and thc Pri atC indi i(]ual cradicated

by the nccds of a Pubhc,nati nahst, con l crcial emPirc h1this scnsc

the icc f Pitt bccomes thC1110st CXtrcn1e exa1nplc of the tcxtualiza~
tion ofthc body for the rest of the ccntury (P 182)
Wc11ave sccn a litcral casc of thc tcxtuah/ation of thc surface of t11eb d bct feen
herc1 1othcr hits(lau8hter to stoP11cr
sla e lnothcr al1d slave daughtcr in Bc`c,, tF,
s^couP,literPr
that the signs of that tcxt can bc passcd on,a lcsson lcarnt
ally aRcr the bl
n branding, Should RAT cxPect an account
v f thc daughtcr s

t11inkin

f the Passing on of thc textuahzati n f

thc intcri

r ofthc body through the v icc,

a luctonyn1for c nsciousncss,l1 on1master hthcr to111astcr son

t

k thc rst steP t changc the nationahst cmPirc t

Inllla Att of1784C

T11c)9oungcr Pitt

thc imPerial nati n vith the

Tl,c DiscotfIsC ofrhc svbF me Plot tl tat sul,limc rcl ?N

t yct

But hcrc,too,an excecding and cxPanding translatiOn is possiblc,

P1

edictably,RAT Hl)(ls a f th ld in thc rhetOricit)

of Tl c Disc

c C11aPtcr

10bcgins: Thc scc nd Part f this study has stcaddy cxan1ined h

v thcOry scts

out to lcgislatc and c ntrol a PracticC, h

v it ProducCs thc cxccss Vhich it cannot
lcgislatc, and rcmoves fronl thc centrc to thc boundary its lh11it, lirniting casc

(P,23O).This PasSage rea(ls to a dcc

nst1 11cti C RAT as an enabling sd dcscriPtion

r the tcxt, although jthin thc lilllits of the b k, it dcscril)es, n t itsclf but thc
objcct f its il`vestigau n By the timc the cnd of thc book is rcached,RAT cls

that shc has been vrittcn into the tcxt

As a hist r)of that rehsal an(l rcsistancC[t11is bookl PreSen

a rccorcl

n con ing into l)cing as history, the hist ry of thc thou ht it

f its

vants to think differcntly, over thcrc, It is thcreforc, only aPProPriatc

386

GAYATRI CHAKRA

ORTY sPIVAK

that its c nclusion should gesturc to

vards thc lirnit,risk thc reinvcrsi

fthe b undary by SPcaking fron the othcr,refusing sdcncc t

vhat is
unsald.

f tlnc t,ther c,

Bcyon(l this da1110ur hr a uss

is u

eatla
,

undcr dlc sgure fRAT(rCadcr~as translat r),I ba c tricd to hmn the P

a certain kind f clandestinc P
t

st~c

litics f

lonial rcading, using the n1aster marks to Put

D:Cthcr a history Tht1s we n(l ut what books wc can bragc,ancl what wc must

sct asidc, I can usc Pctcr de Bolla s TFlc Disco1J on rh

f thc col nia

subfir,

c to oPcn uP(lull

ccntury VVas T ni lXlorrison, a

vritcr
ellcrsecl in contcmPo1 ary litcrary thcory, obhgcd to sct aside Paul dc R/lan s
T 1c

Pur|oined Ribbon
hist rics

cightcc1 th

P23

Eightccn sc cnt) four and

hitc f lksverc stnl on thc l

okcd in a lynch Hrevas a holc othcr thing

that hadvorn ut11is luarro
It vas thc ribb n
l)lood c

se
I uman
But nonc of

Ic thought it

as a cardi11al fcathcr stuck to his boat,He tugged and`vhat calnc loosc

in his handvas a rcd ribb n knotted ar und a cu 1 f vet voolly hair,
chnging still to its bit f scalP

Hc kcpt thc ribbon; thc skin smcll

naggcd hirn

(PP 180-1)
M()rri n ncxt in okcs a langu c wh C SCl
cdgc is so ll cd t11at n
dJc ctan

This tilnc, ald10t1gh hc coukln t ciPhcr l)ut onc word, hC

hcilitatc l ll Passage

behevcd hc kne v ho sP kc thcm.The Pc PlC fthe br kcn nccks, f rc_c okcd

blood and black girls`vho had l st thcir11bb ns (P 181) Did thC exPlanati n of
pron1iscs and cxcuscs in cightccnth-century Gcncva not Illake it acr ss into this

roar PIvill not chcck it out and mcasurc thc bonc flute I
vill silnPly dedicatc
thcsc Pages to thc author

f Bc`
cJ,in

the11an1c of translati n

Notes
1

Thc srst Part of d ls essay is bascd on a con crsation 1th A/lich lc Barrctt in

Fortllcoming I20021 om sca8ull PrcSs9CalCutta,

Facditation

the sulllmcr of1990,

is thc Enghsh translati n of a Frcudian tcrn1 vhich is translatcd

9vJc in Frc11ch Thc dicdonar)n1Caning is

Tcrm uscd by Frcud at a t11nc whcn he was Putting11c)rwtlld a

ncurological m dcl of the functi ning of the Psychical apParatus
(1895)

thc Cxcitation, in PaSSing fro1n onc ncurone to anothcr,

runs into a ccrtain rcsistancc;

hcrc its Passa8C rcSults in a Perma-

ncnt rcductio11in this rcsistance, thcrc is sai(l t

ill
cxcitation

oPt for a facilitatcd path

be rocilitati n;

ay in Prcferencc to onc

wherc no hcihtati n has ccun ed

U hpltlljcl etandJ

B PC,lltdis,The Ju C P o
Press,London,1973j,P 157)

nd,s s[H galth

THE POLITICs OF TRANsLATlON

4 Jacqucs Dcrl^ida,
Mar)

F c

ofL v

Quaintancc,Dccpnsrruc

11c M) stical

p,, nd hc%s"biF

Foullclauon

387

f Autl orit):

usricc;cdrdozo

,t1

=R ric `,

XI(July Aug,1990);p,923
`

Thc Wct nurse ,h Kah r Women(eds),rrurh TdFcs sFo es

n n mcn
(Thc V mcn s Prcss, L nd n, 1987),pp, 1-50( rSt pubhshed by Kah for

Women,Delh, 1986),and Brcast cr ,in Gayath Chakra rty

J

Orhcr 1I%iFds; Essd

spivak,

s(R/lCthuen/R udedgc, Ncw York,

in Cu`r1`r

1987),Pp,222-40
6

'PofiFit

I~ucc Irigaray argues persuasi cly that, E 1rnanucl I evinas to the contrary,

ith"1thc ethics f scxual diffcrcncc thc crotic is cthical(

The Fccunditv of

rc29cc,tr.Carolyn Burkc and G C Gill

thc Carcss ,h her Erhics sexu Dj
(C ncll ul1i crsitv Press,Ithaca NY I19931)
1

7 Sudhr Kakar,rhc nncr lIor` .J rh n c sr fc f,` h d nd o

jn`ndi
,2nd cdn(Ox%rd1I11i crsity Press,Delh,1981), )l> 171 Part f

this discussion in a shghtly diffcrcnt R)rm isincludcd in my Psychoanalysis in

Lc Ficld;and Ficld vorking:ExalnPlcs t st thc Titlc ,in Michacl Munch
v
dnd is,PhiFosoP`!,=dnd CuFrtI (RotltlC dgc,
cJ

tll,d Sonu Shamdasani(C(lS),P

London, 1994),pp.41-75
8

Scc Partha Chattc cc, Ncltiondism and the Voman QuCstion ,in Kumkum
sriraJ I%Il cn(RutgC1 S university Prcss,
Sangari and sudcsh Vaid(cds), Rc c
Nc Brunswick,NJ,1990),pp

23353,br a dct

lcd discussion of this

gcndcring of Indian nationahsm

9 Max Wt L,er,Tl,c

'
Rt F ic,n? d Tlnc s
f Hjndu md d BuJJh^m,tr
Hans H Gcrth and D 11Ma1 ti11dale(Free `
Press,Glencoc,Ill,1958)

10

1orc on this in a more Pe1

iI

s nal

context in SPi ak, stagings of thC()rigin

T/ljrJ Texr

I Amadiumc,l dfc Dduf Fc^FcJ ,`e Husb n (Zc(l Bo ks,L nd n,1987)

hat(latcd f r this intcrventionist in
12 For background n Akhtcr,alrcady somc
ll

thc hist ry f thc Prcscnt,Scc Yayori N atsui(Cd,), lI r,,cn

L ndon,

13

NIot

14

(Zcd B ks,

c on P0WCr/Knowledgc ,in Thomas E,Wartcnbcrg(cd,),Rc Tf,in

inJ

I,c,(statC Uni crsity of Nc v Yot kP1 css,Albany,NY,1992)

SPivak, Can thc subaltern SPeak7 \in Cary Nclson and La vrencc GrOssbcrg
(cds),Jrdrxjs dnd rhc rrlrcrPrd
tI1

15

/ls

1989),ch, 1,

cl,9? cu`ru

c(u vcrsity of

lin )is Prcss,

bana,Ill, 1988),PP 271 -313

For an extcndcd c nsideration of tbcsc and relatcd P

intS, see l y
Crsions

Oftbc Margin Coctzcc s Foc rcading Dcfoc s Crusoc/R x nd ,il`Jonathan Arac

(Cd),Thcorl' nd rrs Consc u nc s(Johns HoPklns ulll crsity Press,Baltimore,

1990)

16

Toni Moros

n,Bc`
'cd(Plumc

Books,New York,1987) PagC numbers arc

includcd in n1 text

17

For(in1)possibility,sec my
Litcrary RcPrcSCntation of thc subaltcrn , in my

18

r Orhei
r`dx,PP 241 68

Karl 1arx, Ec non ic and Ph osoPhical

lxIa11uscriPts ,in R dncy Li ingstonc

and Gc ge Bcnt n tr, dr,'

11 inJs(Vintagc, Ne
York, 1975), PP
Vilson
Har11s,Tllc
G^I
279 00;
dnd(V rrer(Fal)Cr,Lt,l1don,1985) ThcSe
qu tati ns are fl n1WilsOn Ha1 ris, Cross-cultural Crisis hnagery,Languagc,
1

388

GAYATRI CHAKRAVORTY SPIVAK

and thc Intuitivc Ima inati n , Con1n nxs ealth Lecturcs, 1990, Lccturc n

19

2,31()ct 1990,university of Can1t)1 i(lgc,

Dcroda t1 accs thc tralcct r f thC Hcgdian and Pre_Hc8clian discou1 sc of
thc ft,tish(Jacq11Cs Dcrrida,G s,t Richard Rand and John P Lca` c),J1

|11ni`Crsity of NCbraska Prcss,Lincoln,Ncbr,1986j)T11C worshippcr ofthe

fctish cats human flcsh The orshil)Pcr of God f asts n the Eucharist Harris
trans crscs thc fetish hcrc thr

20

sla oj Zi'ck, T/l

subFiI,lc Ol,,

ugh thC nativc imaginati n

cF

de

o `,tr J n Barncs(Verso,Lond n,

1989), PP 203, 208, 212

21 Pct

de Bolla, c DI 0urse?/rfl subhme;Rcd nfs Hi csrhc rics dnd Fhc

PagC numbers ale Cn in my tcxt
Rckrcnccs and discussion of The Bcgun1s of Oudh ,and Thc hllPeachmCnt
su ccr(Bl kwCll,Oxford,1989)

22

of Warrcn HasdngF are bt und in rllc

nfs

dnd sP cchcs Jmun(f

tl,1981 , o1 5 /j, dj
l' tfr Is t,nd Bcn dF, PP 410^12, PP 465^69 P 470; and in
1 6 ' d Cl;
Bur

23

c,cd P J M

shall(Clarcnd n

Pkss,Ox

d nc J of Thc Hds nfs mPc chmcnr sPccuvcly

scc111y Reading thc Archivcs:the Rani of sirmur ,in Francis Barkcr(cd,),
uroPc dnd rs Orh (uni
crsity of EsScx,Colchcstcr, 1985),PP 128-51

24 Ibid
25 Patll de Man, Thc Purl incd Rll,bon ,rePrintt da~s Excuses(Ca ssi@ns)
in de Mcall, FF ohes Rc iaJ(Yak unicrsity PlcSS,New Ha cL1,1979),
pP 278^301

Chapter 27

Kwame Anthony A iah

THICK TRANSLATION

As

ma hia

Akan no na Ntaho dc goro br

[A mattCr which troul)lcs thc Akan Pe

Play tllc l)r k

drum11

k te

Ple,the Pc Ple fG la take to

l

Kaka ne ka nc ayafunka fanyinan)oka

Tood1achc and indcbtcdncss and st mach achc,dcbt is Prckral)le21

Kamcs kwak c

sc

nim so abo rcb bcrc a,anka wank ware adobo

nk nt

vn that thc pahn nuts

crc going to
IThe dr ngo says if hC had kn

riPen,then he would not ha c marricd thc rama Palm with a twis

lcg l

T
n1

or langua8e sPokcn in and ar und my homctown of Kumasiin Ghana Thcy arc

but three f thc7000~ dd Provcrbs that1ny m ther has c llcctcd o cr roughly the
pcriod of rny lifctilnc, and shc and s 111C friCnds have been trying to undcrstand

thcm br the last dc dc Or so;lattcrly I havc joincd them h sctting out to p Parc
a manuscriPt that(as wc say)rC(luccs many of thcse sa ngs r tlac nrst dme t

riting,that glosscs thCm in Enghsh,and that offcrs als ,in each casc, vhat I ha c
ffered ou `hat 'e call a literal translati n
1993

390

K /AME ANTHONY APPIAH

C)oincidcntally (or, pcrhaPs, n t so Coincidcntally) I ha c SPCnt lliuch of thc

samc decade
v rking in xshat analytic Phil s phers call thc thcOry
f mcaning
or Phil

r of trying to say`vhat an adcquatc thcor~

Phical scn antics in tbc acti it

ctical account of thc mcanings of

v rds

and phrascs and scntcnces should l k

hkc

It would cm nattlral Cnough,Phmd`ftic c,tll bring tllcsc

`o ac

ti

itks~of

translati11g and d1e rizing about l

caning~ togethcr, l)ccause of thc sin11,lcst

ayS
Pt to nnd

bcgh1ning thoughts ab ut translation: laamcly that it is an attcn

hat has bccn said in
of saying in onc languagc something that mcans the samc as
an thcr

hy

What I vould likc t do in this cssay is to exPlorc sOn1c oft11c rcasons

at this d cic d1 ught shoul(l bc rcsistc( I shall arguc tllat n, of

it is tl

v1 at intcrcsts us in thc translati ns that intcrcst us most is not mcaning, in the

scnsc that Ph soPhy of languagc uscs thc tcrn in n any cascs, as thc Pr crbs
qtlrcly

ns thcy cxcmPli
ow and hr K
gctung tllc mcamng,in this scnsc,hght

is hardly cvcn a rst stcp to`Vards undcrstanding,

II
Lct1nc start agai11 ith a sin1Plc th

ug11t

vhat vc translatc arc utterances,things

vith
icc or pcn or kcyboard; and thosc
madc th v rds bv men and v mcn,

hiCh hkc a actions arc undcrtakcn for

utteranccs arc thc Pr ductS of aCti ns,
rcasons sincc rcasons can bc C n plcx and cxtcnsi c, grasping an agcnt s rcasons
can bc a diff1cult l)usincss; and xxe can casily fccl that

:c

ha

c not dug dccPly

enough, vhcn vvc ha c told the l,cst st ry xs c can uttcrances~ordinar cvcrvda

remarks arc in this rcspcct solue vhat unusual for hilc it rnay not be easy t give

of why somcone h , r cxamI)lc,uttk d tllc rds s a lo cly,

v l bc inchned
rdinary c ursc of things Enghsh sPcakcrs
Sunn) day/ in thc

ay clcc unt

SuPPosc that anyonc

vh says this to tbcn

intcntion t cxPrCss thc th ught that it is a lo

say in thc rdi11ar) coursc oF thi1

gs

It

has, as onc rcason for uttcring, thc

ely,sunny(lay

bccausc,in odd cn

ugh cj1 cul stances,

ugh ci1 cun1stanCcs

VC111ight suPposc nO such thing;and that is bccausc in odd cn

it n1ight not bc truc PcrhaPs- t imPosc on ou nc ofth sc bizarrc fantasics that

mark thc stylc F thc PhilOsoPhCr~_this is a sPcakCr` ho has bccn told this is an
Enghsh scntcnce vithout bcing told 'hat it n cans;pcrhaPs,shC is uttcring it not
t

cxPrcss that thought~xx hich she docs not kn0 v it exPrcSScs

but to n1islcad

us into thinking shc is angloPhonc PerhaPS vc kno all this PcrhaPs still asscr_
toric uttcrances do ordinarily proPosc thcn1sclves as rnotivatcd,at lcast in Part9by
a dcsirc to cxPresS a ccrtain sPcci

c th ug1 t

Thisis casy Cnough,ofc ursc,to CXPlain Part f vhat is disti11cti c about uttcr_
ancc as a kind of action,
vith distinctivc sorts of reasons,is that it is convcnri@n f;
and thc thought vc normally takc somc nc to bc intcnding to exPrcss in uttcri11ga
scntc11cc is thc th ught3that the con cntions of languagc ass ciatc vith it

Gricc hmoudy suggestt,d tllat wc could say what an(asSCl t riC)utterancc n1eant
nt )tlac bdicf4t11at it was con cntionall 'intenclcd to
by identi ing the(cont
l

Pr ducC;

and he identiHcd, corrcctly in n1y ie v, the heart of thc mechanisln by

THICK TRANsLATION

391

vhich thcsc bchcfo arc suPPosCd to bc pr duccd R ughly,he suggested that vhen
a sPCakCr c n1Inunicatcs a bchcf by vay of thc uttcrancc of a scntcncc,shc docs so

by getting hcr hcarcrs to rccognizc borFl that this is thc bchcf shc intcnds then
have dnd that shc intcnds thcn

to havc that bchcfin Part bcc

usc thcy rccognizc that

Pri1nary intcntion, This is the hcart of uttcrancc_ n1eaning; thc con entions of
languagc associatc v rdsVith rolcs in dctern1ining

J,

C/ll)chcfis t be c mmuni~

catcd by an uttcrancc, but it is by

a of thc Griccan mechanislll that this

communication ccurs,
vhen it docs,
This Gricean lncchanis1u~thc act that achie

cs its Purposc bccausc its PurP

sc

is rccognizcd
is ccntral to mcaning just bccausc it occurs both in thc cases vvhcrc

1ncaning is conventional and in th sc cascs vhcrc it is not IfI say that John is in
thc kitchcn or thc den/ in rdinary circumstanccs I gct y ut bClic c,by vay f

thc Griccan mcchanisn , sOmcthing I ha c n t litcrally s id namcly that I don t

VhiCh
kn0
To explain hy you behcve this, vc sh0uld begin ith thc fact that in ordinary
contexts our exchangcs are go crncd by vhat Grice called c nvcrsational rnaxi1ns:
by understandings to the effect that ve arc trying to bc hclPful, trying to bc, for

CxamPlC,b th maxi1nally and rclc antly informativc,

Sincc I k11ow you know this,I can assumc ou will in r

that I cl

n t kn

morc prcciscly whcrc John is In tlttcring thc scntcncc I will havc your rcco nizing
this as One ofits intcndcd cffccts But u knovv I kn0 v you kno :this,and s y u

u sh uld bchcvc that I vas bcing hclPful and,thus,

u to bclic c that I did n t kn wm rc PrCciscly whcrc J hn
was Thatthisis a casc ofthc Griccan mcchal lsm bllows om that hd that,l)ccausc
I kn0 vy u kn0 v I kno vy u kno v this,I cxPcct you t rccognizc that I had d1is
intcntion and to c met belic e that I(lid n t kn wm prcoscly whcrc J hn
as in Part bCcausc you rccognized the intcntion, It is nO surPriSC that Gricc, vho

disc vcrcd this mcchanis 1, also disc

ered such s -callcd con crsational imphca~
turcs: these th ughts
c con municatc by cncouraging othcrs to(lra v infcrcnccs
that go l)cyond thc meaning ofthc words wc uttcr(It will bC uschl latcr to ha c
can infcr that I intcndcd that

inkr that I intcndccl

a nan1c for thc casc

hcrc u and Il,oth kn P,CaCh kn
s thc Othcr kno

vs it,

and also kn0 vs thc other kn ,s that cach kn0 vs thc thcr kn /s it, and so n

I shall usc a standard shorthand f r this and sa that in this casc

c lnutuall
kn w

tl

at P,)

Charactcristically for a philosopher, I have focuscd on language that is asscrtoric; but sirllilar hncs f th ught can be aPPhed to optativcs

hiCh Cxprcss

q Thcy diffcr i n simplc asscr

ants~rather
than
bclic
PrekrCnccs~wishes Or
tions in cxprcssing diffcrcnt sOrts of states f the sPcakcr T dcal vvith qucstions

and rdcrs,
vc must ivC a(liffcrcnt account of thc intcndcd rcsP nse fron1 thc
hcarcr, sincc qucstions and c 1nmands are ain1ed at s n1cthing more acti c than
mcrc behcf D
F r PCrf rmativcs,n ore yet is rcquircd

for I can pron uncc

you1nan and vifc

nly`vhen therc cxists a sOcial Practicc of marrying, in vvhich my uttcranccs arc

convcntionally gi cn a ccrtain role

L)csPitc thcse difFcrcnccs,thc general theoretical Point hcrc apPhcs across thc
b ard:it is Possil)lC to ha e thc reas ns vc

ordinarily havc for uttcrin8only bccausc

392

KwAME ANTHONY APPIAH

thcrc cxists vithin any c mn1unity of sPeakers of a singlc lan8uagc a sPcci c struc-

ture of rnutual cxPcctations about rcas ns for uttcrin Lcarning thc graln1nar and
thc lcxicon of a langua8e is lcarning a comPlcx set f instructions for gcncrating
intendcd to achic c thcir effects in d1crs vho kno ,the
and PrccisCly by ay of a rcc gnition f those intcntions,

acts that arc standardl

salne instructions

Whcn s mcb dy sPeaks,thcrcf rc,in the ordinary coursc of things and in thc
abscnce of c ntrary c idcncc,shc dl be takcn and l cxPCct t bc takcn by Partic~

iPants in thc con cntions of hcr language to ha e thc intentions that thosc
con cntions assOciatc,by vay of gran`lnar and lexicon,xx ith hcr uttcrancc,6Tol c
intt ntons is )know tl c htc ml mca ng of what slac h scaid;
and the literal1ncanings of vords and phrases are dctcrn incd by thc vay in vhich

ablc t ldenti rh se

thcy contributc t xing thc intcntions associatcd vith thc spcech-acts in vhich thcy
can occur Lct n1c call thcsc thc Fircr Fintcnd ns Vhilc cach utterancc of a scntcnce

vill bc surroundcd and motivatcd by morc than its litcral intentions, ill havc(in
thcr w rds)lnore rcasons than thcsc,and wh c som uttcrances vvill n t c en ha e

these intentions~becausc, f r cxamPlc, thcy arc clcarly ironically intcndcd~it

remains truc that cxPlanations of vhat a spcakcr is(loing in uttcrin8a Sentcnce
allll st al
ays in ol c

thc

vill

rcFcrcncc to tbc standard intcntions,c cn in thc cascs vhcre

are absent

III
If,as I riginally suggested, translati n is an attcmPt to Hnd vays of saying in onc

languagc somcthing that rneans thc samc as vhat has bccn said in anothcr; and if,
as I havc rcccndy suggcsted,thc litcral1ncaning of an uttcrancc is a mattcr of

vhat

intcntions a sPcaker v uld rdinarily bc takcn t ha c in uttcring it;thcn a literal

translauon u:ht t bc a scntcncc of, f r cxamPle, Enghsh, that v uld rdinarily

be takcn to bc uttcrcd
vith thc intcntion that thc riginal, for examPlC, Tvvi,
sentcncc,
as conventionally ass c1atcd vith7
This th ught has bccn rcjcctcd1nore Ren than it has bccn afHnued in rccent

philosophy of language bccausc, for a varicty of rcasons, it has bccn thought that
thc litcral intcntion that gocs vvith sOmc r Pcrhaps all scntcnccs is Onc that you
can ha cnly if you sPcak thC languagc to vhich thosc scntcnccs bcl ng

Ifyou do

not recognizc thc SaPir~wh rf hyPothcsisvhcn(lrcsscd uP ths vay,it is bccause

the hyPothcsis iS normally cxprcssed as thc icv that vhat languagc you sPcak affccts

vhat th ughts you can havc: but then, if that

verc true, it
uld a cct
vhat
thoughts you could intend to cxPress also. If vvhat languagc you spcak detcrn1ines
vvhat th u8htS Or intentions y u can havc,translati n,thus concci ed, ill

al

vays

bc imPossiblc.
PcrhaPs l)ecausc I
as br ught uP l)Ctvvccn sC cral languagcs,not all of thcm

arictics of Enghsh,I ha c nc cr quitC bChcvcd that this coukl bc right 0f course

thcrc arc sOmc thoughts that it is hard to imaginc somcOnc having vithout s mc
languagc thc thought that a I)article is a ncutral b s n,for cxamplc~and thcrs
that rcquire linguistic kno vledge constituti cly:thc thught that Rnald Reagan is

smarter than my d g surcly rcquircs that I kn

v
vhich means kn `h vc

usc

in scntcnces~Ronald Rcagan

THICK TRANsLATION

s11an c But surcly thcrc a1

393

c thoughts

- It

s a cat/

say that you can ha cvithout sPcaking Enghsh;ha c,uncontro crsially,n ques_
tions bcggcd And ifthatis s ,can vC not sce ho v you c uld ha c thc th ught that

n,not bccause you kno v thc v rds nCutral b s n but bccausc

y u kno v somC othervords that refer,in somc othcr languagc,to thc samc thingP
this is a ncutral bos

so,at lcast,I think,th ugh I shall not arguc it hcrc;bccausc vhat I vant t noticc
no v is that c cn if this is right, vc

nccd only consider thc casc f proPer names to

sec that it vill oftcn l)ca1nattcr ofluck

vhcther the relcvant intcntions are Possil)lc

con1munitics,bctwccn vhiCh e arc translating To lnakc thc P int

at its lcast comPhcatcd,it is no surPrise that you cannot cxactly say in T .i that thc
for b th oft

lr

all is,wcll,burnt sicnna

This impossibility,though of thc hrst imPortancC in translation,is not thcOrct~

ically puzzhng;cxplanations of vhy Ti docs not have thc c nccpt of burnt sienna
or of a ncutral boson are too obvi us to be v rth giving What I alll inchncd t
(lcny iS thc morc cxc

ltlng da11u~which R lows m any icw thatinv lvcs hohsl

about lncanings~that :c

cannot translate any talk at all, because, f

r examPle,

cvcry scntcncc in hich it can ccur subtly shades thc meaning of e cryvord, so
that tablc and

isch d

not lncan thc samc,becausc n thing adequately gets the

sCnsc of DCr Tisch ist ge1utlthCh In standard circumstanccs thc litcral intentions

with which I uttcr It s a table and Hans says ES iSt Cin Tisch arc,f r all thc argumcnts I kno v,thc samc,
On this t Pic I am only saying 'hcrc I stand, n tn aking argumcnts

ifl am

vhilc thcy
right, thcrc arc barricrs to translati n to bc noted hcrc,but, as I say,

an undcrstanding of vhy translati n is so (lifbcult, they do n t

seem theorctically puzzhng If you cannot con entionally c lnmunicatc a certain
r cannot
htcralintention in languagc A and you can in languagc B,then thc translat

arc i1nportant t

Producc a litcral translation;that is all it amounts to

IV
But literal intcnti ns as ve ha c sccn arc not thc only ncs that can opcratc by thc

Griccan n cchanislu Scarlc luakcs a(listincu n betveen direct and indirect spccch-

acts,thc kcy t0 vhich isvhethcr thc main Point of thc uttcrancc is accountcd for
by thc litcral intcnti

ns

if n t,then vhat

is prhnarily bcing collltnuniCatcd is bcing

Con11nunicated indirectly )(oticc,in PasSing,that thc distinction l)ct vccn indircct

and(lirect is not the same as thc distinction bct vccn litcral and non~htcral uscs;

I rnay say Thcrc s an ant on your sh ul(lcr

vith thc pri1nary intCntion of gctting

you to rccognize l)y thc Gricean n echanisn that I carc about you,an cffcct vhich

vill dcPend on
hat I say bcing takcn litcrally as vCll and l)cing seen to be true;

rIn ay

say juhct is thc sun non-htcrally (that is,

not asc bc to me tllc htcmhlltenti ns)btlt

m rdcr t

vith

thc intention that you

c mmu cate

in K that

crsc,In othcr wor(ls,s mcumcs in rcct

Juliet is the cenjal hct of lny httlc u
colnmunication Pr cCCds by vay of the litcral intcntions and sOmctirncs it docsn t
All f this can bc caPtured in translation,Provided the relevant hteral intenti
ava ablc

ns are

394

K /AME ANTHONY APP1AH

lilj ;jiilt

:) 1

lf :l|

iI ::

jllll

}li

: :r lF lW

=:f
:

THICK TRANsLATION

395

vhat shc intcnds us to undcrstand l)

vav ofthe G cean n echanism~it is Pl n
that neithcr rllctaPhorS nor Proverbs Fncan

only vhat thcy say,

VI
I ha c

l)ccn csscntially acccPting thc thought that rncaning in thc br adcst scnsc is

vhat is c 1Inunicatcd b thc Griccan mcchanis1n. Litcral intcntions v rk in the

Griccan
vay; I ha c suggcstcd that thc pr crbs do, to , though I have n t said

much about ho v, It is clcar I think that n1ctaphor v rks likc this, ho vcvcr the
dctalls go On onc soH of c ntemPorary viCw, ulict is the sun is a litcral hlse
h

dvhich

in itcs us to think ofJuhet as standing to the sPeakcr as thc sun stands

to the vv rld; on anothcr, rcsurrccted by Bob Fogehn, it is clhPtical for a si1n

vhosc

r ugh mcaning is that Juhct has a signiHcant numbcr f thc(cntCxtually)

sahcnt fcaturcs of thc sun, 9so shc is ccntral,as urce of varmth and nourishmcnt,

cnhvening,imPortant and onc lnust add Prosaically_

and so on But on cithcr
ic v the metaphor is suPP scd t
rk by gctting you to scc ho it iS SuPPosCd
toVork and gctting you to rccognizc that tbat is h
vIvant u to undcrstand it,
And herc both c n cntion(mcFdPh r,howcvcr it works in dctad,is mutudly kn wn
t all f us) and spccinc fcaturcs f thc mutual kn
vledgc of spcakcr and hcarcr
that dcrivcs fron1c ntcxt intcract to Pr ducc lucaning

what PhiloSophcrs of languagc ha c largcly attcndcd t in thinking ab ut

mcaning arc thcsc Gricean asPCcts ofrncaning
they inc1udc b thvhat are n rmally
thought of as scmantical and as pragmatic Phcnon1cna, and thcy l)roadly, as I say,
cxhaust thc rangc of phil

Phicalintcrcst in languagc Ha ing idcnti cd this intcI cst

and its scoPC,my argumcnt o1nn w is dircdc(lt wards cxamining the ways in
s

which thc Point of much translati n ansccnds what I am calling thc Griccan asPects
of rncaning

II
And t bcgin to scc Vhy,let us obscr c that thc sOrts f things I ha c bccn saying
ab ut

meaning arc not much fa red by thosc xlho spcnd thcir thuc in htcrary

studies, in Part, I think, bccausc faccd vith a rcal live tcxt, it see11 s bizarrcly in_
approPriatC t SPCnd nc s thuc sPeculating about thc auth

s intcntions:thc auth r

n1ay be long dcad,unkn0 vn to us,unintercsting,and surcly,it vvill scen hcr intcntions ha c n thing t d
hat vc are intcrcstcd in Nor(lo I disagrcc
vith
vith
an of this
vhcthcr av rk is ctional rn t,our litcrary intcrcst in it has usually
vcry litdc to d
vith psychological facts ab ut its hist rical auth r But it rcmains
truc that in rdcr t bcgin t ha c a litcrary undcrstanding of rnany tcxts,

vc must

usually rst kn w its languagc wdl cnou ht bC ablc t idend what tl C htcn~
tions convcntionall ass ciatcd vith cach of its scntenccs arc: thatve must bcgin

/ith the litcral rncanings of ords, Phrases, scntcnccs More than this, in undcrstanding n any of thc tcxts that vc address as litcrary,
ve l
ust grasp n t lncrcly
d1c litcral intentions but the

vhole mcssagc that vv uld bc co 11nunicatcd by the

uttcrance of thc scntcnce in morc Ordinary scttings: rnetaphor and imPhcature,as

396

KXlVAME ANTHONY APPIAH

the ccur

in ction, ccur als utsidc it These m re comPlex elements of the

ccurvith the usual intentions

Griccan lllcssagc of thc uttcrancc in its context also

suSPCndcd
vc d n t havc t bchcve that Janc Austcn tclls us that
uni crsally ackn vvlcdgcd,that

bc in vant fa

it is a truth

a singlc luan in p sscssion fag d fortunc,1nust

vn ironic attitudc t thc rclati ns f

in rdcr t cxPrCSs her

marriagc, gcndcr "f

and proPcrty, but ` c cIrC Plainly meant to rely on our undcr
vould conve that ironic
standing of thc fact tbat an uttcrancc of this sentencc
attitudc outsidc thc Hcti n

Many, PcrhaPS most tCxts, in othcrvords, require us to grasP the Gricean

burdcn that thc v rdsv uld bcar in ordinary uses But only mOst ;for vith sOmc
texts mboliSt P Cms,latc JamCs J ycC,the Pr ducti ns fthe dada P ctF~it
vords in t110sc
sccms that,
vhilcc oftCn nccd to undcrstand thc r les that thc
tCXts Play in thCir rn rc normal hal)itats,thcrc is no intcntion at all that ur languagc
associates wkh thc strings of words that dl bctwccn Pe ods And somedmes,as

in Joyce(and abbcrw cky ),wC d

n t even ha C

word~mcanings to rcly on

thc

v rds thcmscl es Rcn havc no cstabhshed rncaning~no rulcs for ho v they sh uld
contributc t dctern ining litcral intcntions;and vhatvc thcn d is cithcr t scc

thcm as made mc st g wor(ls,inv hng thosc meal lngs,or to rcly

n associ-

ations of sound and thought that arc based on thcr things than mcanings, or,
Pcrhaps,to give uP alt gcthCr!
But cven in thc casc of narrativc Hcti

Prol)lCms f identi ing tllC h rahl

n, vherc thc scntences do n t raisc thcsc

tcndo ,I agree,as I

y,thc t

tl

e htelahlltcn
ction is t

tions can hardly bc thc point of the mattcr, since to bc PackagCd as a

bc ffcrcd vith thc literal intentions Canccllcd

vhy on earthvc should11avc thc PracticC f
It is a serious qucstion, I think,
ducing languagc vhosc undcrstanding rcquircs us both t grasp hat xl=ould ha c
Pr
bccn its litcral intcntions and to acccpt that thcse are not thc

vriter

s intcntions in

thC PKsCnt casc It is a question about whcthcr wc n Jusr the l,racticC J cti n
cxtcrnally It is Plain,I think,that vc c n,th ugh thc story is comPhcatCd and has
many ClCmcnts,but that is not an issue to pursuc no What1s imPortant no v is
hiCh is t say it is
that litcrary Practicc,likc linguistic PracticC,is convcntional-
go crncd by a sPcci c structu1

c of mutual cxpcctations~but that thcsc litcra1 y

con cntions _ unlikc linguistic convcntions - do not usuall

inv ke

thc Griccan

mcchanlsm,
Crb ds
T usc a Pr
imPly
thtat,Starting
with
the
hteral
mcaning~sta1ting
such is,as I sald,t
om thc

cry literal intenti ns I ha c cancclled _and l)uilding n mutually kn0 vn fact

Akal

(s

uses f Pro crbs arc,in this rcsPect, quitc atyPica1

mC ofit,pcrhaps,cxtremcly contcxt-bound),you can vork out a truth that I do

intcnd to cxprcss, c cn though it is n t thc truth associatcd ith thc litcral intcn~
tions This is a fcaturc that Pr crbs sharc vith

t vo

and thc fablc but not vith

the f rlll fthe n vel is constra1ncd

/hile

ln st othcrs

by hist rically dcvcl ping convcntions, thosc con

arc not, that is, suPPosCd t Pcrate in such a

gcnrcs of ction~ thc Parable

entions do n t carry a meSSage:

va as to allo v

us to rcad ff thc

go crning intcntions of thc auth r,to ans vcr the qucsti n, vvhy did shc vritc this?
And it is f r this reason, I think,that attcntion to intcntions -in the n

many otllcr gcnrcs~is likely to strikc us as a n1istakc

cl and in

THICK TRANSLATION

397

Literary con entions, si1nPly Put, luakc l)osSible acts that can be dehned by
reference not only t thc n canings~both literal and n n litcral,(lirect and indircct
_ of uttcrances,but also to fcatu1 cs that are br adly fo1 111al__alliteration,rlleter,
rhyn

c,Plot^structure VVhat thcy(lo )ot usually do and herc,as I say,provcrbs

vc sh0u dc nstruct a lueani11g_in thc scnsc

arc an cxccPti n- is dctcrn1inc ho

of a sct ofintcntions oPCrating through the Griccan mcchanism~f r thcv rk

Bccausc thc n cl and the s nnct arc not con cntiona y c nstitutcd by a Proccss
f rneaning gcncrati n,thcre is no sct of C0n cnti ns tovhich vc can1^cfcr,analogous to thc convcntions of literal mcaning, for deciding
thcrc arc11o litcrary intcntions,convcntional and Griccan,t

vhat the xxork mcans;

corrCsPond to litcral

hat a literal asscrtoric

intcntions Becausc thcrc arc litcral intcntions vc can sa

uttcrancc is r~it is t communicatc sud1and such in rmau n;it n1a bc

P

ssible, thcn,in literal translati

n, to lii (l

a scntcncc in a targct lan uagc that l)as

ncc i1)thc ol,lcd-languagc,

hy: thcre is no :a oF CxPrcssing

n1ore or less thc samc htcrd i11teI1tio11s as tlac uttt

If it is not possible, it luay bc clcar enough

that thought in thc target language, PcrhaPS becausc thc rcfcrcnt of s

mc terrn is

n thcrc, r bccausc a social PracticC in vhich thc uttcrancc is embcddcd

unkn
~ thc cursc, say

is abscnt succcss and fa

vell~cn ugh
urc at this lc cl arc

dcHncd
But Ior litcrary translation our objcct is not to produce a text that reProduccs
the hteral intcntions of thc auth r~n t cvcn thc

nc

Pr duce sOn1cd1ing that sharcs thc ccntrallitcrary pr

Pcrtics of thc bjcct-tcxt;and,

s she is cancelling _but to

ious, thcsc arc vcr) much undcr~dctern ined by its literal1ncaning,e`cn

\ litcrary translati n, so it seelus to n)c, airns at
in the cascs `vhcrc it has Onc
cnVhosC rclation l)oth to thc litcrary and to the lh1gui:tic con
Produc"1g a tcxt

as is ob

tions ofthc culture f the translati

n is rc

cvantly likc thc relations ofthe object~tcXt

ssiblc,just

to its cukurc s conVentlons.A PrcoSC sCt of parallcls is hkely to be imP

bccausc the chanccs that rnctrical and tl)cr rmal katurcs ofa w rk can l)c rePro

duced
hile PresCrving the idcntity

f litCral and n n litcral, dircct and indircct,

mcaning arc` anishingly small.

And, in fact,
vc

ay choosc, righdy, t

un

vC a1

translatc a tern1 in a
C trying to prcser

d1e litcral
intcntlons,bccausc
c1 1ICial But evcn if ve(lid not havc t
that "d1hlto
scen I11orc
``C Could,Pcr in,Possjbj

ay that is

c rn1al aturcs

makc such ch i(Jes,even if

c,1ncet all thc constraints ofthc Griccan l11caning and all the

hterary con`Cntions, vcvould not havc Pr ducCd thc PerfCct translation

d

bettcr,

vc Could airn to rcProducC litcrary quahtics of thc

c could

bjcct-tcxt that arc

not a111attcr of thc convcntions

so t11at thc rcasOn 9hy ve cannot sPcak of thc perfect translati n hcre is not
that thcrc is a dcsnitc sct of desidcrata and vc kn0 /they cann t all bc met;it is
rather that thcrc is no clc nite sct of(lcsi(lcrata, 'k translation airns to produce a
nc v

tcxt that1natters to onc con1munit

but it is lDaIt of
that c n cntion

thc va another text rnattcrs to anothcr

ur undcrstanding of vhy tcxts lnatter that this is not a qucstion

settlcs;indccd,it is part of our1111derstanding of htcrary judgn1ent,

that thcrc can al vays bc nc

rcadings,

,)c

reasons for caring about nc /ProPc1 iCS

thi1 gs that111attcr about a tcxt,ncs1.

398

K /AME ANTHONY APPIAH

VIH
It is a fcaturc,silnPly Put, fthC ittcn tcxt that
cd not ha c scttlcd and de nitc
idcas about vhat I11atters about it VVhat is als clear is that in our culturc
c have
1

d q"h

lf

JJs1

1 lR

lW ~Ill
=1,

PrCsCrvc ft)r us d1c lcaturcs that n1akc it

0 h

tCaChi 1g

l
lTJi

Ii
:

l : !

:
l
yr

:t

conccPt fa

lil|

l:

litcrary readi11g/ likc thc conccpt or htcraturc is

hat

tI
ItIf:{J
J1
::
i Fl;ij;sl
=
f

aI1d Pohtics f litcrary Pedago8y fr 1a scnsc about vhy c sh uld tcach tcxts,

THICK TRANsLATION

399

cJl vcc should teach, vhat this tcaching is vvorth to our studcnts,and s n And
ve n1ight
:hat this n tion suggcsts, of C0ursc, for thc conccrns of this talk is that
seck to pcrateith a corrclativc notion of Pr ductivc m des of translation,
Such an aPpr ach t translation~hkc thc appr ach I ha e clscwhcrc suggcstcd
in the same Prag1uatist sPirit to what htcrary Scholars call rcading will dcPend
on our having some sensc of =hat ur PraCticC~of tcaching or translating is for
I ha c surrcPtiti usly introduced assumPtions ab ut the kind of translation I am
(hscussing by inventing
hat n ay ha e struck some f you as the artincial catcgory
f thc literary translati n, Actually this terrll n1ight be used equally x ycll t dcn tc
t
o rathcr differcnt ki1 ds f activity I 1ight havc mcant by it- though I did n t
~a translation that ahns itsclf to bc a literary vork,aorkvorth tcaching,a ork

cry htdc on what k tclls us ab ut tllc

whosc valuc an Cc t f sttldy dcPcn(ls
culturc m which the l,Jcct text it translates has comc such translad ns _
Fitzgcrakl s R1Io JF as Pp SCd t that of Pctcr Avcry and John Hcath_stubbs

~can bc read as rc vardingly as any litcrary vorks,

But I had in lnind a differcnt notion of a litcrary translati n;t11at,namcly,of a

translation that airlls tO l,e f usc in litcI ary teaching;and hcrc it sccms to Iuc that

such acadclnic translation,translation that sceks ith its annotations and its acco1-

panying glosscs to loCate tl e tcxt in a rich cultural and bnguistic contcxt, is

c 1incntly :orth doing I havc callcd this thick translati n ; and I shall say in a

momclnt why Btlt bc re I do say ,I sl otlld hkc tO say mt th ab llt the

ould ur ef r thiS sOrt of acti ity,thC PurPoses by vhich its Pr ducPurPosCs thatI
u ty may bC dged

Remcmber hat

I sai(l at the start uttcrances arc thc Pr

ducts f

acti ns, vhich

hkc all actions, are undcrtakcn f r rcas ns undcrstanding the reas ns Charactcr~
isoc of other culturcs and(as an instance of this)othCr dn.es is Pa

of what ur

this is csPecially imPortant bccause in thc casy atmosPherc f rclarld of that s just your Pini n that pcr adcs the high schools
ti isl11~in thc
tcaching is about

that Pr

ducc ur studcnts - onc thing that can gct entircly l st is the rich dicr~

cnccs of hun an lifc in culturc Onc thin8that nccds t be challcngcd by our teaching

is the confusion of rclau isn1 and t lcrancc sO scandal usly pcrpctuatcd by Allan
Bl
m,in

in a long succcssion of Amcrkan jc miad Ancl thcat,

fc urse,is a task for n y SOrt f tcaching~PhilosoPhical tcaching and it is onc
,thc latt

I aln haPPy to acccPt But thCrc is a r

lc hcrc for litcrary tcaching also, in chal~

lcnging this casy tolcrancc, vhich amounts n t to a cclcbration ofhuman variousness

but to a rcfusal t attcnd to ho v various othcr PCoPlC rCally are or`vcre /`thick

dcscriPtion of the cntcxt of litcrary Producti n, a translation that dra s n and

crcates that s rt of undcrstanding, lllcCtS thc nccd to challenge oursclves and our

studcnts to go tlrthcr,t un(lcrttRkc thc harder proJed of a genuindy in rmc(l

rCsPCct f r thcrs t1ntil

facc uP to differencc, VC cannot scc vhat PricC tolCr~

ancc is dcmanding of us.

In thc Amcrican acaclcmy,therehre,thc translation of A
mc to nccd to bc(lircctcd at Ieast by such PurPoses as these

ican texts seems to

thc urge t continuc

thc rcPu(liation of racism(and,clt thc samc dmc,through cxPlorati ns of minist

issucs and women sw1 lting,of scxism);thC need t extcnd thc Amcrican ima nation_an ima8ination that rcgulatcs much of thc v rld systcn1cconon1ically and
v scoPe of thc Unitcd Statcs; thc desirc to devcloP
P htically bcyond thc narr0

400

KV/AME ANTHONY APPIAH

ie vs ofthc v rld clsc vhcrc that rcsPCct rnorc dccply thc auton my ofthc C)thcr,
vic
s that are not gcncratcd solcly by thc lcgiti1nate but local Pohtical nccds
f

AmcHca sn ultiplc

diasP ras

T strcss such PurPoscs in translation is to argue that,

an analysis of thc current cultural situation

oIu the standPoint of

an analysis that is frankly Pohtical~

ccrtain purPoses arc producti cly scr cd by the literary,thc tcxt~teachin8,institu_

tions fthe

acadcmy To offer ur

Pr
crbs t Amcrican studcnts is to invite thcn1,

by sho ving hovv sayings can bc used vithin an ral culture to c 11nunicatc in ays
that arc c mPlex and subtle, to a dccPcr rcsPect f r thc Pc
PlC of prc industrial
socicties

Lct lnc cnd by saying that such a ay of undcrstanding rcadin and translating

vill rnakc thc qucsti n ofho

Ve should(lo it highly contcxt-dcpcndcnt;so that,
to teach thcsc Pro erbs in tbc Enghsh-sPcaking acadcmy in Africa is a dircrcnt
n1attcr yct again, If one bchcvcs that thc kinds
f cultural infcriority con1plcxcs
rcprcscntcd in thc attitudes()f rnany African studcnts nccd to bc c
orciscd, then

/estcrnized academy in Africa ill requirc

thc tcaching of ra htcraturc in thc
an apPr ach that d cs

tVo Crucial things

hrst,strcss that thc c ntlnuities bct ccn

PrC^colonial f rms of cultural pr ducti n and c ntemPorary ones arc

enuinc(and

thus Pro ide a modahty thr ugh

vhich studcnts can valuc and inc rporatc thc

African Past);sccond,challenge directly thc assumP0on of thC cultural suPeriority

/est, both by undcrn ining thc acsthcticizcd conccPti ns f valuc that it
f the

PreSuPPoSCs,and l)y(listinguishing sharPly bct ccn a d main of techn lo ical skill

in vhich~once goals arc grantcd~comParis ns of cf cicncy arc Possil)lc, and a

f valuc,in
hich such c mparis ns are by no mcans so unproblcmatic13
This nal challcngc~t thc assumPtion f Westcrn cultural suPcriority rcquircs
d main

vays in
hich thc systcmatic charactcr of
adly,acsthctic)judgments of valuc is the Product f ccrtain

us, in the last analysis, to exPosc thC

htcrary(and,In

re l)r

institutional Practiccs and not sOmcthing that cxists indePendCntly

f those Practiccs and institutions But it rcquircs,at thc start,a thick and situated undcrstanding

f ral

litcraturcs of the s rt for

hich I havc,I arll sure,Provided only thc barest

hint of a sketch;thc sort f understanding that

dl lca c you ablc both t undcr~
stand and undcrstand thc truth in the v rds vith vhich I began
As

ma hia

Akanh

n na Ntafc,

dc goro br ko

A matter which tr ublcs the Akan Pc PlC,thC PC Plc of G nja takc t

Play the br k tc

(lrum.

Notes
Blc

k& is tllc(Akan)namc

f nc

oftllc m0n Dagomba drums,which ac

com-

PanlCS danc1ng
The rnOst obvious thought suggcstcd by this Pr vCrb is thatif one has t

cho se

among e ils onc should cho sc thc lcast fthcm (ThC Pro crb is typical of a

vh le class
f Pro erbs that dePend
n Playing
vith the sirnilar~s unding
namcs of dis milar ctts)

TH1CK TRANSLATION

vf r all ki11ds f ambiguity,

vhcthcr rn t ur

Or onc ofthc th ughts Thc c

Putting it this vay av ids taking sides n qucstions about

n cntions all

401

scmantics should be nc that assigns contcnt in a broadl dircct rcahst rnanncr

I think that f r man tcrms dircct reahs 1ab ut c ntcnts is corrcct but that
is a seParate iSSuc hcrc
And,sincc cpistcn1ic authority in rcsPcct of onc

so vn bchcfsis normal, vh c

thc auth rit to co 11nand othcrs assuI cs ccrtain relati ns ofP

vcr,thC rangc

of intcntions onc can intelligibly bc hcl(l to ha e dePcnds, in the casc of

C0 11nandS, in Part n
vhat spcakcr and hcarer kno v about thcir P wcr~
relati ns

Ofc ursc the convcntions rna makc the intentions dcPcnd n fCaturcs f

contcxt~what is PCrcePtual|SdiCnt,w
at has st

thc

bccn sai(l,wht t timc it

is,and a h lc host of rn re such fcaturcs

vay

Ph soPhcrS
vill Pr bably ` ant at this Point to suggcst that thc right
t

ProccCd herc is to insist on diffcrcnccs I ha

c bccn blurring: l)ctvccn

uttcrancc-mcaning and spcakcr~mcanin8; or bct vccn V hat is dircctly

comn1unicatcd and fhat indircctly; r bCt CCn proPcrtics of thc t ken_
scntcncc amd ofthc tyPC F r thcm,lct rnc say that in thc rdinary cascs thcsc
notions conncct vvith thosc I havc bccn using in thc follo
ing
vay: thc
n

eaning of the tokcn~uttcrancc is thc sPeakcr neaning con entionally associ

ated vvith a standard unadorncd uttcrancc of thc tokcn vhcn thc c ntcxtual
features con cntiona v dctermined as rcle ant arc thosc of the actual c ntext
of utterance;thc mcaning ofthe typc-uttcrancc is thc function fr
t

m contcxts

t kcn-uttcrancc mcanings; thc sPcaker_nlcaning con cntionally ass ciatcd

vith an utterance is xcd b thc literal intentions associatcd vith it,thc intcn~
tions an uttcrcr of thc tokcn unad rncd and in standard circumstances is
convcntionally recognizcd as having
vhcrc s mcOnc has
This Pr verb
vould naturally bc uscd in a c ntext
exPresscd
ain rcgrcts The th ught is something like this that if y u (thC
v uld Pr sPCr, you
n that onc PCrsOn (thc Pahn~nuts)
drongo) 11ad kn

would not ha
e relicd on a Pcrson who was lcss successfttl(thC criPplcd ra a
Palm )
R l)c

r rivc
J Fo8Clin,Fl

sPc kinf(New

Haven Yalc uni ersity

Press,

1988)
10

J hn

Guill ry, Canonical and N n~Canonical:A Critiquc of thc Currcnt

Dcbatc,

LFf54(1987)

Thc Tcaching of Litcraturc is for mc alm st tautol gica1.Litcrature is what

is taught, that is all Rcnccti ns sur un manucl in Tzvctan Todorov and

scrgc Doubr vsky, nsc1Jncmcnr d

12

(1988)
13

Fd FirFJrdFLJr

Otlt of Amca:T Pologics of Nath

m,

Th

(Paris Pl n,

1971), 170,

ydFc/o n F of Ch sm2,1

153-78

Thcsc arc, in csscncc, thc Prcscriptions of ToP logics of Nativism (scc

ab vc)

Chapter 28

elth Har ey

TRANSLATING CAMP TALK

GAY IDENTITIES AND CULTURAL
TRANSFER

St

r i:
c ll 1:y l
;s tn i i 1
C
1940s to thc Prescnt whatis morc,can1p talk is ass ciatcd vith a xx h lc rangc f
h moscxual idcntitics in Frcnch and
`EnghSh Hcti n, froln thc marginahzcd trans-

vcstitc(GcnCt1948),thr u h t middlc class ty t PcS(vidal1948/65, Vilson

1952,Bory1969),thc Post stoncwall hedonisuc ggot (Na arre1976,Kramc1

uld bc assun1cd
a1

1978)and t11c Pohticizcd AII)s-a vare qucer (KuShncr1992),It c

from this that vhcn translating such Hcti n translat rs need mcrcly to bc a vare f

e er,

vhilc thc f rn1al asPccts of camp n1i:ht aPPCar constant, thc functions that

thc c mparablc rcs urces of camp in sourcc and target languagc culturcs H

ca11)P Pcrfo"us in its di crsc contcXts are hr iom uni

)rn I xx ill arguc late1 t11at

onc f thc chicf ariablcs(lctcrn1ining thesc functi nal(hffcrcnccs is thc conccption

fh n scxuahty as a dc nhlg Pr Perty ofidcntity For thC m

ant to notc that thc functi

f its

c dFudr

n cnt

it is i1nPort_

ns of camP arc intiInatcly l)ound uP xxit11thc qucstion

n,

1 FoHmal and functional di1ncnsions of camp

h)ordcr to oPcn uP thC factor

f c

aluation to scrutiny,thc functions of camP talk

can uschlly l)cl,rokcn d wn into two distinct(micr

thc immediatc hcu nal

c ntcxt

of camP talk

and n1acr )dimcllsi ns First,

v l
ftcn suggest hcthcr it is to

be gi cn a P Sitivc Or ncgative e aluative load For cxamPIe, a cha1

1998

actcr such as

TRANsLATING CAMP TALK

Cla

cncc in Jcan-L uis B ry s11oVCl d Pcdu d s

rcadcr as a cy 1ical,sclf~abs

Z br6(1969)is

403

PrcscntCd to thc

is camP talk(hc
rbcd,cn)otiona y stuntcd indi i(lual

is thc only hon)oscxual charactcr in tlnc book to cmPloy can11))iS rcad in thc novcl

f hiS liltlitcd atcti c Potcntial In cont1 ast, Bchzc in Tony

as a key sympt
Kushner s Play
Je in ic',Pd/r Onc; lriFfcnnium HPProdc c (1992)is PrCsentcd
f

as thc l ain sourcc of cm

cI

ti

nal and Practical suPP rt

dying ofan AIDs~rclatcd illncss

f r Pri

Iis camP is Positivcly vic

r, a young gay man

cd in thc play as a sOurcc

of strcngth and luuch11ccded hum ur In both of thcsc cascs, thc c

locatcd at a I11icro- Llnctional

aluati n is

ctional lcvcl Thc macro-Functional (limension taPs

into thc vidcr(sub)cultural valucs that11 nn scxual/8ay idcntity has cstablished for

:hich thc Hctional text oPeratcs and develoPs its lncanings Bory
itsclf and vithin
n vcl v rks hard t pr mote

the noti n of homoscxual rdinariness

Iis charac~

tcrs lovc,suffCr and live their li es just as hetcr scxual charactcrs do in c untlcss
othcr l vc st rics

Thcy just haPPcn to lovc PcoPlC fthc san1c scx In this c ntcxt,
f(hffcrcncc and lnarginahty :hich
Clarence s can1P talk is a n acro-cultural tracc

it is dccn1ed desi ablc to o erCon1e In contrast,I<ushncr s rcPrcsentations of caluP

at thc n1icro lc cl arc instrumcntal in thc clab

ration of subcultural diffcrcncc

as a dcsirablc goal Hnfc`s in mcrjcd PrCsCnts camP as a Sign of gay rcsistancc and

sohdarity in thc facc of a

h lc array f thrcats t thc gay indi idual and his
community,flom AIDS t thc discriminadons and hyPocllscs of thC d minant
culturc In Kushncr s tcxt,camP is invCstcd Vith a pohtical chargc Prcdicated uP n
an irrcduciblc and subvcrsivc gay differencc Camp hcrc, thcn, reCeivcs a positi
c aluativc

load in l)od1functi nal dhuensions

It is
ith this rcc gnition f tllc d uble-layercd naturc oft11c cvaluati n ofcan1P
that thc ` rk f a translator reachcs a kcy Point of dif culty For,`vhilc thc n1icro-

functi nal dirnension of c aluation in a gi cn Source tcxt rnight arguably bc al,Parent

to a translat r, as to any attcnti C rcadcr, rccoEniti

n f thc macro-functional

di1nension of ca1 1I) ill(lcPcnd on a clustcr of factors that go bcyond closc attcntion
t

thc s urcc text and involvc cultural and c

cn aut biograPhical issues RD1 thc trans~

lator, Thcsc issucs includc: (a) thc cxistcncc, naturc and visib ity
f idcnF1Fics
a11d communirjcs prcdicatcd upon sa c scx ol)jcct claoicc in thc target culturc;(b)
thc existcnce or abscncc of an cstabhsl)cd Jq
stclted J

l Cs(if rCtricvablc)i1
,'ol,/ccF

he1

rdrurc
r

in tbc targct culturc; (c)thc

cnt in thc undcrtakng ofthc translation and

publicad n of thc translation( r cxamPlc,whcthcr the tcxt is t bc Pal t ofa gay

hst fn vcls); (d) thC scxud/idenFi of thC translator and his r hcr rclati nt a

ject In
hat f llo
s
k cus on thc qucstions ot homOscxual/gay idcntitics,c
1Inun-

gay subcultural grouP, its identitics, codcs and P

I vish abovc all t

htical Pr

itics and vriting in sourcc and targct culturcs and to attclllI,tt01i11k thc existcncc

f such Prcssurcs
ith

thc translatcd tcxtual pr duct

I nl bcgin l,y analysing an exan

C f crbal camP in a c nte1nporary Enghsh-

languagc text, rclating this to a gcncral dcscriPtion

f vcrbal camI) I
vill

then

oudinc sOme m or c unts of camp as a ctlltural Phcn mcn n by stmight and gay
SPCciHc examPlcs f can 1, and itS

idcntihcd coniln cntators l)cl rc (liscussin8 t vO

translation, ne r on EnghSh to Frcnch and thc thcr fr m Frcnch t

Enghsh

404

KEITH HARVEY

2 erbaI camP
A couPlC f

relatcd P ints nccd to bc madc bricfly bcf rC l oking at the cxan1PlC

nccrns thc sPcci city to thc rcPcrtoirc f carllP talk f thc featurcs I
i(lcntiI,Thc scc nd rdatcs to thc naturc of tllc c
iclcncc I am c nsidcring Rusty

Thc rst
Barrctt

rdcr

s (1995, 1997)Cnquirics into gay men s languagc Practicc arc

aluablc in

hs use of Pratt s(1987)linguistics of contact

t think through thcsc issues

is particularly uselul
In a c ntact

rnodel flanguagc usc,spcakcrs constitutc each othcr rclati nally

(Pratt198 60) ThiS m (lcl c ntrasts with the m re hmiliar

and in diffcrcncc

hnguistics of con1munity Prcscnt in dialcct l gy, according to vhich essentially

holnogenc us languagc practices rcsult fron a conscnsual Proccss fs ciahzati n of
thc individual by a c 11nunity As Barrctt notcs vr)ly, Gcncrally,PeoPlc d not

raisc thcir children to talk likc h m scxuals (1997 191) A hnguiStics fc ntact

:ould rcc gnizc thc fact that gay mcn and lcsbians
ork ithin and aPPr Priatc
aili11g
straight
(and
h
moPh
bic)
discourses
sPeci
cally, it xs ould l)c ablc t
Pre
account for gay spcakcrs

frcqucnt usC oflangua8e Practiccs associated vith a vhole

rangc of co ununitics dc ncd in tcrms f Cthnicity, class, a:c, r rc8ional back~

vhitc n iddlc~class gay
ground (ibid) F r cxa1 plc, Barrctt suggcsts that vh c

ican~Amc11can crnacular sPccch( r

mcn may draw upon lcxlsi(lcnu ccl with A1
eXt mPlc J
1cnd al1dl/riss TJ,dn , Rcn cmPbytStl as` es) d LlP n tl c tuJ
:ith black sPecch c cnts (SCC als Murray 1979, LcaP 1996
insults associatcd
5-10),A ican Amcllcan gay mcn might makc usc f thosc katurcs of whitc
woman s En81iSh that Lakof(1975)suggCstcd wcrc,Pical, r examPle the c ehl
(liscrin1ination of col

ur tcrms and thc usc f tag questions This account Points to

verR l citadonal nuidity in languagc stylcs that is c nsonant vith Pratt s contaCt
aP

m dcl As Pratt hcrsclf notes

A hnguistics of c ntactvill be deePly intCrcstcd in

Pr ccssCs of aPpropriation,penetrati n or co_oPtation of onc grouP s languagc by

an thcr

(1987:61)

This n

ti

n of contact

in languagc practicc is als

uscful in addrcssing thc

qucstion of thc status of thc cvidcncc in my descriPti n fcamP talk I an1chicfly

intcrcstcd in htcrary rcPrcscntations, but occasionally rcfcrcncc is also made t

vork(lonc in thc s ciohnguistics of actual lan uagC practice There scc 1s,ho cver,
bc litdc sti cati n hr mixhg thc two tyPCS oflanguage Thc c dencc m

cach6cld f study aPPearS, strictly sPcaking,to bc inadn1issil)lc in thc Other This

conclusion itsclfturns ut to rcst up n an assumPtion that can bc challcngcd,namcly
that vhcrcas scti nal rePresentations of talk arc c ns rucrc(f dchbcratcly by an author
f

r the PurPosCs of Charactcr develoPment and narrativc advanccmcnt,rcal languagc

use is a rg cc

on f tl es 0 linguistic grouP(S)tt,which spcal trs bcl ng Barrett

account of thc inhcrently citatjonal naturc

distincti n bct vcen

f8ay camp talk underlnincs thc clcar

ctional rePresentations of talk and real talk, B

th, in this

account, dra on a stock of languagc fcaturcs that arc in csted vvith cultural
(and stcx o pkal)valtlcs in order to achic
tity

f a sPeciHc c
c thc efrt

mmundi(len-

vish to usc languagc in a vay that vill indcx a gay idendty

For sPcakcrs vvh
the f r 1oflangua c oRCn re ects a stcrcOtyPe of gay1ncn s sPccch (:arrett

1997

192) What c unts,thcn,is n t thc emPirically cri ablc truth

f the rclati

betvccn a langua:c fcaturc and a sPCaker s idcntity,but thc fact that thcsc langua8c

TRANsLATING CAMP TALK

fcaturcs ha

405

c comc tO stand for ccrtain gcndered and subcultural di& rcnccs,

CamP talk cnhsts thesc stcre tyPical differenccs in ordcr t

indcx a distinct scxual

idcntit

2.F On he su cc orc mP
Tony Kud ncr s nJc`s

ricd,P rr Onc

m PPr dch s(1992;Act Tw

`fc,nni1
erbal cxchangc bctwccn
two gay male charattcrs,Bclize
and Pri r Behzc is black and Pri r vhitc. Thc
erc ncc lo ers Behzc uscd to
in

il

sccnc Fi :c:44)k ures a

bc a drag quccn Hc is visiting Prior in hospital, vhcrc the lattcr is rccciving care
for an AIDs~rclatcd illncss, Prior is rcfcrring to thc fact that thc drug he is being
gi cn

causcs hin to hcar a oicc Behzc has thrcatcncd to tcll thc d

ct r

unless

Prior(l cs so hhnsclf

You kn w what haPPens7whCn I hcar it,I gct hard

Prior:

C)h m

P`i'c
r

C mI c
slo v

Bc

ga (Hc uscs hjs drm Fo dcn,ons d c)And y(

know Iam

to risc
ry,

'c;Myjaw achcs at thc mcm

And ould you dcny mc this littlc s lacc~bctray my concuPis~

P
r

ccncc to Florcnce Nightingalc s stormtroopcrsP

Be`i'c

Pcrish thc th ught,1na b

Thcy d changc thc drug ju to oll thc hn

BcFiz :You and your bncr can dcPcnd n mc
P

P or:Jc t a(l

rc,mal)clle N gre

BcFizc All this girl~talk shit is Pohtically inc

rrcct,you bo v Wesh uld

havc dr PPcd it l)ack vhcn :c ga c uP drag

P
r:I m sick,I gct to l)c politically inc

rrcctifit makes me kcl bcttcr,

XVe can begin by n ting that in this passa C thCrc are certain ProP sitional fcatures
that arc tyPical f gay camP talk

hc PrcOccuPati n
ith scxual activity(thC Crcc~

tion,fcllatio)is oRCn assOciatcd,as hcrc,

vith rekrcnces t extinct Passion and a

tragi_con1ic a
arcncss ol thc cPhcmcral naturc f scxual dcsirc, Furthcrlu rc, in

camP thc talk f scx contrasts vith an attentiveness to convcntional ln

ral codcs f

bcha i ur,
ith sPcakCrs oftcn a uding to thc Principlcs of deccncy and rcctitude
t0 vhich thcy fcign to adhcrc(for cxan.PlC Prior s suggcstion that Behzc c uld n

P SSibly bctray

interest in thc mcchanics of sex vith a trumPetCd adhcrcncc to traditi

c dcs

hilu) Thc inc ngruity inhcrCnt in thc juxtaPoSition of a dctailcd

nal moral

is One of thc chicf s urcCs ofirony in camP.

Turning to tllc rmal lc cl,this Passagc is rich with camP traits.Thc m st

bvious is thc inversi n of gcndcr~sPcci c tCrms, thc
girl-talk that Behze refers
t , Thc Practice of gh1-talk ovcrlaPs

ith thC camP stratcgy of rcnaming that

includcs thc ad Pti n f malc nalncs lnarkcd as quccr ~Quentln C11sP s naluc
xxas Dcn1s bcf rc he dyc(l jt(CriSP1968:15) and thc disturbance ofthe arl)itrary
PracdcC of attHbtlting ProP

304)clndss

C9

names_br cxamPlc,RCchy sI oh d(RCChy196

nlsr cbld:336)Luc (1 132)gi SC dcncc

quccr rcnan1ing11as a hist ry that datcs back at lcast t

of h w stlth

thc ei htCenth

ccntury in

406

KEITH HAR

EY

Britain, :h"c Pastrc(1997: 372)sh ws h

v siluilar PracticCS arc at
ork in con_

tcmP rary quecr France In thc Kushncr cxtract, thc malc terms con11)inc :ith
thc usc of Frcnch and are rcalizcd by kmininc a ccti`=cs in ocati c cxP1 cssi0ns
(n

lb b ,m

bc`/t

N grc) ThC effect of such rcnaming is to signal thc sPeakcr

critical clistancc fron the Pr ccSSCs that Producc and naturahzc catcgories of idcn~

tity Bccausc this oPcns uP disjuncturcs l)et vcen aPPCarancc and rcahty,thc cffcct

to undcrn1inc thc schemata :ith hich thc addressec is oPeratin

is als

ThuS,Cvcn

a gay rnan has hs PerccPtion fthc orl(l disturbed by a lnan vho intr duces hilnsclf

as c (Na k1976),or iss

Ro/Jd

Frc(Kmm 1978)

H
vcvcr, fc
ininity is not only signallcd in thc tcxt by such bvious lcxical
de :iccs

as namcs Thc cxdamative sentcncc Oh n

is multlPly dCtCrmincd as camP

style and constitutcs an cxamPle Of hat I oukl call thc cmPhatics fcamP,all f

vhich c ntributcs to camP s construCtion of thc thcatricahzcd :oman Alongsidc

cxclamations,thesc cn PhaticS includc a tastc for hyPcrbOlc as ell as thc usc of thc

unin olvcd
r out fP wcr adjccti cs(mdrve`` us, d rdb`c)that Lakof(1975
11-14) dalmCd werc tyPical f womcn s languagc Thc imittlt c ntlturc of
CmPhatics is madc clcar by Crisp vchcn dcscril)ing a pv rs Longhurst he knc` 'as a

bccamc an adcpt
=ay
at this n1odc f talk and,
vid1thc Passing of thc ycars, camc to sPCak in this
child: This voman clid n t lly to cxtrcmes

shc li

cd thcrc I als

unconsciously (CrisP1968: 24) In thiS c nncction King(1994),citing thc Polcn1~

icd b
k/lc Phocnix?fs

m(1813),nOtes h

w dking

likc a womclll has bccn

a fcaturc of hOn10sexual can P at lcast sincc London s cightccnth-ccntury Mo y

H tlscs(where h mOsexud mcn mct in sec t to h c scx) 0n ar cd h a

M lly H usc,men a cstc l t sPeak,wdk,talk,tattlc,curtsy,cry,sc

all manner of cHtminacy

(qu tc(lin

King199 42) FurthCrmorc,

ld,&mimick
c cry

nc was

to talk f thcir Husbands&Children,one estolling sicl thc Virtucs of hcr Husband,

an thcr

thc gcnius&
it of thcir Ch drcn:
hilst a Third

v uld

exPress hllllsclf

sorrowfully undcr thc character fa Vid v/ (ibid) Thc construction of a

voman
is clearly achicvcd througl) the Par
featurcs,such as th sc

I tcrll

dic accumulati n f stcreotyPical lan uagc

cmPhaticS

Howevcr,thc brm ofthc cxdamati n Oh m in thc Kushncr cxtraCt docs

morc tlaan just suggcst a gcncralized kmininity For a gay rcadcr,ke

okes a sPeci c

culturally situatcd and thcatricahzed tyPc f fcmininity,namcly thc southcrn Bc1lc

mtaclc hm us by V kn L0gh h GoI,c" J,rhe nd~scc also John RCchy s quccns
Southcm acccnt As such,
Jhr(1963 48,287,328),wh oftcll a

ho

the Phrase b lds into thc tcxt thC typc ofintc cxtual rc rcncc t

a mt lor

cxamPlc

f gay talk Lcap(1996: 15),R)r examPlC,traccs

a rcfcrcncc to lrn star Mac Wcst s famous linc Why(lon t ya comc up and scc
of P Pular culturc that is tyPical

mc some ti1nc in an verhcard discussi m bctvcccn a maitre d and a Potcntial

customer,b th of wh m LcaP assumes to bc gay,In an ther rc rcnce to a hmous
nlm hcr inc,Matlp1n s(1980)n
el
lc,

rdF s frJ,

0 includes this cxchange l,ctwcCn

crs Michacl arld Jon(Mau9n1980:119):

Michacl shruggcd. I want to deceivc him just long cnough to makc him
vvant mc

What s that r rn?

Blanchc Dub is.In sFrccFc r

TRANSLATING CAMP TALK

Such intertextuahties ha c at lcast t

407

effCCts First,thcy crcate ironic distancc

n (F wler

around all semiotic pracucc,c nstituung devices f (lchmiliarizau

1986 40-52) and, in Particular, signal a susPicion of all cncodings of sinccrity

second, tllcy rcinFc)rcc gay sohdarity bCt vCen intcrlocut rs To undcrstand the

slang or catch on t
(Nc,tc h

the allusi n is also to fccl that onc bcl

wJ nh1mc(liatt

ly i(lclltiHcs Mich

ngs to thc community

s scntcncc ab a qut,tc in thc cxtract

ab
c,)
Pri r s llllcs

Commc gF tlt1d et ad re mal)cllc N

grc

drt

w on anotlacr of

crbal camP sm st consistent(le ices in Enghsh, thc uscf French ( carly, this
accon 1,hshCS a hum r us nod tO s Phisticati n and c sm pohtanism, Frcnch
vorld ith the quahties
vvn Hrst and f re_
of stylc and urbanity What is morc, Francc is PoPularly kn
m r its consumm c sklk h thcx f su cc re cmmt(h it,ln,Pcr mC)
languagc and culture l)cing saturatcd for the Anglo-saxOn

Thc usc of Frcnch,thcn,docs n t just clcc ratc thC tCxt linguistically, RathCr, t

alludes t a con Plex

f cultural
alucs and stcre tyPes that carry dccorati cncss
as an attributc It is intcrcsting to notc that Frcnch camP, in a ParallCl gcsturc,
rcsorts to thc usC of Enghsh` 0rds and PhrasCs

(Camus198

eFJ,

rflclnk

uv rv n,t`cJl, k ind s'

64,itdics in original); C est exciting! (Na arrc1976:177)

h c thc Enghsh usc of Frcnch signallcd a kind

f tongue in-chcck soPhistication,
thc Frcnch usc f Enghsh hcre P ints(PerhaPs`vith equal ironic distancc)to the
sPrCad f Enghsh languagc PoPular culturc acrOss thc vvorld in the latc t
`cnticth

jr,cf s
ccntury Indeed,a Phrasc likC

lli

FF, rJldnk @u vclJ much,

jr

suggcsts thc intcr~

tcxtual rcfcrcncc to Hollyxs d her ines alrcady n tCd In thcr ords

Enghsh in

Frcnch can P also functions Pri11ciPally as a cultural, rather than mcrcly linguistic
s1gn,

Languagc gamcs such as thcsc may l)e charactcristic of a typc of critical semial ng
otic avcarcncss that is csPecially hcightcned in gay pcoplc, rcsulting fron
lll
in
also
o1um
trcam
cxclu on11
s
gnal a mOK
Practkcs :tIt thcy m
dcHant attitude to cultural norms, as sullivan has suggcstcd vvhcn noting that gay
:
Pe Plc Sh in thcir ir

thcm

ul mately

vith
nic gamcs

immunc to s

thc (l n1inant culturc that s

comtlc,l (Stllli an199

mcthing in

71-72) ComParablC in

its cffcct is thc f rn al asPcct of rcgistcr lllixing that

crbal gay camp typically

dchghts in CamP likCs t exposc thc1ncchanisms at vork in thc ch ices speakers

makc wid1rc

ard t aPPr P atcncss

Camp spcakcrs,for cxamPlc,will tyPically

ntcxt,or

use le els f formahty/informahty that arc incongruous in a Particular c

juxtaP sc dlffCrcnt lc cls f rmality h a way that crecltcs ling stic incongrtll

In Kramer s fdJ ors,a chalac r(rc lllamC(l rhd juxtaP Ses mockliter y a l
l

rcgisters to(Icscribc a scxual cncountcr

vith anothcr llaan in a toilct:

Hcimn1c-

datcly inq rcs, how mucl I,n r cxPcc IlJ such b unF f n s,bccause I wcluld
(Kmm 197 17 my italics)
lla c donc jm` i~frcc Iam sa ng My Pleasur
?

And Pri r s rhct llcal

fl urish C And

w uld you(lcny n c

this litde s lacc~bctray

my c ncupisccncc to Florcnce Nighdngale s stormtrooPersP ) contrasts with his

ncxt uttcrancc, an informal and unadorncd cxPrCssion of Potential disPlcasurc

( ThCy d changc thc drug just to sPoil the fun

),IndcCd,the h lc exchangc,bascd
around scXual innucnd andvordplay,could bC construcd as highly inaPPr Priatc
givcn Pri r s raPidly dcchning hcalth Ho vcvcr, as thc last hncs sug cSt, this
inapproPriateness als

acc mPhshCS an act of critical rcsistancc.

408

KEITH HARVEY

2.2'mbiv

rcnr s Fid r {/ nd

It is i1nPortant to add t

PoFirencss rhc

-/

ur dcscriPtion f this Passagc a considcration of a n1icro-

hncu nd katurc thclt I would tcrm dmbivdfcnFs

This is a crucial intcractive

asPcct of gay camP that can bc

aPProach Broadly,ambi

alcnt

`idd
bscurcd by an cxclusi
cly formal and taxon 1ic
s hdarity rev l cs around thc mcchanisms of attack

and suPPort,eithcr of
hich can bc co crt or on-rccord Thus,t vo Characters n1ight

gn supPort hr cach ther l)y surfacc Pr Positi nal and brmal mcans whilc in hct
attacking thc other s scxual Pr0 :CSs r Probity thr ugh innucndo and d ublc~
cntcndre, as in thc con crsadon bet /ccn t11c trans estites Divine and Mirn sa in
N r -Ddmc

des f`c1I^(Gcnet1948: 177-8) Crisp(lcscribes thc stylizcd cattincss

thatas characteristic of gay get-togcd1c rs vhen11c

as youngcr as aR,rmal

Finnucnd cs

ab ut thcr

gan1e

pcoPlc bcing oklcr than thcy sai(l,about thcir tceth bcing

falsc and thcir hair bcing a vig Such convcrsation vas thought to be smalt and very

kminhc (Crisp196

29) In thc Kushnc1

P Sagc,tllcrc arc clcmcnts of covc
atttlck(c.g Bellzc s mock coml,lalnt at Prior s sl wncss at gctting an erettion)

alongsi(lc nulllcrous On_record assuranccs of suPPort and trust orthiness (cg

Bchzc s Pcrish thc thought ) In c ntrast, gay charactcrs 1 ight dcPloy thc put~
d

wn as an on-rccord attack White(1988 42)gi es

Wc vere
i

the follo 1ng exa111Ple

all sn1ihng Ixs'asI utc and PondCrous bcsi(lc1ny nc

compan-

ns I assumcd cach bit of rePartce had bccn coined on thc spot ()nly
utincs rnade uP a rePcrt ry,a sort of Fl)lk

later di(lI rccognisc that thc r

visdon1con 1uon to <luccns ,for hadn tM rris rccklcssly ann unccd,

C.rab your tiaras,girls, ve rc all royalty tonight, vhy I ha cn t seen so

man cro vncd heads sincc

cst1 instCr Abbc

I kn
v you fi hcad,Abbie,but the only cr0 vns you
c scCn arC
on thosc w molars you vc got lcft
Hcrc,thc parting shot,though ici us,is in fact Part f an elaboratc game uscd to
the t ls of qucer
crbal scl defcnce and to rcasscrt, albcit Parad xically, a
1mmunaIl)clonging(sce thc PioncCring work on a)inSults by Murray1979)
ThC Pragmatic thcOry of Pohtcncss(Brofn and Lcvinson 1987), 1th itS kcy

h nc

notion ofthc facc~thrcatcning act ,Could usefully l)c brought t

bcar on this asPect

of camP talk According to PohtCness theory,all sPcakers havc b th ncgati e and

pos i e hce~wants which thcy stllvC mutuany to resPect Negati ,c hcc-
ants are
bascd uPon a desire n t to bc restricted in nc s frccd m f action As a result,a
SPeakcr will mitigatc the imPosition imPlicit lll thc lormtllation of a requcst(the

Facc

threat

)by the cncoding of an uttcrance d1at nts dckrcncc Camp tdk

thrcatens an addresscc s negati c face-vants

vith its on~rccord rcquests for soh~
darity and suPport PoSitive facc~ cants, in contrast, arc bascd upon the(lcsire to

bc apPrcciatcd and aPpr ed Of, In Br vvn and Lc insOn s tcrn1s, camP can Rcn
be secn to involvc thrcats t an addrcsscc S PositivC facc- vants by indicating that

thc spcakcr docs n t carc about thc addressec s PositivC sCIfLimage, hence, the
insults,ridiculc,Put_d

ns etc One small examPlc vvill suf6cc t

shothe P ten^

tial f this approach to thc analysis and its uscfulncss in descril)ing translations,Aftcr

a nocturnal sexual encounterin a pubhc garden,the narrat

r of Camus Tricks(1988:

70)mCets an acqualntancc on thc cruising gr und This1nan con11ucnt

TRANsLATING CAMP TALK

~Tiens,Rcnaud,mais v us ous

409

vergondcz!Qu CSt ce quC us%ites

'
II

ays!What arc you doin8

ey,Rcnaud,but you arc gctting into bad

hcrePj

This remark c nstitutcs a clcar thrcat t

the addrcssee sP sitivc facc~ cants by cast~

ing asPersions n his behavi ur Yet it is Overloadcd

ith
s

t11c ir nics of ambivalcnt

hdarity:
rst,thc sPeaker c uld just as easily addrcss thc rcmark t hhnsclf(hc,

too,is on thc cruising ground) second,the noti n of getting into bad vays is nc

hich b th addrcssor and addrcssce kno v bcl ngs to d1cm ral codc ft11cd n1inant culturc Thr

u h

such a comment,this c dc is thus bcing rnocked f r thc benc t

vard

fboth addrcssOr and addrcssee Itis intcrcsting that thc Enghsh translation(H
ants of thc addrcsscC:
1996 30)cxaggCratcs d1c thrcat t thc PoSitive facc-

Hcy, Rcnaud,you

vh rc|

What arc you doing hcrcP

vhereas the sOurcC

Here the facc_threatening act is intcnsihcd l y sevcral lucans
teXt encoded a c

n 1nent

on thc lln ral bchavi urf the addressec,thc sPccch act

odlcss)insuk lll the French,thc sPcakcr ir ni-

hcrc is a cletar(grammatically m

cally Jkcts m ral suPeri rlty through thc use ofa term(se dJv ond rl morc usually
ith
associated

rmal rcgistcrs, Vhilc in thc Enghsh the

ulgarity of
h rc(lin1in~

ishes the sPcaker s claiIns to a suPCri r moral stancC furthcr, the use of".J,@rc
CXClllPhnCs thc tyPical camP111

of CnnPl yiug a tcrn1usually reser cd f rv n cn,

The target tcxt,thCn,a1nPh cs thc camP in SC eral ays,but in cloing so arguably

loscs s mc

thc ir ny prcscnt in thc s urcc tcxt s (feigncd) cnc ding of rn ral

cxact

ccnmK Polittxncss tl Cor)i can bc uscd to hell,ltlenu

w iRs f tllis

tyPC might occur

3 camP,gay sensib ity and quccr radica

s1m

From sontag(1964)to quecr thc rists of the 1990s, much of thcvork on camp
has takcn Placc vithin cultural studics, hn studics and gay and lCSl)ian studics It
has n t, thcrcf rc, Paid n uch attenti n to the dctailcd mcchanislus of languagc,

H
/c vcr,its insights arc rclevant to Our Purposcs
In

Notcs n Camp ,sontag conccivcs of camP as a tyPc of acsthetic scnsib

that is characterized l)ya(lChght in

failed scriousness

ity

and thc thcatricahzation()f

exPericnce (1964: 287) In rder t cxPlain thc link bc ecn camP and h m _
scxuals sontag suggcsts that the camP scnsibility sCr cs a Propagandistic agcnda for
thc h n1 scxual cause:

I o

osc ualS

ha c PinncJ rJ,cir inFg r Fi n

h)to socicty on

m ting tllc acsthetic sensc CamP is a sdrcnF of m rJity It ncur

Prc

`jz6mord
indignation, sPonS rs Playfulncss (ibid: rny cn Phascs) It v uld sccn1rcasonablc
vas Pohtical by
to suggcst that a l)id f r s cial intcgration by a lninority :r uP
naturc Howcvcr,l)y insisting that camP iS rst and brcm st an acsthedc Phenom~
ic
f it as discngaged,deP hticizcd or at lcast
cnon (il)id), S ntag lnakcs hcr
aP htical

(ibid) Prc a

d
vnPlaying

thc dctri1ucnt of any Pohtical P

its Pohtical Potential,Bo

tcntial

Vh e

th(1983: 17)nonCthClcss brcaks vvith S

als

ntag

by asscrtlng that CamP iS Ph larily a mattcr of scl

)rcscntation, Hc is thcrcby

410

KEITH HARVEY

erbal stylc of camP PcoPle in hiS acc unt,

noting charactcristics that cxtcnd om thclc el oft Pic(man iage, ma111y sl)orting
activitics,etc)t a sPeciHc rnanner of`ocal dehvcry(il)id:67):
ablc t includc a characterization of thc

thc tyPical (hcti n

v al1nost to thc point f cxPirati n,

vith hca y cn11)11aSis
n
inaPProPriatC
vords (l tS
f caPital lettcrs and itahcs) rising Painfully
t a chmax,to bc foll wcd by a series of swiR cadenccs~a sort of
r llerc astcr ecct, vhiCh in Rcgcncy tirncs was kn

n aS the dra ing

A can1P quahty of voicc111ay also cxPrcss lassitudc

is sl

roon1dra d

is intcrcsting hcre B d1is ostcnsibly

talklng about no11-

rittcn camP PCrfOrn1a11cc ,yct thc litcrary quahty of this stylc
suggcsts thc presencc of
ritten~tcxtual (lcviccs of en1PhasiS This c nfusi n f
Thc rcfcrcnce tO caPital lcttcrs and ita"cs

(liffcrcnt hn::uistic channcls is in itscll a tcstirnony to thc succcss of cala

l)

S dCcon_

struction of the l)inarism sPokcn/xx rittcn as an analogy of natural/constructed

As hrl)ack as thc1970s,8ay idCntihcd con)lnlentators argucd that there wcrc

ns to an cxclusively acsthctic and dcPohticizCd rcading of camP Practice

hn1itati

(DyCr 1977, Babuscio 1977/1993) Babusci , a historian, suggests

emcrgcd as a gay response to contcn11)orary sOcicty s pcnchant for
of labchng [thatl cnsures that individual typcs bccolllc P larizcd
1977/1993: 20_ 1) Thus, camP s critical n1cchanis1ns arc sPcci ca y

that camp

a mcthod

(Babusci
dc

cloPcd

isms in ur sOcict) d1at stcn1

to mock, dodge and dcconstruct thc multilDlc l)ina1

fron1the P stulation f the catcgol~ics natural/unnatural tIsing hn 1exts or his

cxalllPlcs Babusci suggests that gay can P dcPl ys four linkcd stratcgics: irony;

acstheticisn1; thcatricahty; humour Irony is l)ascd uP

n thC PriI1ciPlc Of incon
gruous cont ast bct vcen an indi idual or thing and its contcxt or association

Babusci suggcsts

arious cxampIcs of gcndcr crOssing through masqucradc (cg

Garb in ccn chIi ind) In rdcr t be cffcctivc,irony n ust bc shal)cd This is

whcrc thc stlatcgy of acsthcti0sm comcs i11to Play Thc camP cmPhasis on stylc
dclibcrc tdy sig11iHcs P formancc rathcl tllan cxistcncc

(ibid:23) Xllrllat is mOK,

it lcads tyPically to a dehl)cratcly cxaggcrated

chancc n qucstions of(sclf-)Presens likc; ^on1
tation: thc cn1Phasis shiRs from vhat a thh1 or Pel^son is to
`hat it`o cl
2ris bei1 g

donet

ht, it is bci11g donc

"`,

ine itabl) liom its aesthcticis1u Babuscio

(ibid

24) ThCatricahty in can)p dcvcloPs

s cxPlanation for thc gay dePl(

theatricaht) takeS its Place in a long lh1c of fe

1inist critiqucs

ymcnt of

f thc constructcd-

ness of gender r lcs(c8 Millct1971,Butlcr1990)

If r le

is dc ned

as thc aPPropriatc bcha iour associatcd

ith a givcn

ays
PoSiti n in sOciety,thcn gays do not conf rrll to socially cxPectCd

of bchaving as n1cn and

v n1cn Can1P, by focusing on the

ut vard

aPPcaranccs of rolc,il Phes that rolcs,and,in Particular,scx roles,arc

suPCr cial~a1uattcr of stylc
(BabuSci 1977/1993 24)

Hum ur,b rn

ofthe ir nic aPPrCciation c l incongruity,iS thC f urth of thc fcatu1 cs

Babusci mentions Intcrcstingly,it is

vid

hun1 ur that Babusci

cxPlicitly points

TRANsLATING CAMP TALK

411

uP thC Pohtical potcntial of camP, HC

rites of camP hun ur undcrcuttiI1g ragc

by its(lcrisi n of conccntratcd bittcrncss (ibid :28),Callin:camP a protoPohtical

Phcnomcn n ,hc n tcs

rnorco cr that it stcadfastly rcfuscs to rCpudiatc Our l

heritagc of gay hetto life (ibid) This gi cs risc to thc tyPical invcrsion

ng

alucs

vhcn this takcs thc lc,rm of ndi11g bcauty in thc sccn1ingl)bizarre and outragcous,or cliscovcring thc` orthiI1css in a thin8 r pcrson that
is supPosedly`vithout aluc (ibid,),

that can1P I

Cls in c cn

If Babusci rcco ni'Cd camP s Pohtical P tCnual, thcn 1990s

queer CamP~

vritten vith an upPcr-casc C

vhcn conccPtuahzcd as a P htici7cd,s lcly queer

discou1 (Mcycr199 21,n 2)~has g ne much fttlthel Nc,t ol ly has queer

criticisn1rcde6ned CallllD as a ccntral strategy in its cxPosurc fthc hnctioning of

straight

institutions and valucs, queer thinkcrs have uscd it t

ontolo8ical

challcnge

(ibid.

vider
und the

2) of quccr: (2ueerness can bc sccn as an opPosi-

tional stancc not sirnPly to csscntiahst fc)rmations of gay a11d lcsbian idcntitics,but

to a n1uch:idcr al,Phcation of the dePth modcl of idcntity

(ibid,

3), Quccr

ra(hcal indctcrn1inaCy rcsidcs in its conccPti n ofidcntity as a Purc Cffect fPerf rm_
ancc

at sOmc tillac, thc aCtor must dL,sOn1cd,ing in ordcr to l>r ducc thc s cial

isib ity by

11iCh

(ibid 4) Languagc contributcs

fidcntity FurthCrmorc,thc Perf rmancc
at Mcycr inheri m Ju th Buder s thcory of gcnd mcal s that
pdacl m

contcmporary scxual idcntitics ultilnatcly dcpcnd on

cxFrcls Xud
Perf r1nativc
thc idcntity is n1anifcstcd

activcly to this claboration of thc cffect

tl

gcsturcs (ibid 4,n1y cluPhaSis) This is an imPortant insight for undcrstanding the

ay gay

functi ns scn1iotically in c

acti ity itSClf bet veen

ntcn1Porary culturc F r,if the fact of scxual

PeoPlc0f thC san c gcndcr aPPcars t

thc(sct)attIibution f the labcls gay or lcsbian

,it is als

is actually abscnt onl vie v and only Prcscnt through thc

S ni

bC thc si/,c tlt

'non for

truc that such acti ity

v rk

of ther ext1 ascxual

ing Practices ich thcreby bccomc hnked to k mctonymicJly

l

IIl this Play f surfaccs fcignin substancc, it is hardly SurPriSing that CamP
occuPy a ccntral Placc as thC total b dy of pcrFormativc Practiccs and strate-

sh uld

gies used t cnact a quccr idcntity NIcycr

is achic cd thr ugh

a dePloymcnt of

s rcading of Can1P and itS Pohtical P tcncy

Hutchcon s conccPtion of Parody as an

cxtcndcd rePetiu n xsith c1Itical diffc1 cncc (Hutcheon 1985 7), Thus, parody
(and,f r
cycr,CamP)emcrgcs as an cssentially intcrtextual operau n n thc aluc
that is in cstcd in an original tcxt,Thc traditi

an idcological position that cndo

nal denigrati n ofPar dy stcms ll

vith suprc nc cultural imP

tancc

`s thc Original
and suPPrcssCs a11y suggcstion t11at thc s urcc is itsclf thc Outco111C()f an intcrtcxtual Pr ccss.A rc-cvaluati n of par dy as a Priluary and Pcrvasivc cultural

cnta s a rcconsklcrati n of thc hicrarchy f

it Mcycr suggests that Hutchc

alues that11avc hithert

Pcrati n

arginahzed

,ork is particularly uscful for thcOrists of

caluP if thC hctor of proccss rather than fc,Hn is higblightcd; By cmpl ying a
Perf rlnancc_orientcd111eth dology that Priv Cgcs Process, ^ie can restore a kno v_

lcdgeablc c r soCial agcnt to the disc ursc()f CamP parod) (RICyer1994: 10) ln

other
ords,af cus n the docr and thc
all
vs

l ing,and notthc nishcd tcxtual Product,

the quecr the rist to highhght thc ncglcctcd P tcntial for cultural agcncy in

thc par dic m mcnt: thc rclationsh P bet /een texts becomes si1nPly an indicat r

ofthc P ,cr rclationships l)ct vccn social agcnts vho

icld th sc tcxts, onc vvho

posscsscs thc orjginar,thc ther vho P sscssCs thc par dic altcrnati c (ibkl)

412

KEITH HAR

EY

1eyer s Can1P is thus a kind of'Tr jan H rsc

l)Cnetratin

thc othcr
ise 11n-

brcachablc Prescrvc of straight scl91iotic l)l^actice, a ncccssarily Parasitic entcrPrisc

that managcs n ncthcless t cndoW the oicclcss quccr with cultural a8enc) ThC
rcquired link t don1inant Practiccs is als

hclPful in exPlaining ho v difFcrcnt c alu_

ations of CamP can bC adhcrcd to xl:ithin thc gay con1munity: Calup apPcars,on

thc One hand, to ffer a transgrcssivc vehiclc yct, on the othcr, siluultanc usly
in okcs the sPcctCr of a d n1inant idcology (ibi(1,) FOr s mc,thc sPcctcr of domi~
nant idcology clnbcddcd in Can P blockS its P tCntial as an instrumcnt of cultural
critiquc and Pohtical action Pcncl Pc and w lfc(1979 10,citcd in JacobS 1996:
62),R)r cxamPlc,clastigatc thc usc of dero:at ry tcrn1s for vomen in thc can)l)Put^
doxx l

bccausc it end rses thc Pohtics of Patriarch)

thc transgrcssion inhcrcnt in CaluP founds quccr

and c nstitutcs the ncccssary l)ackdroP f

Ila c ntrast,for A/lcycr hi 11scll

s susPiCion of identity catcgories

r qucer cultural agcncy

4Translations,trans or1mations
l ill n0 f exan1inc t
o eXtracts om n vels that c nt n cti nahzcd camp talk
and sct thcrn alongsidc their l)ubliShcd tra11slations Thc hrst n clis Gorc Vi(lal`

rf,c Cj,dnd Fhc Pj``cr(1948/1965),trt I1slated into FJ cnch as t`n Cdrfon Pr&dc d
crt s Pq sd c dc
Ri iJrc(1981)by PhiliPPc Mikriamm s T11e sccond is Tony Du
Fdnr lisie(1973),

translatcd i11to English as srrdnJ

n( cciPc(1975)by sam Florcs

dl seek tO sh
that in the rst translation thc callP is Cithcr I11inirnizcd or

dePrivcd fits gay co 11nunal

alucs h1contrast,thc sccond translati

n fronts the

8ay camP clcll cnts and transfor 1s the Passagc int onc ith a clcar hom scxual

mcssagc.These tcxtual hcts xllll l,c rdatcd to thc cukural c

ntcxts in
hich they

vvcrc produccd

1d F nd Mikrf n,rl,os:Conlin ou in
v y r nd Pd s

In Vidars 1965ARcr vord t h Cirr d dF P

e arc tokl that h m scxual

behavi ur is cntircly natural sincc

A hulnan``dr
bcil 8s arc biSCxual ( klal

1948/1965: 157) Ho

as a h moscxual

`c

Cr, Vidal insists that of coursc therc is nO such thin

vord is n t a noun Iescribing a rcc

nizablC tyPe (ibi(l)

Hc thus dePri cs11

moscxuahty ofits cla"ut
`thC

constitutc a key clcn1cnt of idcntity

in thc same gcsture as hc legitiIlli7cs it In one sensc Vidal
s
ic` is consistcnt
hc1
,Jim,an r(lincaly Amcllca11malc xx h can,and oltcn
docs, Pass aS hctCroscxual r` ncthclcss, thc novcl contains a Portrait ()f lx 1)ll_

estabhshcd c n1rnunitics of rncn vvho ccrtainl do idcntifv as h m scxuals

hde it

witl)the descriPtion f tl c

is truc that thc Picture of thesc connnunitics that cmcrgcs is far Fr

n1positi

c(d1c

n1cn Jim meets tlt g pttltics arc oRcn htchy,jcalous and small mindcd),tllcy do
cxist as a distinct sOcial grouP And thCir11sc f`:Crbal can1P is Prescntcd as onc f
thcir dcsnin:traitS:vidal n tcs that thcir c nversation vas often(ryPtic ,a

(ibkl

sug

46) Jin.,thc hcro,d cs not contril)utc to canlP1and is S 1c~

gcstive ritual
rn1adc
t
fccl uneas)byit C)n the n1icrocontcxtual levcl,thcn,calnP
tin1cs borcd
rccci cs a ncgati cc`:aluation H wc er,onc Of d1c kcy katurcs f camP is t11at it
n cxPcnse built int it Through this ir ny,camP is oftcn ablc t
has irony at its o

TRANSLATING CAMP TALK

413

sub crt thc negativc e aluati n that n ight be loadcd on to it As a rcsult,Ic

can1p cmcrges in Vidal sn cl and desPitc its auth

s a o/ed

ntend,

intcntions- as a

macro-Contcxtual sign of an estabhshcd holllOSCXual idCntity and conwnunity

Thc cxtract I wish to cxan1inc is o1u a PasSagc dcscribing a Party hCld in
Ncw Y rk by Nich lasJ R lloS n(Rolly),a minor chamctcr Jim has bccn tclkcn
thc Pa y by his cx lovcr,a lm stclr mllcd shaw By tllis ttmc in thc no cl,Jim
has had two in1Portant h m scxual affairs and gay so0dh%is not unhmilia1
to
t

hin1 Mikriammos s translation of thc Passagc is rcProduccd imn1cdiatcly aRcr

Vidal s tcxt

said Rolly, t /isting an

cho are
veakness f r mcn
I have a Pcrftct

Y u kn0v, I loathe thcsc scrcan1ing Pansics,

cmcrald and ruby ring

butch I rncan,aRer all,vvhy l)e a quccn ify

ll w mcPLuc

Gn wa(lays c crybody

rc,,d

cRruo ly!

claysap a hcnd d mine

u likc othcr queCns,if you

s JclJ,ifyou know whatI mcan

,ju a w

a dW

rmtwknIw

wdl,Iw tlldn tgo

so hr

tosay

a icnd,

vas
actually I think hc s rather s1nisrcr, but any vay this acquaintancc

actually kccPing Will JePS n,tlac b xOr!Now,I

mean,real|,whcn

d1ings gct that far,things ha c rcally g nc farr

Jilll agrccd that things had indccd g ne hr Rolly rathcr rcvokcd

hin1but hc rcc gnizcd that he mcant to bc kind and that vas a good
(lcal,

My,isn tit crowdCd h hcrcPIlovc br Pc PlC to e y thcmSckCs!

I rncan the right kind c)fl)c Ple vh aPpreciate this sort of thing You
sc c,I vc bcc mc a Cathohc

(Vicla11948/6

Je

d tCStC Ccs tantCs si voyantcs,s

cxdama R lloson

12O)

en t urnant la

meraudcs qu il portait,son d igt J ai un

grossc bague de rubis ct d
faible P ur lcs gargons qui sont c

stauds Jc nc

iS Pas l

int r t qu il y

a, pour n us autres tantcs, ahner lcs tantcs!

uS mC sui ez?

Heu usemcnt,atllour(l hui,totlt lc mondc cn cs

al)s lumcl t totlt lt,

m ndc

unc hllc!M n cher,

Tdlcmcnt(lif nt

du temPs o

tals

a qulcqucsj urs un dc mcs amis,je nc dcva^Pas dirc un ami c

lc trou c asscz sinistrc, n ais cn n

cet an1in1 a aPPris d nc qu

jc
il

cntrctcnalt Vill JcPs n lc b xcur!Quand lCS ch scs cn s nt l;,c cst

qu cllCs S nt d

a anc cs!

Jim dit qu cn CffCt la situation a`:ait volu R ll s n lc r v kak un

Peu n ais il se(lisait que le b nh 1un c a ait(lc bonncs jntcntions ct quc
c

tait

tr

s bicn comn1e ga

hulc j ai cc soir!J a(lorc oir lcs gens qui s amuscnt

Vous sa ez que
Ennn,je veux dire lcs gCns qui
ibrcnt col lInc nous
Qucllc

jc vicns de mc converur au cath licim1cP

(Mikrhmm s1981
I

15 3)

ill cxan1inc t o groups of fcatures in thcsc tcxts: Hrst, lcxical and Pr

sccond,tcxtual and pra{::matic

sodic;

414

KEITH HARVEY
In thc Enghsh tcxt,the lexis fR lly s camP is rich vith subcultural
alue,both

at thc level of individual itcms and that fc ll cation, For examPle, R lly (hC

rc nnal R s n throughout the translati n)cmpl ys

rcn1alns the m

P nsics xl lth

a PCjorati c lncaning to dcscribc othcr homOscxuals and quccn as an clcctcd(all)Cit

ironic) term t
n

describc hi1nself Such uscs c ncord iith thc

alucs that gay

cn vould stnl in cst in thcsc items today, Thc distinction,ho c cr,is rlattcncd

aunt/s

in thc translation, vhcrc both tcr 1s arc translatcd by rdnrc/s(htcrally

ir lllc

),a
rcHcdon n

thc guc for J9is historically intriguing Vidal coul(ln t havc kn

vn

in1948that

PCj rathc

tcrm,cvcn amon t FKnch h moscxuals RO y s

this tcrmvas to Play a crucial rolc as a dc6ncr of a(listinct idcntity Ho

in thc translation(pubhs11Cd,let us rcn1ind ourselvcs,in1981)bcc

C Cr,Jt

n Cs

thc lar:cly

bC f it/tllcm ,a tcrm which dso cfct ti

cly cra s

thc sensc of an emcrging idcntity by cmPl ying a Phrase that is

oid f lexical
contcnt, functi ning cntircly through irnphcation For Frcnch rcadcrs, cn

Frc is
als likcly t carry a Proustian rcsonance,bcing emPloycd in
c,rccJ,crc/, dt Fer12`s
Pcrdu t dCsignate hon1 sexual charactcrs(cg Pr ust 1924: 17-18) This litcrary
ccho, far fr m rcinforcing thc idca f an idcntity/community across tilue, brings
Pcj rat c cn

with it Proust

(lit al|,`

s hndamentd ambivalcncc with rcga l to hom scxuality:

in

@rccflcrcllc hom scxual charactcrs rnight bc incrcasingly on1niPresent,but thcy arc

noncthclcss judgcd to be un unatc ictims of a moral Haw R lly s stock f
subcultural signs is further in
ally, stocky,wcll

P vCrishcd by thc translati

n fl

Fc as c

Czuds(htcr~

buil ),Bu ch is a long stan(1ing mcl bcr f tl c ga

lcxic n,

usually CmPl ycd(ir nically)to dCSignatc thc surfacc fcaturcs of dcsirablc rnascuhn~

ity,cithcr f an thcr ay man(

h0is110ta quecn )or f a hctcr scXual rnalc In
contrast,cosr udsis a1nainstrean Frcnch tcrm that fails to connotC thc ir ny accruing
to the gay awarcncss of gcn(lcr Perf )rmati yity,
Thc sourcc tcxt also fcaturcs collocations that arc gay n1arkcd For cxamPlc,
nsics is 8ay camP n t Prirnarily bccause of the noun (
hich c uld bc

scrctIminJ P

CmPloycd as abusc by hctcr scxuals),but bCcausc ofits c

an ironic/P rad :C term inclicating how out and

ll

cation vith scrcdlllinJ,

amboyant a pardcular gay man

is DcsPite its PotCntid hrcc as critiosm, rcdm n

als c ntains

an elcmcnt

aPPr val vhcn used by a gay n an,suggcstin:as it d cs unn1istakablc gay

Thc translaj n, c s

F nres si vo

thcsc

dnrcs (hterally,

(Such) sh

isil)ihty,

aunts )

uscs

rm,vq dnres( owy )that,ag n,is m nstrcam Frcnch and unambiguously

P advc An ther coll cadcl,n,P u%cr d ncss,dso hncdc,lls CamP in R lly s

a tt

talk Thc e

d Pc

witl c ncss is mall ed

hxl,Crbdc lll gcncr

En ,its

quasi oxym ronic quahty suggesting ths sclfLc nscious intcnsity of thc fcchng bcin:
CxPressed The translator makes n attcmPt t capture this and translatcs it

ff1
lt
lfli
J

li

tyPical of rcprcscntations of vcrbal can P in Enghsh, It cxaggcrates (and thcrcby

rcndcrs suscePtiblC to irony) the sPeaker s
vn in estlncnt in the Pr P siti nal
content of his sPecch and hclPs to takc thc addresscc -
Vilhngly or n t~into his

confidcncc It thus binds togcther sPeaker and addrcsscc in discoursal and subcultural s hdarity Thc strcss pattcrns f French, as a syllablc-tilncd language,
d not allo v this Pr s dic featurc(and its vrittcn encoding)to t11C samc dcgrcc,

RANSLATING CAMP TALK

415

Thc translator^thcrcf rc,has not uscd itahcs in this Passagc;ncither d cs hc atten1Pt

to con1Pc1 satc rt1 c loss c)ft11is st) liStic aturc As a result,Rolly s ca1111)is dimin-

:many

ll ::

JP1; f
:l

oPCmuve
r

:st :

sc urse mtark s haxc i11thc xt: r cxamlDlC u n@";Vj`ou k o

c
h r'n,cdn crud`, N , mc n,itd As wdl as ftlHhering d1e SPCakCr s

s act as a constant involving 1ucchanisI

Pr PoSitional strcan such tcrl

dircctcd

at thc addrcsscc, ThCy arc dcviccs that crucially contributc to thc gossiPy tonc

fR lly s talk Nonc f thosc co- Pcrauve markers just cited is translated in
nPlays the
Vith nc n table cxccPti n, d1c Frcnch tcxt d
N1ikrian1111os s tCXt
ss

vcrbal li11 th R lly attcmP

u n is dF trans|at0n ll

lll)'

make

'ith his ll Dw h mOsexud Jim TllC exceP

s exchmatory use f by=1fon (lit ally, My

l
T

ve br PeoPlc t
commcnt

k r

wh aPPrcciatC this s rt of thing

u sCC, vc

f ;|

::

Jr

;tT
lta

e11joy thCmscl es!I mcan thc rig11t

Il

bcc mc a Cathohc

1)

]of l coPlC

The jokc is

cxccllent, Rolly suggcsting that d1crc is a causal link bct vccn his convcrsion to
Catl olicism

and his dcs

c r

Pc Plc to Cl loy thcmsckcs at Pardes Thc lattcr

ith you scc n1aking

an act of Christian charity,

bcc lncs thcrcby transformcd int

the link As is typical ith camP, wc cannot l)c cntircly surc vhcthcr thc sPcakCr
is intcntionally scnding hi nsClf uP

vhCthcr thc jokc is at his exPcnsc At any

r

rate,it1na11agcs to ridiculc and tri

iahzc Picty and the Church,a frcqucnt butt

:
y F T J 1

q1
:P
iP f
::l
11

I11

L
;
:; r

l :hJ
i

li

;: i r :

t

herc,Thus,in Francc there is a susPicion(c

cn am ngst thosc who PractisC hom ~

it) )of thC vahdity f a Subcultural labcl such as gay ,Indccd,thc very
rted nature of thc tcrm makcs its usc t111stal)lc,as is clcar m aco111n1C11t

scxual aCti
i1uP

such as the R)ll

wing:

Ic can usc thc Enghsh sPcllin8

gay

rt,srrcss

rs cu`rt r

`
s l,or tlnc Fl cncll clling g ,witl tllc mmc mcanin
n,cuni imPD cd~/IOm Fhc
r

(Gais et Lcsbicnncs Branchos,Wcbsite 1995,Enghsh languagc version;1ny itahcs).

ikriarrl1nos suPPrcSsion of thc itcn1Jdy fron1his trans

e are rcrllindcd hcrc fp

hu n,This lack fac m Hable,h mc gro n label br the ctltc ory rc cdSa morc
gcneral rcluctancc in Francc to recognizc thC uscfulness f idcntity catcgorics as thc

Camus ri s(1988),Barthcs

sPrin )oard hr P litical acu n,In his Prehcc t

critiqucs thC SCll

catcgorizin8sPccch act PrCdicatcd

n I

an1

r its in1Phcit submis~

sion to thc dcmands fthe C)thcr

Yct to Proclahn yoursclf somcthi11g is al va)s to sPCak at the behest of
a vengc dl(Dthcr,t cntcr into his discourse,to argue vith hhl,,to sCCk
l1

n1hhn a scraP f idCntlty: You arc

Yes,I aln

Llltin1atcl)

416

KEITH HARVEY

rtance;
hat socicty should n tt lcratc is that
, 0 hin , or to bc111ore cxact, that thc s mcrJ,in that I
am sh uld be oPcnly CxPresscd as ProviSi nal,re cablc, insigniHcant,
incsscntlal,in a word:irrclc ant Just say Iam`a11dy u :ill bc so0ally
thc attributc is of no i1111)
I sh

sa

uld be

ed
(Ba hes,in

Howard199

vii)

Advocatcs f Anglo-Amcrican attcmPts to thc zc and PrOm te gay and lesl)ian

visibihty
vould n d ubt rcsPond that n Fll J PrccisCly idcnti cs the d n1inant
culturc

ancc
rclatlx

s goal
vith rcgard to holuoscxual sel =articulati n;
not11ing and irrcle~

htll:cl

ng becn the nulli=ing col)ditions against which we strugglc Thc

c rcluctancc fFnch hom cxuals to scl identi a ol cling to thc v iable

f scxuahty has dircct ilnPhcations for the construction of a subcultural c

nununity
bascd n scxual diffcrcncc It leads t sccPtiCism f la tentati nc n1n1unautah e
C

the tCmptation ofthe con

l`

unity

,Nlaltc1 1996:4O4),a symPton

thc construction of a distinct gay community

f thC

fcar that

vould c nstitutc a regrcttable rctrcat

into scParatiSm

Edmund/11itc

attributcs a icvc such as Martcl st a sPcci c Galhc c nccP~

tion of thc rclationshiP l)ct cen thc indi

lual and the collccti e

Thc Frcnch behcvc that a s cicty is n t a fedcration f sPccial intercst

grouPs but rathcr an imPartial statc that trcats cach citizcn rcgardlcss of
his r hcr gcndcr, scxual orientation, rchgion or colour as an abstract,
univcI sal indi idual

(XlVhite1997:343)
Thus,although somc carly Frcnch thcOrctical vv rk in the cld(eg H cqucnghem
1972) rna)'Stdl Strikc a cho1 (lt day in Anglo-Amcrican quccr thinking, thcrc is
c abscncc of radical gay (lnale)thcorizing in contcn Porary Francc lMcrrick

relati

and Ragan(1996:4)ha c notCd the c nscquenccs thjs has had fOr rcscarch
the Frcnch acadcrn

vithin

ILlCSS rk has bccn d ne on thc lnistory of honn scxuahty in France

/cstern countlics . . The cmPhasiS On national

than in somc other

idcntity has led to the do /nPlaying of diffcrcnces in racc,scx,and sCxual

oricntation

.Figurcs likc Gi(lc and Yourccnar ha

cl)cen trcatcd rnorc

ho haPPCncd t havc scx vid1PCoPlc f thC san c

sex,than as h m scxual ,riters Pcr Se

as Frcnch

vritcrs

Thc rcsulting conscnsus aPPcars groundcd in thc vic

that, c cn if onc :crc to

construc hom sexuahty as a kcy factor f idcntity, hon1oscxuals

vould be
vcll

adviscd to lay thci hoPcs in thC gcncral l)rogrcss o 11uman rights that snd thci1
origin in tl c uni crsahzin

RcPubhcan tcxts and cvents of1789,This has lcd t

an

attitudc to issucs of ay idcntity, history and c mn unity that aPpcars conscrvati

c om thc PcrsPectivc of B1

it n

and thc UsA,CamP,I have argucd thr ughout

this Papcr,can l)c sccn as a tyPical(indeed,PCrhaPs aS thc kcy)scnli

of gay men in thcir critiquc of straight s

tic rcsource

cicty and in thcir attcmpt to carvc Out a

TRANSLATING CAMP TALK

417

sPacC f r thcir(liffcrcncc, I ould likc tO suggcst that c see a signi cant textual

conscqucncc/rcahzati n of thc Frcnch rcsistancc to this ie v in Mikrian11nos

ducing thc gay verbal can1P in idal s tcxt

dccisi n to a oid rePr

.2Du

nd FForcsr Po m Phous

PcrverJ frI/scxP

vs that thc n tions f

If thc idcntity catCgory gay is Problcmatic in France,it foll

gay vritin and gay htCrature are also disablcd in the Frcnch cultural PolysyStCm
Vhite recalls
by a uni crsdli ng tcndcncy in the Gallic c ncePtion f su ccti ity
an intcrvie :hc ga c in thc early 1980s to a Frcnch gay ma azinc during vvhich

f course hc c nsidercd hilnsclf

ltcF Hc also remcmbcrs how in thc midJ980s a thc male French w1 lters

hc astonishcd thc journahst by telling hi1n that

a gay w1

indig

vh had been invitcd to an international gay literary confCrencc in London

nantly rcfused t attend(WhitC1994:277-8) This is Put down to a rcsistancc on
'riters to thc pcrcci cd lirnitation thatv uld bc imPoscd uPon
thC Part f Frcnch
:Cll aS thcir litcrary acti ity,by such a label Instructl c in this
thcir subjccti ity,as`
rcspcct is Renaud CaI us rcjccuon f thc tcrm homoscxual w1 itcr in Nor s
cJ,r c Cs(1982;translatcd and quotcd in Vcrcier 1996:7):
ritcr ,unless
Nothing is so ri(hculous as this conccPt of homOsexual
it

s Catholic w1 ltcr , Brcton

whtcr, avant gar(lc writeF,I already

havc tr ublc bcin a riter I (l

more than agrcc to being a

rathcr l)c t

vo or threc fthcm or

homOsexual vvritcr

As a conscqucncc,it could bc argucd that thcre is indccd no gay ncti

n in Francc

thc immcdlatc cultural an(lP litical idenuty neccssary to gi c it m mcntum(l)oth

in tcr1ns of Pr ducti n and reccPtion)is undern1incd b thc resistancc inhc1 cnt in
largcr s cial and cultural factors,Frcnch ncti

n that treats asPects of homoscxuahty

and d c hom scxual condition cxists,ofC0ursc,Of this,t vcntieth~ccntury French

Cr,this htcr urc tcncls
literaturc has many cxamples(SCC RoL,lnson1995) HowC

not to Contribute t thc articulation of a culturc, identity and sensib ity that is
diffcrently gay In thiS c ntcxt,it is not surPrising tl at thc Hgures,say,of the trans~
vcstite and thc quccn c ntinuc to be mar8inahzcd or do 'nPlayCd in c ntcl Porary

accrue
Frcnchriting and that thcir charactcristic linguistic registcr,camP,fails t
siti c
alucs it has gaincd in much Anglo-Arncrican vork
Thc work of T ny Ducrt,though httlc commcntcd uPon in Francc(and barely

the P

rcad r translated utsidc Francc), gives us an insi8ht int

isi n ofn nthc

ritCrs
mainstrcan1sexuahtics that has l ng cxistcd am n st Frcnch hon1 scxual
moscxuahty
is
nc of
ne
could
disPutc
that
h
rc
ttc
N

such as Gi(lc and Pc

orks
vever,in Duvert s no cls and the rctlcal
s chicf prcoccuPations H
ntcxt
oF
a
largcr
intcrcst
(1974, 1980), homOSexual acti ity takcs Placc in thc c
in Pre-PubcscCnt and ad lcscent sexuahtics Ultin atclv, Du crt s tcXts sCck to

Du

ert

exPl re

and cxtcnd the human exPcricncc ofscx and scxuahty Pcrsc HC rcPCatcdly

returns to thc thcme f scxual relati ns bctvveen Chndrcn and bct vccn childrcn and

adults, Although much f

this acti ity is sallnc-scx baSed, thcrc is a clear scnsc in

it is thc Pcnncss,Poly1u rPh usnCss and(to uSc a Duvcrtian :ord) i11n _
ccncc of childrcn s intcrest in Physical and scxual acti itv that is his ccntral thcmc

hich

418

KE1TH HARVEY
'hen considcring IDu ert that thc(listinct uni crse f

It is i1nportant

rn dern

French

:r 1
t Jll;1
Jf;;;
r
:

cnce of a gay literature as this is undcrst

11;;

d in both British and Amcrican litcrar

iS,aPPCars to takc placc in and around a boarding sch

h l

J
ol/corrcction ccntrc/hidc~

cstablislamcnt bc re tllcy can e oy one f thc gids r mlc This scenc intcr

csting for its rolc~playing of scxual coll,lllCrCC,and als bccausc it givcs us a litcrary

lii 1

r l

:1

u
:l;

to conccntrate on thc rePrcscntations of direct sPccch I havc als itahcizcd thc

spccch ofthc N1adam t fac itate readability Thc lack f standard Punctuation and
thc use ofsPace bct fccn Porti ns f tcxt is,hovcc cr,an0riginal fcaturc f sOurcc
and targct tcxts,)

la1naqucrclle un Pctit ba ard c mme uncI iC a chapeau dc paillc

d f nc

lcur dit

JlV`ds mcs bt, ux,,,cssieurs tz

C

Z- 0us

tlLz

uc cI~fenrP

cst Combien?dcmandcnt lcs gargons

la

Fa Fa c

sF

cJ,cr c/,er!

Hc la P titc damc z avcz unc Putain qui rnct lcs bouts!

oh f eh dcPo u Fu` ucs

PFusP

Cstla mCrdc a ec v sc0nnCHcs j vais(lchors m

Hllc~l e c a dcs c

n s dcr,,ois

FF s

uilles rnadame dit un chcnt

dcs cc,uiFFes`ds du r

r!protcstc la gorantc ct cllc c urait

dc gamin en gamin soulc ant lcs juPcs

bdisez ccFF

d1`i,,iFicu se1I`ei,,cnF J,ein il lnc m

ntrait

(Du e 197 102-3)

!ll
:1

,;

dF s

h
v

fuc unn

cou cno1 mon P

Jood sJ

much is it?asks onc ofthc bo s

dedhe dcdric me s nor ch

hn ,,oF For d

HCy madamc y u vc a whorc hcre who

s!

d r n

'
s cutting out!

TRANsLATING CAMP TALK

oh rJadF birch rh s mon"

419

n,r uP in
/m@rc?
vhat
you arc vith all your stuPid assb lc
s
re
all
full
of
shit
that
you
R

ll jrll d

ry games rm going ut r a walk

hey this floozy here has got balls says Onc of thc chcnts to the twit~

tcring madam
n

o/ ` `oun

i rdnr
thC

Fo e`ics

oFrinf b //s sjr/ou mu

madam gi
es a

tr,ss t

c dse

F
s vu r

,her hmd thcn runs Rom lady tc,lady

hRing ski
ts
thcn I ll

fuck that onc lying there in thc middle

hc P inted at lnc

(Florcs 1975

111-12)

Thcrc is e ident camp here in thc sOurcc tcxt lXIadam s uttcranccs Thrcc main

camP katurcs can bc mcntioned:(a)a rCa

ith%igncd outra c,cxPrcsSCd

lincss
`

through exclamati L1s(oh)and tlle PresCncc of cxdamauon m

with archaic hnguistic rcgistcr,asin h

alas my hand~

i11tc rrogadVc hverqon of vcz vous an(l tl cu f qucFquc,in cad

C articlc,t modi d nF( m ncy ).ThiS c ntlasts With dle coarsc~

somc s s ,thC
f thc Partiti

h;(b)a Playhlncss

mess
urs(htCrally,

zs J,,cs bedu
`

ncss of F JtIrcc( thc bitch )and thC SCxual cxPhcitness of dcs c uiFJcs( balls ); (c)
thc sc Lc nscious tcasing and scductivcncss ofthc disPrcfCrred resPonsc to thc boys

dicct qucstion c
la la it

csr con,bicn C

s exPcnsivc cxPCnsi

how much isitP o

1) This rcsPonse

ac
sF ch r ch r/(htCrally, h

nly`a
in fact rePhCs to thC questi n

by Prc-cmpting thc outragcd resPonSC that thc lalen v l

Pr bably ha c
hcn t ld

ho v cxPensivC it is,Itis an acutc con1rncnt on thc diffcrcntial po

vcr fact r atork

in a(lialoguc that is part busincss deal,Part sCxual PohticS

Fl rcs s translation transf rs much ofthc camP It als signiRcantly transf rms

Du cl s tcXt in t o ways 6rst,the N/Iadam s camp is intensiscd and made sull

more thcatrical;second,thc sccnc bccomes one of homOscxual seduction and lcss

a Playing out of ch dish curi sity vvith sexual roles and b undarics,In sh rt,Florcs

Ho v is this achic cd tcxtually7Thc mah1stratcgy is that of addi~

ti ns t sourcc text lnaterial For cxan11)lc9thc N1adam is intr duccd in the Frcnch
tcxt as wcaring un ch Pedu dc P
F c dt
fonc (litCrally, a bashc<I-in stlaw hc t ) Thc
text is gaycd

translation carrics Out a transformati n hcrc by suggesting that thc s urcc tcxt

Pie

1nagPic

) is itsClf PiI1ned t , ,

al Stra

` b

atcr

, N1orc signincant is thc

PrcsCncc in this scntcncc of t vo addcd details,ncither of vhich aPpcars1noti atcd

by thc u e

tcxt (a)s mC Fd d mc(m dying srIcI

bodrcr)ftlnctions nKtonymi
cally to rcinforcc thc clcmcnt of gcndcr Parody; (b) J9 nincFics
through the
PrCScncc of thc dangcr usly hom nyn1ic d , sets ofF a subthcmc that bec m cs
CxPlicit by thc end fthc Passagc The gcndcr roles Par dy is furthcr rcinforced by
thc altIldon ol oh n n@F r dr
to tl c Ma 1am s dcdHc d dhc m
1I=ddr n
ir s noF chedP,L Cr ad ti ns i11cludc,Fcd0"r
u musr tc, sc rhis vu ri:!jnsrdnrJ,

furthcr dcvcloPing thc feigncd outrage of thc

voman , and rhc m cldirl`i es d Foss
hc'
rP,or
rotC
ess )bc%le r cn/IJns
cdd(
s c

nF :htt r
s the mala c

'

i,, d ro F (f0r cJJe c urdir dc J min dn Jdmin:hteralI) s11e ran Fl()lu boy to

boy ) ^ hc cun1ulativc cl ct of these additi ns is to hcightcn thc fact r of Pcrf rn1~

allcc h tllc gendcr r lcs and to intensi `tllC thcatricdity of tl

C Madam

420

KEITH HARVEY
Thc thcr trcnd I mcnti ncd is that f

the fr

nting of hom scxual scducti n

n f thc

This is c ntcxtuahzed and facilitated b thc intcnsiHcd theatricahzati

Madam sdmg,Indccd,lll tlnis connCction tllc t

ti c

cIdid n to thc tar8et tt xt fthe ac cc

r =irFerin to dCScril)c thc p 1adanl is signi

cant, as thc mctaPhor of l)ird (and

sCXual1ncn~csPecially
camP oncs~in both s urcc and targct cultures(cf CrisP1968 84,Duvcrt1969
othcr anilnal)noisCs is oRcn apPhcd to thc sPecch of hoIll

52, Grccn 1974 45) The Prescncc of r iFrC,,nJ, like that f Jd , SCtS of sugges_
csonanCes of homOscxual idcntity that arc n t Present in thc source tcxt The
manifcstation of this idcntity bCcomes cxPhcit hCn nc fthe b ys refuses t
Play,
c mPlaining:
u
F`JhF`ofshir F r hdr ou czrc llIrh our sruPid dss oFe` i9`Jdmcs
ti e1

( rc esr F'mcrd

cc
os C0nnCries hterally, it

s shit wkh your cunt stuPiditiCS

Thc addidcln of u d dssh

c fdi Jdmcs makes dcar Florcs s homoscxud read of
thc sourcc tcxt Thc rcfcrcnccs to anahty and tO sexual deviancc suddcnly trans
forn thc sccnc into an claborate cxcuse for malc~malc intcrcoursc, and thcreby
deHect fro1a rcading that prioritizes thc Polymorphous cxplorations of ch
This gaying of thc tcxt culIninates in a decisi
thcn I ll fuck that

nc lyin8therc in thc n1iddlc

hc pointed at rnc

Hcrc, a crucial clc1ncnt of agcncy is attributcd to thc boy`

(bCginning

dren,

c transformation

uttcrs thc Phrase

) and thcn P ints at thc narrator (an thCr b y) This rc vritcs thc

source tcxt s
baiscz ccllc(lu n ihcu seulement hein il rnc montrait

(lit:just hck tllc nc[ft malcl in the mi(ldle heyP hc Pc,llatcd at me)

In thc sOurcc tcxtitis thc Madam

h0gi es

an in Pcrati C and n`aintains thc ction

f thc hetcrOscxual role~Playing vith cc``c(

the ne Ifemalel), LatCr in this sccnc,
vhen t vo b ys actually do sncak ff f r gay scx,their activity apPcars in thc sOurcc

tCXt to be yct anothcr exPcrilnCnt in prc-adult sexual activity In the targct tcxt,
thcir samc~scx aCti ity is already c ntcxtuahzed and PrePared f r by the hom ~
croticislll in Flores s reading of thc rolc~Playing,

In thc light of thc transformations in Florcs s tcxt,it rnay l)c considcrcd unlikcly

that Duvert hiInself Playcd any r lC in Producing thc translation, I1

e er, in a

sN tc at the front ofthe b k Fl rcs vritcs

I ould like t thank thc
auth r,Tny Duvert,hr his J b like PatiencC in dcalhg ,ith my many quc1 lcs
Translator

conccrning his tcxt,and also f r rcPlying s len8th y to thcm Alth ugh this(l cs
ve that Duvert rcad(or undcrst d)the vholc f thc translation,it ccrtainlv

n t Pr

,arrantcd
Puts us n our guard agaiI1st conCluding that Fl rcs 'as able to takc un
and unsanctioncd libcrtics
vith thc tcxt.
Ve arc pcrn1ittcd thcn t surn1ise that

PCrhaPs DuvCrt b th undcrst od and aI)pr ed fthc Enghsh crsion Onc n ight
suggcst that this is l)ccausc Du crt, as a rclati cly marginahzcd and untranslated
author,
vould be plcased vith any translation into another languagc of his v rk,
ould l)e that Duvcrt :as

vhatevcr thc quality.Pcrhaps a morc scrious suggcstion

a
arc ofthc cmcrging mo cmcnt of homosexual hberati n in the usA in the n1id_
1970s, and als f the c ntributi n that a gay hteraturc could make to such a
l o emcnt Through gay libcrati n Du crtl,lay ha e hoPcd that thc luessagc in his

TRANsLATING CAMP TALK

b
ks

421

id1rc a1 (l to ch d sexuahty voukl reccivc a bcttcr rcccPtion in thc uSA

by bcc n1ing caught uP in thc gcncral s

vccP of a SCxual rcvoluti n that vas lcd by

.sillh g for 11is

adult h n1oscxuals h1 this contcxt, it 1uay bc argucd that hc `vas
r(lcr
hr it t join
w rk t undcrgo thc tcxtud intcrvcntions dccmc(l suitablc in

d1is inciPient s cial,cultural and litcrary ll,ovcmCnt(to bC

gaycd ,in short) It is

als
orth notil`g that Gr e Prcss,
bo Pubhshcd srrdn LdncJsctz`c, has c nsistcndy chamPioncd gay writing ovcr d1c years(Pul r1994:216) By1975th0r

gay list11)ay alrcady ha c bccn taking shapc, A gay tcxt, in thc American scnsc,

om Du crt s wriung Flores,in

would ha 'c bccn just what thcy wcrc looking for

sh rt,

as l^csPonding t

thcse c

mbincd(sub)cultural and c mmcrcial prcssurcs

5 ConcIuding remarks:texts and contexts in translation

studies
v a vcrbal stylc, can11),is linked vith thc dchncati n
cs ugbt to cstabhsh h

I ha

ofhom scxual rnalc charactcrs in French-and Enghsh_languagc ncti

ho v thc translati

n and,furthcr,

n of this stylc in its Hcti nal settin s rcveals the cffccts

constraints and Prioritics of diffcring cultural scttings sPccihcally,I ha

c suggcstcd

that thc changcs, on1issions and additi ns prcscnt in t vo translatcd tcxts Can bC
illun1inatcd b recoursc to debates on scxual idcntit

s stems

and t the literar

nal in Frcnch and Anglo-Amcrican contcxts

voukl bc disingcnu us of mc to say at this Point that an) unccrtah1ty

(lisccrniblc in m
ccCding paraconclusi ns(d C hCdges,n,iJlDrs and mdlbcs of thc l)

grcss naturc of this paPcr The

graPhs) is duc prirnarily to thc
opcI ati

It

`ork in-Pr

uch lllorc fundamental and threaten to disablc

djn(as
Scd
to
mcrely
dcs jbt,lthe data offered Thc)are a c nscattcmPts to
pp
P
Pr blcn1s this unccrtainty raiSCS are n

qucnce, I bchc c, f crucial theoretical and n

c nfr nting translati n studics, namely thc nCcd t

cth dol gical issucs currcntly

makc cxPhcit thC imbricati n

ftexts and c ntexts Translati n is notiuSt about tcxts:nor is it only about cultures
and po er, It is ab ut the relati n fthc Onc to thc othcr,In this rcsPcct,translation studics is11ot unhkc critical linguistics, thc branch of contcn
stud) that has g1

vn ut

1,orar

|anguagc

of thc fklsi n of functional-systcn`ic linguistics and critical

tbc ry Critical linguistics is also st

ugghng to Producc Paradign1s that vjll

allO v it

to rclatc the n1inutiac of tcxtual analysis to thc intcractional, sOcial and p htical
fhich those language forms Pcratc
contcxts that Producc languagc fornns and upon
As Fovdcr has rcccntly Putit,it is no ti1nc for thc criucal hnguist to takc a Proks~

id an
in order t a

and on informal acc unts of relcvant

o crrchancc on intcrsubjccti c intuitions

contcxts and institutions (Fo vler 1996: 10; see alS Fairclough 1992: 62-100)
A/1uch thc san1c could bc said t thc sch lar of translati n
sionally rcsP nsible attitudc tovards thc analysis of contcxt

What is rcquircd, then, in translation studics is a n

ith
Pri ritiZes l)road conccrns

cr,
l)

ethodol gy d1at neithcr

i(lcology and Patr na8ct thC dctri111cnt of

thc need to exa111inc rcprcscntati c cxan Plcs f tCxt, n r contents itsclf

`jd)
vith skctcby and generahzed
dctailcd text-hnguistic analysis ` hilc n)akil)g do

notions of contcxt SPeCiHcally :ith regard t

ork, many n1 rc instanccs of

y

camP ta k can f r descriPtion in rder to l)ring out the trcnds not

nly bct vcCn

422

KEITH HAR

EY

Frcnch,British and American tcxts,but als

bct veen

texts from different pcriods

(Cg Prc- and Post~ thC AIDS crisis), bet vccn tcxts that cti nally rcPrescnt
diffcrcnt social strata,and alsO tcxts that demonstratc(liffcrcnt litcrary aspirations

It is i1nportant, in othcrvords, to maintain the noti n f calllP as a P tCntially

Plural nc,rcmaining alcrt t its tcxtual inHccti ns and ariati ns This is thc cl se
teXt-hnguistic branch of thc

v rk I

vcvcr, n aCro-cultural trcnds alsO crucially

nced t be kcPt in
ic and rclatcd t

us1hg m nc u matcly,thc

thc tcxtual dcscriPti ns in a hcuristically

Jcl k d nc arc abk t

uq c n no

cxPlanati ns ofh a tcxt comCs to rncan in its contcxt,of

hat valuc a text accrucs

as a sign, bc it of a Postulatcd universal subjcctivity or an irreduciblc subcultural

diffcrcncc The Challengc is to hnd a vay not just t

actional and cultural scttings, but to give thc rclati

Fudr disc

urse in its intcr_

nship betxx`ccn SCtting and

discoursc the forcc f causaht

Acknowledgements
I am vcry8ratcfu1t

the f llo ving

PcoPlc f r thcir cnc uragcment and criticisn

during thc
riting of this PaPer,as cll as f r Pportunitics to(hscuss thc matcrial
in
vorkshops and scn nars: N1ona Bakcr, Jcan B asc~Bcicr, Pctcr Bush, R gcr
F
vlcr,La vrcnCC

VCnuti I vould likc t thank Christ phcr Robins n for Pointing

out thc Proustian rcsOnanCc of cn rrc,discusscd on Pagc414,

Chapter 29

Jacques DerrIda

WHAT IS A RELE ANT

TRANSLATION?
ra s a eC/by Layyre ce l/eny
`

Flcn

rnusr Fhc/e bc mcrcy F

(I lea e

untranslated this ntcncc

om

Portia h rfl

crchdnr

gf nicc,)

P rda will alsO say," bcn ila scds ns usri ,which I shall htcr Pr P sC
F Jus c
to translatc as Q dnd F Pdrdon rt J

oW DARE ONE sPEAK oftranslati

n bcforc y u who, ln your v1gl

lant awarcncss of thc immcnsc stakes~and n

t onl

ofthc htc f

~makc this subhmc and imP ssiblC task your dcsirc, your anxicty,

litcraturc

your travail,

ving skillP1
your kn vdcdge,and your kn

H /darc I Pr cCCd bcforc you,kn :ing myself to bc at nce rude and incx_
PCriCnccd in this d

main, as somconc vho,fr n1thc ery rst rn mcnt, from his

u, CE hS
pcS,orfrJac

vcry6rst attcn1PtS(khIcodd Kcc,tlm

recoi Jl, unncd thc translattDr

sm dcr,his bcatltihl and tcrri ing

ns ility,

his ins lvcnt duty and dcbt, vvid out ceasing to tcll hilnsclf nc cr cvcr again

n ,Prcciscly,Iv uld nc cr

Pull it of

darc,I should nc cr,could ne cr,xX ould nc` r1nanagc

If I dare aPPr ach this subjcct bcf rc y u,it iS bccause this very discourage~

mcnt,this Prcmaturc rcnunciation of hich I sPcak and fron1 vhich I sct ut,this
dcclarati n ofins l cncy bCf rc translation vvas al
jeal us

ays, in mc, thc Othcr facc of a

and adn1iring lo c,a Passion f r vhat sun1mons,lo cs,pro 0kcs and dcHcs

hdc running uP an in nitc dcbt in its scrvicc,an adlaliration for th

translation

lncn and
omen
vho, to my n1ind, arc the nly ones
ho kn0 f
1999

h
v

sc

to rcad

424 JAcQuEs DERRIDA

and vritc~translators Whic11is an d1cr vay of rccogni7ing a sumln ns to translati n at the :cry threshol(l f a
cadi11g :riting Hencc tbc in nity of thc loss,
the insol ent(lcbt, Much likc vvhat is o cd to shylock,insol cncy itsclf SPcaking,
1

my ProRcssi n and
l ch, aftcr a , hkc
n any here am ng you,cngagcs lnc l)ody and s ul ahnOst constantly)~I kn v that
tcachin , writln:(which I als

c nsidcr

thcsc acti itics arc1ncaningful in my cycs only in thc Proof

an cxPericncc that I

`dl nevcr distinguish fiolu exPC

f translation,throu

1mcntation As for thc

v rd

r thC
vdl l)e111y themc)~ncither ran1n ar nor lcxicon11 Dld an intercst
rd
for mc~Il,chc c I can say that if I lo e thc
v rd, it is nl
in the b dy of its
(f

herc a l)assi n for translation c mcs to lick it as a

aPPr aching as closely as PossiblC

hilc refusing
at thc last rn mcnt to tlarcatcn or to rcducc,to Consume or to c
nsun1mate,lca ing
thc Other b dy intact but not vithout causing the othcr to aPPcar~ n thc cry
brink f this rcfusal or ithdra val~and aRer having ar uscd o1 cxcitcd a dcsirc
)r thc idiom,R)r thc unique body f thc thcr, in thc naluc,s lickcr or thr ugh a
tongue s carcss I don t kn
hoxx rin hov many lang11ages, you can translatc
thjsv rd`JcJacr
hcn u vish to say that onc languagc licks anothcr,likc a amc
idi matic

singularity, that is,

Hamc r an amorous tonguc1night

c)r a caress

But I vvon t Put or any longcr saying mcrci to you,in a

0rd,addressing this
f,lCrc

to you in morc than(and n

ngcr)onc language

dlI ha e thankcd y u for thc hosPitahty id1 vhich yOu hon r

sooner
1uc dlan I will nccd tcl ky ur rgi` encss cttld,ll cxprcssin:my gratitudc lqr ccl
F rn

to you,bcg y ur paldon lclrJc ,ask you t ,bc` c`c! i tDn1eF r youl Pa , r e

mc9om d1e outsct ra
alhng mysdf of tllis 0rd n,crcy1`as if it e a citation
n m nrion n it as much as I m
sin it,as a sPccch act theorist might say,a bit
too ConsdCnt in thc n0 v canonical disth1ction bct 'cen mcnrion and usc
I

In thcrvords, I certainly von t dclay in thanking you f r thc signal hon r

you ha c accordcd n1c,but also,

ia this

^ord

f gratitudc and,,2c cr,in asking your

forgivcncss for all thc ltrnits, sta1 ting ith n1y

n inadcquacics,

vhich hindcr me
m mcasuring uP to it As f r1ny inadcquacics,I will n (l ubt nlakc a
ajn cffort
t()dissennblc then
el) Pcr crsc
`id`contrivanccs more or lCss l)ai
Bcf rc thcsc thanks rcndcrcd,this Pard n bcgged, In1ust hrst ackno vledge a
dcfcct f languagc that could cll be a l)rcach in thc la fs f hosPitahty In cffcct,
fi

is it not thc6rst duty of thc Jucsr

J, r

l that I an to sPcak a languagc that is intcl~

hgiblc and transParcnt,henccithout cquivocati nP And thcrcf rc

lan uage,namcly

sPeak a singlc

that f thc addrcsscc,hcrc of thc/,os

/,JF a langua8c cSpccially

dcsigncd r vh cvcr I1 ust and can undcrstand it, a languagc that is sharcd, likc

the vcry languagc ol thc thcr, that ol thc othcr t

vhom nc addrcsscs it, r at
thc vcry lcast a languagc that the hstcncr or rcadcr can n1akc his or hcr
n7

A languagc that is,in a

`ord,tramslatablcP

N herc js onc ofthe adn1issions that I o

vc you on scveral sc rcs First, n

thc score f rny titlc and n thc sc rc of sPeaking,as I sha

(l

in a rn

mcnt,about

my title in an cntircly untranslatablc manner A(lFnitting n1ore than onc failure, I

c nfcss

this doublc inadequacy that is all thc morc imPossiblC t

avoid bccausc it

bcars a sel contradiCtion: if I need t address y u in a singlc lan uage, Frcnch

(thereby rccogni7ing that evcry s -called(liscoursc on translati u, evcry 111ctalan~

guage or mcta-theorem n the topic of translation is fated to inscribc itsclf ithin

/VHATx1sA

TRANsLATION?

RELEVANT

425
ays alrcady

thc hn1its and P ssibilitics of a singlc idion1), I am nCvCrthclcss allx

inchned to lcaP vcr this language, rny o n, and I shall d it again, thus lea i11g
undccidcd the questi n of a si1uPle choicc l)ct `ecn lan8uagc and n ctalanguagc,
bet veen one language and an ther At thc
rd go` c arc vithiL1thc n1ultiPhcity
of languagcs and thc jmPurity of the li111it

11)
uld n1y titlc rcn1ain f rever untranslatablc?In the Hrst Placc, bccausc

vc];n r,thcrc~

onc can t dcode thc sOurcc hnguagc to which it is answeral)lc Ir

forc, in vhat sensc it tra ails, FrtIvcFs,bctvvccn Jl

rc and

r ,JLIcSr

It is hnPossiblC to dccide thc s urcc lan ua:e to vhich,for

and h

sr,

examPlc,thcv rd

rdc
ante

answc [ f v l,aw rd that I leave within quotau n malks lc,rn

N r tbe languagc to vhich it bel ngs at thc u n cnt vhcn I use it,in thc s)ntagms
r the Phrascs vhere I n o e to rcinscr")c it D es this vord sPeak onc and d1c
saluc languaEe, in onc and thc san1c languagc

At the san1e ti11 c,

vc

(l0n t c cn

kno`v if it is really one vord,a si11g c

ord vith a single Inea11ing,or if,h m nyn1

r llon phonc F itsclf,it c nstitutcs lnorc than onc

`'ord in onc

Vhat I shall ProPosc to you undCr this titlc( Whatis a rclc ant translati n?
),
und ubtcdl short of anv rcflccti n orthv f this vord about thc vord,about thc
unity of thc v rd in gcncral,
ill PcrhaPs l)Can1 rc modcst and`cIb rious aPproach,
n the basis of a singlc vord,thc rd
rclevant I undcrhnc`
ri us to announcc
ln

sc eral

xxords in rr and t

indicatc that thc 1 tif f

Fd oLIr FI ydiF

thc rra

a f

childb th,but also thc r nJ m d and rransbrmatiomal Fr l,h all P ssiblc co(lcs

and n t only those of Psychoanalysis, `vill cntcr into comPctitic)n ith thc aPPar^
cntl lnc rc ncutral 111 tif of rranslati n, as rr ns zcrjt,

and as rransfcr Wc shall thcn

lving around a si11glc cxat 1Ple, a Punning exan 1DlC,if therc is such a
`ind uP rev
thing,and ifthe word cle an n1ay bc nc,unique,solitary,at oncc a11a ljccti `al

and`erbal f rm,a sort of PrCsCnt Pa1 ticiPle that bcc mcs an cPid1Ct or Prcdicate

Vhat f this cable rclcvant ?It PosSesscs all thc traits of the li11guistic unity
that nc f11n iarly calls a word, a vcrbal b dy. Wc oftcn f r ct, in thiS same
fan1iharity, h
v rd remains a
v thc unity r idcntity, thc indcPcndCncc f thc
mystCrious thing,Prccarious,not quite natural,that is to say hiSt rical,institutional,
and c n entional Therc is no such thing as a vvord in naturc Wcll, this xx= rd

rclc ant

ca1

rics in its body an n-going Proccss of translation,as I

as a translati cl, dy,it

il

try to sho v;

endurcs or cxhibits translati n as thc mcnn ry or stigllaata

of sufkring[Po it,`2 r,h

cring abovc it,as an aura or halo This translati c body
is i11thc Proccss0f bCing in1portcd int thc Frcnch languagc, in thc act f cr ssin
b rdc1 s and l)cing chcckcd at scvcral intra~EuroPcan custon
s Po"1ts that arc n t
only Franc -English,as nc n1ight in
nn thc hct that this ord f Latin origin
I

is no

Fl

v rathcr Enghsh(re cy nr/irrc`e,dnF)in itS currcnt usage,in its usc-valuc,in its

circulation or its c1 rren9 e Cn d ough it is also in thc ProccSS 0f Frenchi cati n.

This acculturation,this Frcnchi cation is not sFricru scnso a translatl n Thc v rd is
not only jn translati n, as Onc
vould say in thc
v rks
r in transit, rr vcF1n
,

Fr ,

,,J, in`db r Inm),ProPosed title, it serves, thr

quali ;translati

ugh a suPPlemcntary fokl,

n,as wcll as what a translati n might bc ob

dnr

cd t bC,namcly

r : c1

ThOse f)ou
vh arc

vid1 English Pcrl)aPs alrcady ul

`n1ihar Frcncllihcad
w I lc sa(lomcstication,aIl in1Plicit
a nlo

r lk

ss tacit and dandestille enianchlsement IF

dcrstand the

dnosdrj nl or~(h ISayP~

q6

nchisscmcnrl

ofthC Engi

426 JAcQuEs DERRIDA

a ccti e rd
nr,which

ith
baggagc,
f this

vord

w uld have thus P

ur language with bag and

scd int

its Predicatcs of dcn tation and conn tation, The Frcnch fcn1ininc

C unc traduction rc`cv

nre

) sounds cvcn m rc Enghsh and takes us

back t thc signaturc and the sexual differcncc at stakc

Vhcrc cr translation r trans-

lat0

on thc masctllhe or kmininc)arC in ol c(l,

Vhat is m st oRcn callcd rclcvanFP Wcll,whatc cr cls Hght,whatc cr

scems Pe inCnt,aPropos,wdcomc,aPProPriatc,oPPol tunc,justinc(l,wcl sui d

r adustcid,cOmhg hglt at thc momellt whcn you exPcct lt~ r CorrcsPon(ling

as is ncccssary t

the bjcct t0 vhich thc s -called rclevant action rclatcs thc rclc~

vant discoursc, thc relevant proposition, the rclcvant decision, thc relc

ant
translauon,A rclc ant translation oukl thcrcf rc be,quite si1nply,a good trans~
lati n,a translation that docs vhat onc cxpccts ofit,in short,a
crsion that Perf rms

vhilc inscribing in the

its n1ission, honors its dcbt and docs its job or its duty
rccci in81angua c thc m

St reJ

tInr

cquivalcnt f r an riginal,the languagc that is

Fhc mosr right, appropriatc, pertincnt, adcquatc, PPortunc, P intcd, uni cal,
and so n, TJle j,,osr p ssiblc, and this supcrlati c Puts uS n thc trail of

idi matic,

an cconomv

vith vhichvc shall havc to rcckon

Thc vcrb rcF ver brings1nc back to a modest but effccti c exPeriInent in trans-

in
vhich I ha c f und mysclf cngagcd for morc than thirty years, ahnost
continuously, rst bct /ccn Gcrman and Frcnch, thcn morc rccently bct vccn
lati n

Enghsh and French, That this samc Frcnch word(the ery samevord, assun1ing
cry mc w rd,an(l tllclt hcnce rth k is Frcnch thr ugh and thrughl,

tlaat k is tllc

that this samc vord could havc thus Pcrated,in a singlc language, bct vccn thrcc

'ork Chffcrcnt v rds bcl nging

languagcs,so as to translate, orin any casc to putto
t

aPparcntly(liffCrcnt c ntcxts in at lcast t

vo othcr sourcc languages(German and

Enghsh) ths fact seems an incalculable strokc f luck,an invcnti n or neccssity

for
hich I
ondcr vh can bcar thc rcsP nsibility,c en if it vas aPParcntly n1ine
at rst and ll ine tO sign.I harb r no illusion or PrctCnsi n in this resPcct if I took
thc initiati c in thcsc quasi translations, I could d

nly to hcar, in order t

scmantic and formal~alrcady inscril)cd in

this family of lan8uagcs and, srst and f rem st, in rny languagc. In any case,

rccord, Various possibilitics r

Ia vs_

bccausc thc haPPy c incidcncc in qucstion has since thcn bec mc some vhat lu rc

hmiliar to mc,bccausc I kcl lcss exPosed~in my incompctcncc~to thC Hsk

saying highly irrClC ant things about translati n in gcncral bcf re thc exPcrt scholars

and accomPhShCd Professionals that you arc, I ha

c thcrcf rc PrcfCrrcd t

that we Prowl ar und a small w r(l an(l follow it hkc a

suggcst

bctwccn rathcr tllan

engage anc v, on the lc el f gcncrahty, in thc rctical or m rc

b i usly PhilosoPhical
r sPcculati c re ecti ns
vhich I ha c else vhcrc vcnturcd n
arious

un c al ProblCms f Trallshtion,in thc wakc f Xll/altt,r Bcnlamin,Jamcs J yce,

and sc cral thers

And PcrhaPs I sh uld thcn confcss undcr this ery heading,thus Plcading guilty
/ith ut cxtcnuatin8circu 1stanccs, that I Ch se my titlc PrccisCly bccause of its
vay, consPiring to insurc thc
untranslatability, Prcmcditating my cri1ne in this
apParcnt untranslatabihty of ny titlc through a singlc vord,a 0rd vherein I si n,
hiCh
in an idion that is s mcthing likc my signaturc, thc themc f this lccture,
nl thcref rc rcscmble a seal that, c :ardiCc Or arrogance, xs ould abridge itsclf

into nn initials.

XAlHAT Is A RELEVANT

TRANsLATION?

427

What remains is that~ trust me ~ I don t transgrcss a c de of decency or

modcsty through a Pro cativc challcngc, but thr ugh a tria by subn1itting the
cxPCriCncc of translation t

thc trial f thc untranslatablc,

As a rnattcr of fact, Id

tt)chc c that anything can c cr bc untranslatablc~

or, Lnorco cr,translatablc,

H
v can onc darc say that n thing is translatablc and,by thc samc tokcn,that
nothing is untranslatablc?T vvhat conccpt oftranslation must onc aPpcal to Prc Cnt
d1is axiol11frorn sccn ing si1nPly unintclhgiblc and contradict ry: n thing is trans-

latablc;nothin8is untranslatablc PT thc c ndition of a ccrtain ccon n2r that relates

thc translatablc to thc untranslatablc,not as the same t thc othcr,but as same to
sa1nc or other to othcr,Hcrc

cconoll Signi es

t v

things,`roP rFJ and tlu nrirr:

nd,whtRt conCCrns thc law f ProPcr (oikon I,,id,the laW-nomos~of

hat is proPcr,apPr PriatC to itself,at h mc -and translation is al vays
o ( s,of

n Fh

thc

0nc h

an attcmpt at apProPriation that airns t

transPort h mc,in its languagc,in thc rn

st

aPProPriatC
vay P ssiblc, in thc m st rclc ant
vay Possil)lC, thc n 0st Pr PCr
mcaning ofthc original text,even ifthisis the ProPcr rncaning of a gurc,rnctaphor,
metonymy,catachrcsis or undecidablc imPr PriCty)an(1, n rhc rher hdnd,a law of

vhcn nc sPeaks of econ my,one al vays sPcaks of calculablc quantity

q1I nriFr
On co,,,Prc er
n rend c mPFc, ne c unts and accounts for A rclc ant translati n
is a translation
hose ec nomy,in thcse tvv scnses,is thc l)cst P ssiblC,thc most
aPProPriating and thc m st aPProPriatc PoSsil)lc
How(locs a P nciPF gfccon r Permit nc tr, ytwot PParel t|col tra ctory

tllings at thc mc ume(1 N thng tmnslataL,lc ;2, E ythhg is anslatat,lc )

vhilc c nHrn1ing thc cxPcriCncc that I suPPosC is s comlnon to us as to bc bcyond

Cn translation, vvhethcr thc best or thc

any P SSiblc(lisputc, na1ncly, that any gi

orst, aCtua y stands bctvvccn the t vo, bct vccn absolutc rclc ancc, thc most

appropriatc, adcquatc, uni ocal transParcncy, and thc m st abcrrant and oPaquc

hat this ccon my ofin~bct vccnncss signi cs, it is

irrclc ance? To undcrstand
ncccssary t irnaginc t vo cxtrCmC hyPotheses, thc f llovving t vo hypcrbolcs:
if t

a translator vho is fully c mPetcnt in at least t vo languages and t

culturcs,

two cultural mcmorics with thc s ciohist lcal knowlc(lge cmbo cd in them,y u
all tl C dmc in thc w dd,as wcll as thc w rds nccdcd tO cxlDhcate,d i
1

and tcach thc semantic contcnt and f

r1 s

of thc tcxt to bC translated, thcre is no

rcason for hilu t encountcr thc untranslatablc Or a rcmainder in his

give somcOnc ho
t

is c

mPctcnt an cntirc b ok, llcdvith

exPlain c crything that a Phrasc

ft v

Frczns`dro'

rk If ou

s norcs,in ordcr

r thrcc vvords can mcan in its Particu-

lar brm r cxamPlC,tllc he"dr om Finn dns

c,whch has uucd me in

anothcr PlacC,2c,l dqe mcr

sc sons usF

cc m Tllc/Irerc

shall dlscuss bclow),there is really no rcas

~
ithout

an

n,in PI

nF

n1ce,whic h wc

lnciPlc,br him to hd t rcnder

rcmaindcr ~ the intcntions, mcaning, dcnotations, connotations

and scmantic ovcrdctcrn1inations, the f rmal cffects of vhat is callcd the original
Of c ursc, this oPcration,
vhiCh occurs dail in the univcrsit and in htcrar
criticislu,is not vhat is callcd a translation,a translati

hist

in thc strict scnsc, thc translati

n f

n vorthy

ofthc namc,trans-

rk, To makc lcgitin1atc usc of thc

w rd translation (F
fucF
n,t/be
Fzun ,r'ddu

n,rI4nsFdci n,and so rth),in

the rigor us scnsc conferrcd n it
cr scveral ccnturics by a l ng and comPlcx
lati n

a T

ry in a givcn cukural situation(morC Prc SCly,morc narro vly,in Abrahan1ic

428 JACQuEs DERRIDA

and post-Luthcran Eu1 oPe),the trcanslati n must bc qudnrird

eq alcnt t the

original,aPart fr ll any paraphrasc,exPhcation,cxPlicitation,analysiS,and thc likc

Hcrc I an1n t sPcaking of quantity in gencral r f quantit) in thc pr s dic scnsc

(mCtCr,ll thm,c mrca,ll yme~all thc das c co J nts and hmRs tllat are i11
lc and in fact insurn ountable by translati n) I alsO dehberatcly set aside all

Princil

ts0f PhCnomcna quite intcresting,as a mattcr of hct due t

hich this RDrn1

f quantitative equivalcncc is nc cr rigorously aPProachablc It has been rccognized
sC)1

that ccrtain languagcs vith a tcndcncy to vard exccssivcly long c nstructions take
thcm lnuch fhrthcr in translation,No translation ill c cr rcducc this quantitativc
or, in a Kantian scnsc, this acsthctic diffcrcncc, sincc it conccrns thc sPatial and
tcmpo
al brms of scns ,ilit) But thS will n tbc
n1cn10rc and today in Particular,in this quantitati

m)P int,No,what mattcrs to

c la
, il1this cc non1 , is thC

unit f rl casurcmcnt that govcrns at oncc the classic conccPt of translation and thc
calculus that inf rms it 1 his quantitati e unit f rncasurcn ent is not in itsel

quan~

titati`e;it is rathcr quahtativc in a ccrtain sensc It is not a qucstion of rncasuring

ah n1 gcncous sPacc r thc vcight of a b k,nor cven of yiclding to an alith
ctic
of signs and lcttcrs;it is 1 t a qucsti n ofc unting the nun1bcr f signs, signi ers
or signiHc ls,btlt of c unung

tllc numh 01ds, lcximl um called`` lds

Thc1 nit f rncasurc1 1ent is thc unit of thc

vord Thc PhilosoPhy f

translati

n,the

cthics f translation~ if translation d cs in fact ha e tbcsc things Foddr asph cs to

be a Phil s Phy f the v rd, a linguistics or cthics of thc rd At thc bcginnin

translati n is the v rd

N thing is lcss innocent,Plconastic and natural,n

t11in8

is rnorc11ist rical than this l)roPositi n, c cn ifit sccms too ob ious Tllis has I10t
alxx

ays bccn thc casc,as you wdl kn0' As it was hrmulatcd,am ng od1c rs,b)

Ciccr , I1)chcve, t0
vatCh imPassively()vcr subsCqucnt devel PmcntS, to
atCh
a turbulcnt and cliFfcrentiatcd hist ry of translati n, f its Practiccs and its

o er

thc hrst impc1 ati c of translati n was most certainly not thc con1n1and

nor ns,

rd to word, In Dc Prii lo Jcncr 0rdrorum, Ciccro llccd translatl

`v
obhgation
to thc l`crb
2, its debt t
v

(l-f

n ion1its

r~vvord Thc oPcrati n that c nsists

f convcrting,turnh1g(ccln rcrrcr ,
?rrCrC,rr ns1crrcrc)docSn t ha c t takc a tcxt at
its
rd or to takc thc v rd litcrall) It suf ces t transn1it thc idca, t11c hgurc,
thc lk,rcc And tllc sl gan fst J
mc,who with Lutl cr was onc of tlle hthcrs
of a ccrtain translation cthics, an cthics that sur

m dc1 nity,iS non

bv7,

cs even if it is c ntcsted in our

C/Crb ,scd scnsun, xPrIm c dc s nst` to exPrCsS not lx ord

l)y word,but sensC l)y scnsel He wassPcakI

8just as much oftranslating tllc G

as of translati11g the I1oly scril,turcs,evcn if hc llad bccn ternl,ted to

tion for thc mystcrious ordcr of

ds
1

(, r3oruj,,ortFo`,V

ceks

lflake an exccP

reritIf,,)3in thc Biblc In

rccent times,for scarccly a fe v centur1cs,a so-callcd litcral translation that ailns t

attain thc grcatcst p ssiblc relcvancc hasn t bccn a translati n that rcnders lcttcrs

or cven onlyvhat is Placklly tcrmcd tl)c scnsc,but rad)cr a translati

n that,` hilc

rcndcring thc so-callcd Pr Pcr1neaning of a v rd,its litcral n1eaning( /11icb is to

sa) an1caning that is dctcrn1h1ablc and not H:ural), Cstabhshcs as thc la
v r ideal

~cvcn if it rcmai11s inacccssible a kind of translating that is not

ccrtain ,or Tvclrd~for o ,btlt noncthclcss stays

'tlr(`Fo

ord,

doSc as P s bk tclthc cqmn_

lcncc f onc wor(l onc word and tlacrcby rcspccts vcrbal quantity as a quantity
f
Ords,each of vhich is an irrcduciblc body,thc indi is )lc unity of an ac ustic

rm

inc rPomtin or gl l ing

tl

C in

l)lc

unity of a mcaning or conccpt This

/HAT

is
hy, vhcnc cr

when er

A\\RELEVANT

TRANsLATION?

429

scvcral vords ccur in one or thc same acoustic or graPhic f0rm,

a h moPh c or omo /mic g cF Occu

l1

,tn latlon

h tlac hct,tr

tional and d n1inant scnse of the term cncountcrs an insurmountablc liFnit~and

the l)cginning of its end,thc gure ofits ruin(but pcrhaPs a translation is dc oted

to ruin,to that form f1nem ry or Con)lncmoradon that is callcd a ruin;ruin is

cry outset).A hom nym
PerhaPs its 0cation and a dcstiny that it acccPts i m thc
rh moPh nC iS nc cr translatable vv rd_t ~ Vord It is ncccssary cither t rcsign
omeself to losing thc cffcct, thc cc

mous) rt

n my,

the strategy(and this loss can be en

add a gloss, of thC translator s note sort,

vhich ah ays,

r_

c cn in the

bcst of cascs,t11c casc of thc grcatcst rclc ancc,confCsscs thc imP tcncc r failure

f thc translation

hilc indicating that thc l1,caning and formal cffects of the text

t cscaPcd thC translator and can thcrcf rc bc br ught to thc reader s attcnhat I call thc cc n n1ic lav of thcvord,
ith
tion, the translator s notc breaks

ha cn

vhich de ncs thc csscncc of translati n in thc strict scnsc,the normal,normahzcd,

/hcrc er thC unity f thC vord is thrcatcncd or

PCrtincnt,or rclevant translation

vhich fnds itsclf
Put into qucstion, it is not only thc oPeration f translation
cry axiomatics, thc
c mPr n1iscd; it is als thc conccPt, the de nition, and thc
idca of translation that rnust bc rcc nsidercd

In saying thcsc things, I havc gottcn ahead of Inysclf, f rInahzcd t o quickly,

hat I havc just said und ubtedly still

procccdcd to an unintclligible econ my.
/d
n,thcn, and start o cr

rcmains untranslatablc I shall sl

vord rc`el dnrc belon8s Itis nc f thosc

Enghsh vords that, in a confused and irrcgular vay, is in thc proccss of Vinning

You n1ight ask to vvhat language thc

b th

usc-valuc and cxchangc- aluc in Frcnch ith ut cvcr having becn,to l11y kno v-

ledgc, ofHcia y Sanctioncd thr ugh thc institutional channels

f any acadcmy C)n

Vhose use ats bct `ccn se eral

it rcprcscnts onc of thosc /ords
languagcs(thCre are m rc and m K cxamPlcS ofthcm)a l tl t m i an anal is
this sc rc,

that is at ncc linguistic and s ciolo ical, pohtical and cspccially historical,
c cr

thc Phcnomena of hcgcmony thus con1c to inscribc thcir si

vhcr~

nature n thc b dy

oF a kind Ofidi

n that is Eur
Pean or indccd universal in charactcr(that it rnay in
thc rst PlacC be Eur Pcan,m rco cr,%r iom cxdudcs thc hct thatitis sprcading

uni crsally,and that it inv

l cs

ast quCStion of translati n vith ut translators,if

I cam put it this vay,although I must sct it asidc,likc s

any prcvious qucstions,

r want of dmc)

This
vord rclcvant, this prcscnt ParticiPlc that functions as a PrCdicatc, is
hcrc cntrustcd xx=ith an ex rbitant task,N t thc task of thc translator,but thc task
of dc

ning~nothing lcss thc csscnCC of translation This rd, vhose relation

to Frcnch or Enghsh is not vcry cCrtain or dccidable and vhich I hoPe to sho v
sh rtly also retains an obscure Gern anic nhati n,thus colncs to occuPy a Position th is doub Cmincnt

and exPosed

On thc nc hand,it extcnds and announccs the aCc mPhshment of an an bi

tious rcsPonse t the qucsti n of thc csscnCC0f translation ( Vhat iS a translationP)
T kn w what a relevant t anslatl n

can mcan and bc,itis ncccssary to know what

thc cssencc of translation,its rnission,its ulthuatc goal,its ocation is,

On thc Othcr hand, a rclcvant translati

n is assumed, rightly or

vr ngly,

to

bc bcttcr than a t: anslati n that is n t rcle ant A rclc ant translati n is hcld,
ri

htly or vrongly, to bc thc bcst translati

n possiblc, Thc tclc l gical dc nition

430 JAcQuEs DERRIDA

of translati n,the dchniti n of thc csscnCC that is rcahzcd in translation,is thcre_

forc imPhcatCd in the desniti n f a rclcvant translati n Thc question, V hat is a

rclcvant translation? vould rcturn to the qucsti n, XVhat is translati nP or, What
sh uld

a translation bc?And thc qucstion, VVhat sh uld a translation bcP imPhes,

as if syn

nymously, Vhat should the best Possiblc translation l)cP

Put anothcrvay(and Put an thcr :ay,thc cxprcssion

Put anothcr xl'ay/ in

ther tcrms,
in 0thcr :ords, cn d autres m ts is the Phrase that silentl)
announces c cry translati n, at lcast
hcn it designatcs itsclf as a translati n and
tclls you,in an autodeictic lnanner,look,I an)a translati n,you arc reading a trans_

t an intcdin8uistic translation, to make usc

f Roman Jak l>son s
n, but an intrahnguistic4 ne
and I am not surc /hcthcr r n t this

lation, n
distincti

in my dtle),Put an tllcr way,if thc

qucstion, What is a rclc ant translationP si8nihcs nothing othcr than thc qucsti n,
auto(lcixis acc mPanics tl e wol l rele ante

What is a translati n? or What should thc bcst Possiblc translati

nl)c?thcn ne

should jcttis n thc vord rclcvant and forgct it,droPPing it vvith ut delay

And yct I ha c kcPt it vvhyP PcrhaPs t try to con ince you of t /o things:on
thc ()nc hand, this
rd of Latin origin, c cn though I n longcr kno vto
/hat
languagc it bclongs,
vhcther Frcnch or English, has l)ec mc indispensable t me,
in its uniqucncss,to translate sevcral

v rds

Originating in scvcral languagcs,starting

vith Gcrman (as if it in turn contained more than one :ord in a singlc()ne); n
dle thcr hand,this translati cvord has bcc mc in turn untranslatable f r thc samc
rcason And vhcn I say that this has haPPened to n e, as I try to relate it, I<lon t
mcan at all that it is cmpirically Pcrsonal, becausc
what has Passcd thr
als

vhat has haPPencd to IllC, or

ugh mc coming om lan:ua:es and returning to them,was

a Pr jcct f institutional accrcditation and canonization in thc Pubhc sPhCrc

My nrst c n ccrn, thcn, has nc er been to aPPropriatc tbis translati nf r myscl

but to lcgitimatc it,t 1nakc it kn0vn as thc ln st rclc ant translati nP sSiblC and

thcreforc, n thc contrary,to cxPr PriatC it frona mysclf, to disPosscss mysclf of

it,whilc Putting it on the markct~e en ifI c uld sdll drearn f lcavin8my likc-

ncss on this comm n currcncy and,like shylock,cxPcct an IOU

How can I y

to justi

r it

ns
,or in any sc sIll)mit for your discussion,thc rc

R)r which,sc al timcs o cr tl c space fthdy yc s,I ha c jud c(l lC ant my

usc f onc and thc samc crb, r

r, to translatc hrst a Gcrmanvord, then an

Enghsh onc7
Tlle En
lcn cc

wOI cl

lt

at tl e el

The Privilcgc that I assi8n hCrc t

d-ctan be und in crchdnr

ShakcsPcare S Play docs n t only dcPcnd

on thc PresencC of thisvord t bc translatcd In additi n,by virtue f conn tation,

everything in thc Play can bc rctranslatcd int
thc codc of translati n and as a
t thC three scnscs that
ProblCm f translation; and this can be donc accordin
Jak bS n distinguishcs: interhnguistic, intrahnguistic, interscn1i

cxamplc,bct vccn a Pound f csh and a su 1 f

lation is as ncccssary as it is impossiblc It is thc la

thc lavv bcyond thc la v,thc languagc ofthc imP

rn ncy

tic ~ as, for

At c cry momcnt,trans-

v;it evcn sPeaks thc languagc of

Ssible la v,rePrescntcd

by a von1an

vho is disguiscd,transngurcd,c n crtcd,tra csticd,rcad r nsftlretf,into a man of

law Asiftllc su cct oftl is play wcrc,in sho ,tllc task fthc andator,his imP sible task,his duty,his dcbt, as inHcxil)lc as it is unpayablc At lcast f r thrcc Or
ur reasons:

sA RELEVANT

VHAT

TRANsLATION?

431

1,First thcrc is an odrh,an untenable pr misc,with tl c risk f PC ury,a dcl)t

and an bhgation that constitutc thc cry imPetus f r thc intriguc,for thc PfoF,f

thc conspir y[c@rl,Pf

] NoW it would bc casy to show(and I ha c tricd to do so
else
here)5 that all translati

n "nPhcs an insol ent indcbtcdncss and an oath

_
ith all thc paradoxcs of such a la v and such a
rllise,
ofa
b
nd and a cntract,of a pron1isc that is,1u orco er,imP ssiblC and
Pr
asyIllmctrical, transfcrential and countcrtransfcrcntial, hkc an
ath d mcd to

f dchty to a givcn original

trcason or Perjury,
2, Thcn thcI c is thc thcmc of cc n my,calculati n, caPital, and interest,thc

unPayablc dcbt t shylock

hat I sai(l abo c ab ut thc unit of thc v rd clcarl sct

`

uP a ccrtain cconomy as d1c la v of translation

3In c lrcrch nF

nicc,as in cvcry translation,tllcrc is also,at thc

cry

hcart f thc bh8ati n and thc dcbt,an incalculable equivalcnce,an imPossil)lc but
inccssantly allcgCd c rrcspondcncc bct vecn thc Pound

f csh and m ncy, a

required l)ut imPractical translati n bctvcccn the uniquc literalncss of a Pr Pcr b

and thc arl)itrarh1css of a general,m nctary,or duciary sign,

dy

4 This imPosSiblC translation, this con crsion (and all translati n is a convcrslon: rerr rc,rrdns1'crF rc,con =Cr'rc,as Ciccro s

d)bctwccn thc oHginal,htcral

flcsh and thc lln nctary sign is n t unrelated to the Je

shyl ck s

forccd con crsion

to Ch stianity,sincc the trad i nd gurc of the Je v is oRCn and c n cntionally

situatcd on thc sidc of thc b d and thc lcttcr (from b d y circun1cision or
Pharisaism, om ritual cOmPliance to litcrd cxtt,rioIlty),whereas aRer
Paul thc
Christian is on thc side f thc spirit or scnsc, of intcri rity, of sPiritual circumci_
sion This relation of thc lcttcr to thc sPirit, of the bodY f literalness to thc idcal
intcriorit of scnsc is als

thc sitc of thc Passage f translation, of this c nversion

n As if the business f translauon :ere Hrst of all all

Abrahamic mattcr bctwccn tllc Jcw,thC Ch lan,and thc M hm.Ancl thc ve,

that is callcd translati

discussvith you, vill bc prcciscly

hat haPPcns

hkc thc rclc ancc I alll PrcParCd t

t

thc ncsh ofthc tcxt,thc body,thc sPoken b

the letter is mourncd to sa

and thc translatcd b

~whcn

c thc sensc

Shylock rccalls tbat hc Pr n isCd undcr ocIrJ,to rcspcct thc original tcxt of the

contract,thc IOU, hat is wcd to hirn rc rs,"tcrally,to thc Pound f csh This
oath binds hin

hca cn, hc rccalls,hc can t brcak it vithout Pe uring hilnself,

that is t say, vithout

l)ctrayin8it by translating its tcrms into monctary si ns In

thc namc of thc lctter fthc c ntract, sh l ck refuscs thc translati n or transacti

n(translation is a transaction),Portia procecds t ofFcr hiln thrcc tirnes thc sum

f rn ncy hC is
ved in cxchangc f r thc pound f flesh If you translatc the P und
f esh into moncy,shc csscntially pr poscs to hiln,y u vvill ha c thrcc ti1nes thc
sulla o /ed

sh lOck then exclain

An ath,

s:

an oath, I ha c an oath in hea en,

Shall I lay Pcrjury uP

n mys tllP

N not f r Vcnicc6
Portia Pretends to takc n tc of d s rehsal and t rcc gnizc that
ths b nd is
brfcit
Vith thc c n act,thc bond,tllc IOU%lling duc,the Jew haS thC right to
clain1a pound of ncsh that hc rnust htcrall cut out cr closc t thc rncrchant s hcart:

432 JAcQuEs DERRIDA

Why this bond is f rfcit,

And law11111 by this tl cJcw m cl

A Pound Of esh,t be by hirn cut off

Nearcst thc mcrchant s hcart

,41226-291

Prtia vill Press shyl

ck one last tilue to Pardon vhilc cancclling thc dcbt,rcn1it-

Bc merciful, she asks, Takc thrice thc m ncy,bid me tcar

ting it, forgiving it

thc b nd/ thc pr n1issory note,thc c ntract shylock again rcfuscs;hc s vcars truly

n his

s ul that he cann

t Perjurc hi1nsclf and rctract his oath, countcrsigning his

act fi th,sweaHng on what hc has alrcacly sw rn,hc rcfc,rs t langua:c,to a

tonguc of man incaPablc f bCing lncasurcd,in its rclati

translation r transactiOn, against thc abs
ti nally,bcf

e cconomy,in the Pr Posed

lutc Oath that binds his s

ul, unc ndi~

rc G d:

by my soul I svvcar,
Thcre is no Po vCr in thC tongue ofrnan

To akcr mc,~I stay hcre on my bond

,41236381
Thus thc
C cr,

ath is,

n the human tonguc, a Pron iSC tbat hun an languagc,ho v_

cannot itsclf und ,control, bhtcratc, suojcct by lo scnin:it

An ath

is a

bond in human languagc that thc human t nguc, as such, ins far as it is human,
cannot loosen Jn human language is a bond strongcr than human language N

tban man in man In human langua8e(the Clemcnt

la v
f

that at oncc prohil)its thc translation

r the original literalncss Or the gi cn

lati n
gi cn

f translt tion)is

f thc transaction l)ut c n mands

vord,

rcsPcct

It is a la v that Prcsidcs o cr trans-

whilc c lnmanding absolute rcspcct,without aI1y transacdon,

in its Original lcttcr, The oath, thc s

orc

an in cxiblc

v rn

r the word

faith, thc act of s

Caring is tran~

scendcncc itsclf,thc cxpcriencc of passing bcyond1nan,thc origin of thc divinc

r,

rigin of thc oatll This sccms truc of thc la v f

trans~

if onc Prcfcrs, thc di inc

lati n

in gcncral No sin is m rc scll0us than Pel lury,and shylock rePeats, vhilc

s icalin8,that

hc cannot Pcllurc l lmscl

hc tl

crchrc c nnrms thc rst ath bv a

sccond oath, in thc tirnc of a rcPetition This is callcd6dchty,

vhich is thc ery
essence and v cation of an ath: vhen I s vcar,Isvcar in a languagc that no hun1an
languagc has thc P wcr tc,makc mc aL,jurc,tl,disruPt,that is tc,my,to makc mc
PC urC mysClf The0

hP scs rhrOLJJh language,btlt it PaqsCS bcyol cl human

languagc This vould l)c thc truth()f translation

In this fabulous talc of thc Oath,of thc c ntractual bond,at issuc is an indcbt_

cdncss in
vhich thc cxchangc- alucs are inCon1Inensurable and thus cach is
untranslatablc into thc thcr(m nCy/P und f flcsh) In4 1 Portia,(hsguised as a
vycr, rst addrcsscs hcrsclf t Ant ni t ask hin1t acknovclcdgc,to confcss his

unpaid or unPayablC dCbt:

Do you confcss thc b ndP Do you confess, d you
recognize thc contract,thc promisc,thc bondP Rcc nnals tu le b letP r Do you
la

rccognizc thc noteP l iS thC flat rcndcring by Fran

t0n I ha

e llowc l,c t

times mocl1

ing k7D

is-vict rI ugo,vvhosc
you ac kn wlcdgc

t1 ansla-

tllc kn w~

/HAT

IS A

RELEVANT

TRANSLATION?

433

lcd:cmcnt fthc debt,thc IC)u?Doy uc nnrn thc signed Pledgc,thc bond,that

vhich you arc in(lcbt or in dcfault,indecd at fault

vhich y u
`vc,that bccause of

(hencC d)Cw rd c n%ss )P Ant ni s rcsPonsC/ I do (a Pcrbrmati e) Yes,I confcss,I ackn0 vlcdge,I rccognizc,I con rlm and sign or c untcrsign.'do,A

scntcnCe

nomy and brc ity ofthc rcsPonsc as si1nPle and

barc as Possible,thc uttcrancc imPhes not nly an
I,
an I
vho d es xx:hat it says

vhilc saying it, connrn1ing that he hirnsclf is thc vcry pcrson

vho has alrcady
as extraordinary as a ycs

Tl

c cc

hcard, undcrst od, mem rizcd in its cntircty the mcaning of the qucstion poscd
and integratcd in turn into thc rcsponsc that signs thc idcnuty bet vcen thc J vh

has hcard and the r vh uttcrs thc ycs or thC Id

But it is also,gi cn this under~

standing and thc111cm ry f thc question, thc samc PcrS n as the onc P sing thc
vhat you mcan by asking mc this
qucstion: I say :cs, 'd ,Prcci:Cly in resPonsc t
/e think and mcan d1c samc thing(intrahnguistic

rP sing this qucsti n to mc

tl ansla0on),wc arc thc samc PCrson in the mirr r of tllis mcasurc This mirrorccl
vork in all
or transParCnt uni ocity, thiS idCal translation, is suPPoSed to be at

llrluativc
utteranccs
of
thc
tyPe
I Pardon
Pcrl
ARcr Ant nio s conksSi n,the rcsP nse hlls likc a crdict Thcn must thc

Jew bC mcr l six bHd

sh rt

(ls namc rhcJt, alld m

in thc mc bleath This

scntcncc sirnultanc usly signs b th thc ccon my and thc incon Parablc gcnius

f Sbakcspcarc,It dcscr cs to risc abovc this tcxt as an in mensc a cgory;it PcrhaPs

rccapitulatcs thc cntire hstory of brgivcness,thc cnt e history bctwccn thc Jcw
and thc Christian,the entirc histo
y of ccon mics(I,lcr s,markct,lncrchandisc,

ill

C1,mCrcen y,wage,reward,litcral

m tthc Jew bC mc

or stIl)hmc)as a his )ry of translati

Thcn

tll

Then lllence,consequently,jJirur)thC JCw must be mcrcyjF He must bc cF mcnF,

jndu cnr,say ccrtc in French tlandt t0ns,Ol) ious ,thiS means hc

th cb

1J1Fur,Fhcn,sincc you ackn wlcdgc thc dcbt rthc huk,the Jcw(rh1sJcw,Shyl ck,

crdict
f c cry

n a colossal syn119ohc and mct nyn1ic valuc, on the scalc

lod
thc Jcw als rcPrcscnts c cry JCw,thc Jcw in gCncral in his

in this Prccisc contcxt)must CC you florn it,But thc clliPtical ft)rcc of thc
tcnds t takc
historical pe1

rcnd

with his Christian counterPtalt,Christian P wcr,thc Christian State The

Jcw mu

brgi e

(Permit me a Pt rcnthCSis hcrc whlc rcrca(ling this cxtraor(lina9'

crdict wh sc

rusc wc shall analyzc in a m n1cnt~namcly,thc phrasc that says thcn thc Jcw

m t br e,

imPlying tl1at ht is thc Jcw

in gcneraI t forgivc

I can

ho m t br vc, htis uP to thc JCw

t avokl rccalling thc PoPe s CxtraordiI1ary sigh at the

cnd fthe sec nd n1illcnnium,Sc cral rn nths ag ,as he

as about t board a planc
f r nc fhis transcontincntal journcys,hc vas askcd
hat hc thought ofthc Frcnch
CPisc Patc s dcclarati n of rcpcntancc,and aRcr sighing,aftcr fcchng a bit sorry for

himself, aRer kcling a bit solty br ChHstianity and Cad olicism, hc s"d:

I noticc
do11

d1at it is al

iays wc who arc asking for for

Cness
Vcll!Thc imPlica
if s mc Peoplc le dmatCly think of c tain

hr
Cncss om thc Je
s lcven

Arnerican Indians to ,as Vell as various other victi1ns of thc Inquisition vhorll the
P Pe

has sincc Put n the list as an another duty of corl mcmoration,as it is called

r f rcPcntanccj,It is al
ays re,Christians or Cathohcs,wh are asking r
forgivcncss, but rhy? Yes,
hy? Is it that f rgi cncss is a Christian thing and

434

JACQuEs DERRIDA

Christians sbould sct an cxamPlc bccausc Christ s Passion consistcd of assun1ing sin

ss?Or indeed bccausc,under thc circumstances,a ccrtain Church,if n

tllc cr

Christianity, vill

al vays

havc rcpr ached itsclf a grcat dcal,vchilc asking for forgivc-

ncss,and Hl^st f all i m tlle Jcw,wh m it htls a c(l r r

Cncss-an(lt be
mcrcIfLI

TllCn mu

tlle Jcw l,C m ohl

Portia thus addrcsscs hersclf to Ant

t

ni

,hcr accon)phce, and

hile

rcfcrring

thc Jcw as a tlllr(l Party,shc hc s what the Jcw hCc ls:hccd with your rccog

niti n,

your ackn wlcdgcmcnt, your conkssion, tllc Jcw muSt be mer F,

ff rgiving, of rcn1itti11g your paiL or your

coluPassi natc, forbcaring, caPable

n But thc Je`

Paymcnt, f crasing thc debt,and s

d esn t

undcrstand Porda

deducti c rcasOning, he cntircly refuses to undcrstand this logic shc

v uld likc
hiIn t grant forgivcncss a11d absol

c the debt simply bccausc it is rec gnizcd Thc

Jew thcn gr ws in gnant

In `irtuc of ,hat c,bhgation, hat constI^ai1 t, .s at la n)ust I bc mcycJ/1 ?

l he

rd that is translatcd l)y obhgation or constraint or la v is an intcrcsth1g onc

it is cOI,,PuFS
In
n,
vhich signi cs an irresistablc impulsc or constraining Po ver

1rttlc of wh comPul n sh tlld I ow myscr erc

`P

On

llPulsi
11at c

nn1ust I?Tcll nlc that

,411791

In rcsponsc to thc Jc 's qucsti n,Portia launchcs nto a grand Pancgyric ofthc

PowCr f
er
po

For ivcnCss

This suPCrb spccch(lcRncs Il,er9,f0rgivcncss,as thC suPrcmC

vCr
XX/ithout c nstraint, 1th ut obhgation,gratuitous,an act Of graCC,aP

ab
c P :cr, a so

crcignty above sOvcreignty, a suPC1 lative 1ight, n)ightier than

n1i8ht Sincc it is a 1ight xxith ut n1ight, a resPitc vithin

1ight

ofil, rcr riSCS abovc Iuight,ab

c thc ec non y f

`ight, this transcendent

Illight and thc: cf rc

abovc

sanction as cll as transaction This is vhy luercy is thc king s attrit,utc,the right
of gracc, the absolutc l)rivilegc of thc111 narch(or,in this case, of thc

ge) YCt

it is also an insnitc cxtra agancc,anod1cr trcad or tradc in an insnitc asccnt, and

just this Powcr is above Po

Cr,a migl t mighucr tllan might,so thc monarch

attribute is at thc samc ti1nc abovc hiln and his scePtre This l1,ight PaSscs bcyond
humanity cvc11as it PassCS through humanity,just as languagc docs(a
carhc1D itiS Only in God s kccping,G1 acc is divinc,in carthly Po

vc n`cntioncd

:hat
cr it rccalls
r

ithin the hun1an, Thc t

mOst rcscn1blcs (livinc Po vCr, it is thc suPcrhuman

disc urscs

hcre echo r rnirror onc anothcr,that

f shyl ck thc Jcf and Portia thc

Christian r thc Christian in thc guisc of thc la v, Both l)lacC SOmcthing(thc oath,
for8i encss)above

human languagc1n hun1an languagc,bcyond thc hun1an ordcr1n

the hun1an rdcr,bcyond11uman riglnts and dutics

Thc st
cngth of RDrgi cn css,if you hsten to P

n human la v
rda,is m@ rhdn just,m re just

than justicc or tlac law It ses abovc thc law r abovc what in justicc is only law;
it is,bcyond hunlan la v, thc
cry thing that inv kes l)raycr, And vhat is, hnally,
a discourse on translation(Possil)lc/iruP

ss )lc)is alS

a(liscourse ofPrq cr on Prdver

n and Praycr, on t
o
rcqucStS it and that fthc l)ers n vho grants it,Thc

Forgi encss is Praycr; it bClongs to thc ordcr of bcncdicti

b
sidcs,that o thc Pcrsn

ith f rgi cncss, not xsith Po vcr and la ,. Bet vecn

csscncc of Prayer has to do
Cr, ab
c cvCn royal
rt)cnedicti n ~above human l)o
the cle ation of PrayCr

/lHAT Is A RELEVANT

TRANsLATION?

435

W :I;} T f:;Jl 1 ff J{J ;Rtu

sanlc csscnCc,tbc san1c cn1iI1encc thatis n) rc cn1incnt t11an cn incncc,thc cn incncc

fd cM st High
Shylock is h ightcncd b) this cx rbitant cxhortation to forgi c bcyond the la v,
to1 CnounCc11is1 ight

and his(luc Hc isl)cin8askcd to do n1 rc than hc can and

ight to grant,givcn thc bond(one is tcmPtcd tO Sa) thc

orc than hc c cn has thc
scnscs that it is an
Bu d)that bhgcs hil bcy nd c cry hulnan link shylock als
lvcs
attemPt to stccr his shiP in circlcS,ifI can sPcak this xsay about a story that in

thc
dcv
rcck Hc vho is Prcsentcd as a chabohcal Hgure(
a ship and a shil)
l

iI1the likcness c a Je v lJ' , 3 1 201)8cnscs that hC is in the l

cess()fl)eiI1g

had,

n
PlainS,he clam rs f r thc laxx,his right,his Penalty In any casc,
r i eness,an cconolVic
hcis not deccivcd In thc namc ofthis subhme I)anegyric off

grumbles,he c

it
ruse,a calculation,a strategelu iS bcing l)lottCd,thc uPshot of vhich(you kn
d)
1"
l)c
that

h
oP()f
bl
xsit110ut
shcdding
onc
e the challengc to cut flcsl

ls Fcr

fr 1 l{
:

situation takcs a bad turn at11is cxPcnse he ill

tra11slate hinlsclf(c

,hl:crr

ha

c to conVc1 t to Christianity^t

)into a Christian,into a C111 istiml langtla :c,aRer ha i11g

hC :ho as cntrcatcd to bc

bccn in turn R)rccd, thr ugh a Scandalous rcvcrsal

ilIIi lI

a nx)n cll to J tbc Jev:

That thOu shalt see thst(lifFcrcncc of our sp"

it

I Pard n thcc thy li cl ctore thou ask it:

For1 alf thv vcalth,it is Antonio
Thc c ther

s,

half comcs to the general statc,

VVhich11u1nblcncss lna dri c unto a Hnc

,41364691
I

Thc so creignty ofthc(loge,in its crafty n anifcstation,n1irnics absolutc lt)rgi

c-

hCrC it is n t rcqucstcd,)ct it is thc Pa1 (lon

nCss,t11c Pard n dlat is grantcd cvcn
fah ,As R rt11c rcst,sh)lock iS t tall)cxProl)riatCd,half of his hrtune going
to a Pri atc sul)jcct,Ant nio,half to the state And thcn~anod1cr cconon1ic rusc
~in ordcr to rccci c a rcduction f thc Pcnalty and a id total conHscation, thc
hich is that shylock rcpcnt( rcPcntir is Franqois- ct r
dogc adds a condition,
Hugo s translation f r huInblcncss

if)ou
)

b c rcpc11ting,
give l9r of of hun1ihty

you1

ill
Penalty`vill bc rcduced and you

o cr

it that hc tbrcatcns to

c onl) a-lnc to l)ay instCad ol total

vicldS such so ercign PO vcr

CxProPriati n As for thc absolutc Pardon, thc dogc

ithdra

it

ba

436 uAcQuEs DERRIDA

He sha (lo this, r clsc I d rccant
The Pardon that I late Pron unccd hcrc
[
P rtia had Pr tested against t11e offcr to rcducc thc t

,41387-881

tal c

nhscation to a hne

the c nditi n f rePentancc,Shc says, Ay for thc statc,not for Ant nio

mcans that thc Pcnalty of conHscation is rcduccd f

(which

rvhat shyl ck 'es thc statc,

but n t fclr what hc wcs A11tonio) Thcn shyl ck rcl)cls and rchscs thc Par(l n

Hc re Llscs to Pal d

n, r sul c,to bc mercJh`,btlt hc also rchscs, 0Procally,to

bc pardoncd at this PricC

Hc thcref rc rcfuscs b th

grant and to ask for f rgivc~

ncss Hc calls hirnself a f rcigncr, in sh rt, to this cntirc PhantaSn1ic talc

fc)rgi

logico-Pohtical Prcaching that trics t

t

cncss,t this cntirc unsavory Plot of forgi cncss,to all thc Christian and theo-

clic than t bc Pard

Pass offthc n 0 n as grccn chccsc Hc prefcrs

ncd at this Pricc bccausc hc undcrstands or in any casc scnscs

ould aCtually havc to Pay vcry dca1 ly for the abs lutc and lncrciful Pard n,
and that an cconomy all
ays hidcs l)chind this thcatrc f absolutc f rgi eness

shylock thcn says, in a sort of countcr-calculati n:

cll, kceP your Pard n, take

that hc

myh ,bll mc,hrin takng iom me cver hing

that I have an(l all that I am,you

in cffcct k l mc,

Nay,takc1my lit and all,Pardon n t that,~

You takc lny housc,hcn you(lo takc thc Pr P
That d th sust

n my housc:you takc my h

hcn you(lo take the mcans vhcrcby I livc,

I lr

,4137o-73]

You kn0 v hof thi11gs turn ut:thc extraordinary ccon n y of rings and oaths
Rcgardless of vhcthcr Shylock is illlPhcatcd in it,hc na y loscs cvcrything, Once
thc d ge has thrcatcncd to vithdra v his Pardon,hC must agrcc to sign a con
PlCtC
rcn1ission of thc dcbt and t

G tiano

undcrgo a forccd con crsion to Christianity

tclls him:

In christ ning shalt thou ha c t :

Had I been judge,thou sh

godfathcrs,

ul(lst ha c

had tcn morc,

To bring thee to thc gallo vs,not t0thc font

[lr

,41394-961

Exit sh lock,

1 ;

ts C

FTR

;c

pro ts arc spht,and thc d gc bcsecchcs,imPlorCs,cntrcats(xx hich iS rcndcrcd into

Frcnch as cc,r,Jurel Porua t

dinc with him Shc rchscs,humbly bcg ng hiS Pardon

n (thC fact that:rcat Pe
PIC arc Rcn ca ed

I humbly do desirc your gracc of Pard

Your Gracc r Your Graoous M

cSty clearly undersc rcs thc powcr wc arc

discussing hcrc) shC l)cgs His G1

s Pardon l)ecausc shc n1ust travcl out of to

acc

/n

Thc doge rde that shc,or he,be rcmunert ted C lau=0,that C/hc bc P d r
rC
ardcd

f r hcr/his scr Iccs:


VHAT1

sA RELEVANT

Antono,grati tlaiS gelltleman,

Forin mv n1ind ou arc much bound t

TRANsLAT

0N?

437

hi1n.
I If

,41402-31

vs it,shc recognizcs it, shc kno

This gratuity,this rc :ard is a vagc Portia kn

vs

rp c11css

and

and says that she has been paid br Pcr n11ing wcll in a sccnc

Pardon as an ablc and cunning Iuan f law;she adn1its,this on an in thc guisc of

a man,tlltlt she has l lsomc way bcc11Pai(l as a m ccnary of gratitLl(lc[`e m cil,or
mercy I`d mcr

Hc is wcll Paid that is wcll satisfic(l,

And I dcli eHng you,am satls cd,

And thcrcin do account lnVsclf xl=cll Paid,~

-as ncver vct rnorc n crccnar

n1in(l

lJ ,41 411-141
No onc could bcttcr cxPrcSs the n1crCcnar

ord
of this

dirnension of n1erCr in evcr sensc

And no nc

vho has
could c cr cxprcss it bcttcr than ShakcsPcarc,
er
bcen char8cd vith anti-sertlitisn for a v rk that stagcs vith an unequallCd Po
all tllc grcat m u cs f Christian anti Jud

sm

Finally,agai1 in thc samc sccnc,Bassanio s resPollsC to Portia PassCs

ncc lnorC

thr ugh a logic of forgi cncss

Takc son1e1 clncn)l rancc of us as a tril)ute,

Notas a ke;grant mc ths 0things I Pr

Notto de11y mc, and to Pardon nlc

you,~
l

141418-2Ol

Such is thc c ntcxt in vhich Portia(lisPlays thc cloqucnce for vhich shc is paid as
crccnar
al

n1an ofla

Now hcre is thc m n dish,thc Plat dc r si ancc I ha e lcR thc spiciest[rcfc

and aRcr
ttlstC fl,r the cn(l Just a cr ying, Then must tllc JCw bc mclcihl,

(Dn xx
xll)lock Pr
n mustI? Portia bcgil)st SPCak
tCSts by askiI1g,

hat con11,ulSi

again I citc her sPccch in Enghsh, thcn translate r rat11cr Paraphrasc it, stcP by
SteP It raiscs thc stakcs in adn1irablc1 hythms

First rnovcmcnt
The quahty of rnercy iS not strain

d,

It dr PPeth aS thC gcntlC rain fro l hca en

icc l,lcst,
uP n the Placc bcncath:it is t

It blcsscth11inn that gi cs,and hi1n that takcs,

Jrl,,41 180-831

Thc quahty of mcrcy is not f rccd,constrained rncrcy is not con1n1andcd,itis icc,

ver It can
gratuitous;grace is gratuitous,Mcrcy falls orll hCaven likc a gcntle sh
bc schcdulcd,calculatcd;it arrivcs or(loesn t,n onc dccides on it,nor docs any
human la v;likc rain,it haPPCns r it docsn t,but it s a good rain,a gcntle rain;
f r8i

Cncss isn t ordcrcd uP, it iSn t calculatcd, it is forcign to calculati

n, to

438 JAcQuEs DERRIDA

cconon1ics,to thc transaCtion and thc la ,but it is good,like a gift,l)ecausc lnlercy
gives by forgiving, and it fccundatcs; it is good, it is l cnehcicnt, l,cncv lent likc a
bcnc t as PP Sed t an2dfefacti n, a ood

likc raln,i m ab vc t bd w( it d1

dCcd as oPP SCd t an1isdccd It falls,

PPeth upon the Placc bcnecRtho thC
pcrson vh f r8ivCs iS,like f r8i Cncss itself,on high, cry high,above thc Pcrson

h asks f r r btains f rgivcncss There is a hicrarchy, and this is :hy thc

mctaPh r ofrain is not only that of a Phcn mcnon that is n t ordcrcd uP,but als
that of a vcrtical(lcsccndin

It is t vicc

m eluent for ivcness is givcn oll,abo c to l)clo

blcst;/It blcsscth hin1that gives,and hin

that takcs

a sharin:of thc good, of the good(lccd,a sharing f thc bcncdicti

`thus thcrc
alrcad
n,a is
performativc c ent and a lnirr r"1g bet ccn t
o bencHts f thc bcncdicti n, a n utual
cxchangc,a translation l)ct vcen gi ing and taking

sccond n10 emcnt

Tis thc n1ig11tlcst in thc rnightlcst,it bccomcs

Thc throncd m narch bcttcr than hls cr n

His sccp c shows thc rcc oftcmPord Power,
Thc clttributc t awe and m csty,

hcrcin d th sit the(lrcad and fcar f kings;

But lancrcy is above this sccpt1

cd s ay,

ncd in the hearts of kings,

It is cnthr

It is an attr )utc t G d hin self;

And earthly Poxx=cr d th thcn sho'hkcst G

/hcn md cy

d s

seasons justice
Il

I',41 184-931

Forgi`ing mercy is thc n ghtiest or thc almighty in thc all li hty

Tis thc
n1ightiest in thc rllightiest/ thc omnil)otcncC of lnniPotencC,the omniPotcncC in
on)niID tcncC r thc aln ighty am n8all thC alrnighty, absolutc greatncss, absolutc
en1incncc, absolutc luight in abs lutc n i ht, thc hyPcrbohc suPcrlati C
fn1i:ht
Thc Omnil) tencc c)f omniPotCncc is at oncc thc csscnCC of P cr, thC csscnce of
n1ight,thc csscncc( f thc PoSSiblc,l,ut als
d might,is

oncc thc mighJcst

vhat,

likc thc essencc and suPcrlati

might and morc Fh

n might,

on( I niP ~

tcncc This lilnit of Po :cr, fn i ht and ofthc P ssiblC obhgcs us to ask ourscl cs

:cr_to_

if the cxPcricncc of forgivcncss is an cxPericncc Of

Po Cr/ ( f thc P
br
c, thChrmaj n f Powcr tlar ugh r vencsS thc )n ndi n of all tllc
rders f I

and n t only f Pohtical po vcr,or cvcn the bcy nd of all po vcr

at issuc hcre~_another Problcn of translatk)n~is thc status of 90rC

can/

/l)at

is al :ays

as rJl

m sF and as J,,orc rF,dn, fthc n1ightiest as n2orc`

j l,9

n1ighty, and thercf re as an thcr ordcr than n1ight, Po

imPosSiblc that is illOIC rhdn in2P

In d1c samc
ay,

ss

Fc

dn J rhcr
r

if forgi cncss, if lucrc)

ssib`cS

Ff

'cr,

cin_ and as i,,orc r

r thc P

ssil)lc

tl n

thc

or dlc quahty of n1c1

cy is the
this situates both thc aPcx of nu1iP tencc and son e~

/C
thing ln rc and othcr than abs lutc Po vcr in the n1ighticst in thc lnighticst,

n1ighticst in thc n1ighticst/

foll
v, accordingly, the va ering of this liluit bct ccn p
cr
,Crlcssness,Poxl
and abs lutc P
crlcssncss or thc abs lutc imPossiblc as unhn1ited

shoukl be ablc t

po vcr

vhich is n t unrclatcd t thc im~possiblc possible of translation

^/HAT S A

1crc

RELE

ANT TRANsLATION? 439

bccon`es thc throncd monarch, Portia sa s, but cven bcttcr than his

vn on al cad;it suiFs thc nx)narch,it becon1cs hiln,

cro :n Itis highcr than thc cr

cr cJagn,tllan the t ttHbtltc r

`n LikC the sccPt1 C,thC cr0
n mani%sts tc

hCrcas
hrgi`cncss
is
a
supratcl
wcr,
lt lal P wcr Abo c tl c
al,spi1
po1
Poral P
btlt sujrs h hcr tl an hls hcad cllld thc hcad lfd

gn of Po vcr

that is thc r yal cr

authority of thc scePtrC,it is cnthr

ncd in the hcart f kings This omniI)otcncC is

diffcrcnt om tcmPoral might,and t bc diffcrcnt c)Iu rnig1t thatis tcmPord and

thcrcf c carthly and Pohtical, it rnust t)c intcrior, sPh1tual, i(lcal, situatcd in the
1

king

s hcart and n t in his cxtcriOr att1 ibutcs,

11c Passagc across the liI11it clcarly

ll ws

thc trt lect ry ofan intc1 lorizatio11that PasseS om thex Isiblc t thc in isible

by bccoming a thing f the hcart hrgi c1acss as Pi

n9 J c rJc
bcing thc scnsiti ity ofthc hca1 t to thc rnisf
gi cncss

,1

,if y

u
ish,Pity

tunc ofd c bouilty,`vhich n tivatcs for-

This intcrior Pity is di inc in csscncc,but it als says solllCthing ab ut the

csscncc oft1 anslation Portia ob iously sPeaks as a Christian,shc is alrcady trying to

convc1

t or to l)rCtend that she is Prcaching to a convcrt In bcr cfR)rt to pcrsuadc

shylock to l

rgi e,s11c is ah

cady attcn11)ting to con

crt hin

to Christianity;by kign~

ing thc suPPosition that hc is already a Ch1 istian so that hc vill hstcn t
vhat shc has
to say,shc turns hilu t
ard Christianity by rneans of hcr logic and hcr rhctoric;shc
cc nVC1 s llllal, shc convcrts

PrCdiS )oseS hiln to Christlanit)9 as Pascal saicl, shc l,1

hin1in
ardly, son1cthing that hc

ill

s
n

bc forccd t

physically, undcr con_

straint she trics to con crt hiln t Chlistianity l)y Pcrsuading hirn fthc suPPosedly
Christian interPrctation that c

nsists of i

ltcriorizing, sPirituahzing, idcahzin8

among Jc
s(it is Rcn said,tat lcast,th

tll is a

rcmai11physical, cxtcrnal, htcral, dc otcd to a rcsPcct for thc lcttcr As

dirercncc l)ct ,Cen thc circulncision of d1c flesh and the Paulinc circun1cision
ill
heart~therc

vhat

cry Powcrltll xterccltyPc)will

`ith thc

f thc

certainly be a nccd to lo k for a translation, in thc broad scnsc,

it11 rcgard t this I)roblcn1atic of circun1cision (htcral circun cision of thc flcsh
versus i(lcd and illteror cilcumclsion of tllc hca ,Jewis11circumcision v sus
Christian ci1 culncision,thc hole dcbatc surrounding Paul) Vhat haPPcns bCt
CCn
the JC shyk)ck and thc lcgislati

nc)f

of Hcsh bcf re thc la v,t11c oath,t11cs

the Christian statc in this wa cr ofa P und

`

rn la1th,thc qucstion of htcrah

css,and so

on?If f rgivcncss d
clls 1thin thc king s hcart and notin his thr nc,his sccPtrc,

his cr0
n,that is,in thc tcluP ral,carthly, isil)lc,and P htical attributes f his

cr to l)a don intcriorizcd in

Po cr, a lcaP has beCn madc to ard G d Thcl )

n1ankind, in hu111an Po cr, in royal Po

cr as11un1an P
vcr, is
hat Portia ca s

di inc:it vill be God~Ji

c This hkc/ this analogy or rescn blancc supPorts a logic,

or analogic, of thcologico P htical translati n, of thc translation of thc theological

jnto Pohtical

It is cnthroncd in thc hcarts of ki11gs,

It is an attributc to God hhusclf;

AI1d caI tl)l)P

cr

Vhcn1

c1

C)sCasons justlcc,

Thc ctl1 t111y powc1

sticC
`c1111Ders

likcst God
d0th d`cn sho

that n10st rcscmbles God is that which

ith h1 gi

cncss

scasOns justicc,

which

440 JAcQuEs DERRIDA

Tcmp re

[tCmpersl is Hug s transladon r scas ns

choice;it in fact means`o scas n

mocl ,to mrr,to drc

Lct

ss
[

It isn

t an erroncous

isonneIl,to mix,to causc to change,to

od c,rto a
ftc

a cllmatc,asm d s

c,l qud y,

s not forgct that this sPcCch bcgan by trying to(lcscribe

thc quahty of rncrcyr
Yct I an1tcmPtcd to rcPlace I ugo s translation, temP rc,
vhiCh is not bad,

th another It vill not bc a truc translation,abo c all not a rclc ant translation
lt
ill not rcsPond t thc namc Fr ns`drion It ,ill n t rcnd r, it vill n t Pay its
ducs,it v l

t lnake a Iull rcstitution,it :ill not Pay or allits dcbt,srst and fore_

most its dcbt to an assumcd conccPt,that is,t

the scl idcntity of rncaning allcged

by thc word rr ns on It will n t bc answcrablC t

r

IrcF d

l what iS currendy

called a translation, a rcF v nF translation But apart fron1 thc fact that thc m

rclevant translation(that vhich prcscnts itsclf as thc transfcr

st

f an intact signi;cd

thc h nsccl ndJ

Chclc d any s niHcr whatsocvcr)iS tl c lca rclcvallt

rer

dl
all

vn e to attcmpt at lcast rhrcc

srurcs at oncc,to
PosSible,thc Onc I
thrc,tl

tie togcthcr, in the samc cconomy, thrcc ncccssitiCs that

vill all be linkcd to the

history of a translation that I t k the s mc

hat rash initiati e in Pr
P Sing, ovcr
d1irty ycars ago, and
vhich is n
v Pubhcl can nizcd in Frcnch ~all thc
hilc

naturally remaining untranslatable int any ther language I shall thcrcf rc trans_

latc seasons

vhcn1ncrc
as rcl
c :

j tice lou le d

it) [

hCn m

cfc Fcs

scasons justice/

c la
quand lc Pard n rcl
r"nJ
dnd
driI
PFcs

J9

dnd
rc ori ,rh c

c( r rhe FdTl,

r cdFion:animme(liatc gu antcc l ad)c play ofthe Idlt,m Re`c rst

conveys thc scnsc of cookin8suggcstcd hcrc,likc dssdisonI,cr It is a quCstion f gi ing

`usF1Firs

tastc, a lifferent tastc that is blended vith thc6rst tastc, no v

dullcd, rcmaining
hde changing it,
vhilc undoubtcdly rcm ing son1cthing of its nati e, original,idiomatic tastc,but als
vhilc addin8to it,and in thc
very Pr ccss,mor tastc, vhilc culti ating its natural taste, hilc giving it sFiF`ili ore
:c call rdc c1 in Frcnch
rs n`n dsr ,its wn,nt tural av r~this is what

cooking And this is Prc0scly what Por a says:mcrcy scasons lreF

justicC,thc
quali of mcrcy se ons thc taste ofjusdcc Mercy keePs tllc tastefjusticc whlc
the samc whilc altering it,

ding ,rcHnlllg

it,culu ajn:k;mercy rescmblcs justicc,but comcs fl

somcwhcrc dsc,it bclon

to a dif

ft

it at oncc tcmpcrs and strcngthcns justicc,changes it

it vvithout con erting it,yct xl=hile imPr
reason tO translatc scdsons

rent ordcr,at tl,c samc dmcit modi cs justicc,

ith
rcl vcr

ithout

changing it,convcrts

ing it, vhilc cxalting it Hcrc is thc srst

vhich effecti ely PrcscrvcS thc gustat ry

and thc cuhnar rcfcrcnce of ro sc son,

assaisonner Fo sC son ll rf, sPicc, t
SPice H s
s
Cd disFl is,according to thc translati n in thc Robcrr dicti nary, un Plat
9Justicc PresCrvcs its Own taste,its own mcaning,but this vcry tastc is
relc
,
c de

bcttcr xs hcn it is scds0nCd or

reclccm,dcllx

relc b

lncrcy, Without considcring that m

rc

can

er,casc,hdcm ,indced curc(this is thc chaln hcd`,hor n,h

h iFi

)justicC which,thus easc(l,ll~ghtcncd,(lcli crcd(rc c;= Jl,redecms itsclf with

ic v

tO sacr sanct sal ati n,

2scc0

f Jusrin^c on

justicc,it Pulls and inspircs justicc to

ctl c
x d at
exPre dex on M
vard highncss,to Vard a hcight hi hcr than thc
c

sccPtrC,and po vcr thatis r yal,human,carthly,and so n subhmati n,

n, asccnsion tovvard a Cclcstial hcight, thc highcst or thc most
high, highcr than height, Thanks t f rgivcncss, thanks to mcrcy, justicc is c cn
cro vn,the

ele ation, cxaltati

/HAT

Is A \RELE ANT TRANsLAT10N?

ising

n1ore just,it transcends itsclf, it is spirituahzcd by

vC itsdf Mc y Sublimt tes justkc

3ThcK is,nnally,a FhjJJ usrJ cdri n br tl c

441

and thus lifting itself[se

l d,,rI ab

cdFi nt

mojf

to

crb reFcvcr I usc tl is `ord us -

rcConcilc
hat ould rcndcr this t1 anslati n rclc ant to thC c njoincd
M cy sCasOns jusd and justlDcss or alDl)r PH Cncss usrcss
ord,thc most aPPr PriatC l) sSiblc,n10rc aPPro^
PriatC

f justicc(

^hat ruust bc thc aPPr

Priatc d)an aPProPriate T11is last justi cation lx:ould thcn gi c a Phil s Phical
mcaning and cohercncc to thc cc non y, accumulati n, caPitahzati n f good

ord

vith a doublc

eaning

grounds In 1967, tO translatc a crucial Gcrman

hcbcn, cbu ),aw rd 1lih clll

l,l

rcss alltl

ckvatc,a

ord that Hcgcl says rcprcscnts thc sPcculative risk of the Gcrman lan :uagC, and

that the cntirc vorld had until then agrccd as untranslatable~or,if you prefer,
a wo1 d r which no Ilc had agrced ith anyonc(,11a stablc,satis ing n anslati n
into aI1)languagc

le and thc
crb rcFc er
for this v rd,I had Pr poscd thc noun rc

This allowcd mc t rctain,j(,ining thcm in a singlc word,thc doublc motif f tl c

elc atioI1and thc rcPlacen cnt that prcse1

cs vhat it dcnics()r dcstr ys,Prcscrving
vhat it causcs to(hsaPPcar,quitc likc in a Pcrfect cxamPlC

vhat is callcd in thc

arn1cd forccs, in thc navy, say, t11c rchef

P

SSib

rc`

Fcl

f thC guard Tl1is ust1gc is als

C in Enghsh,Fo rcF c c l()Was1 y oPcration a translationPll I an1not surc that

it dcscr cs this tc

n Thcf`ct is that it has bccon c irrcPlaccablc and nca1 ly canon~

izcd,c cn in thc uni crsity,occasionally in othcr languagcs`vhcrc the Frcnch xx: rd

cre quotcd fr n1a translation, c cn vherC its Origin is no l ngcr

Vithout
hCn its Placc f rigin~I mcan mc -or its taste is dishked
kn0 n,or

is uscd as ifit

Plungh1g us cry dccPly into thc issucs,I1 1ust at lcast recall that thc lnovcl,1cnt0f

%c u ,thC l)rocess d est lishing rcl ance,is dw sin H d a di cctical

mo mel t of interic,li/tadon,ll rioH ng mcm '( hnn nInJ)and Sut,limathg

sPirituah'ation It is also a t anslation such a rc` lc is prccisely at issuc herc, in

tc

s moud1(mcrcy rdt,9c,it dc atcs,rcPlaccs and intcri()rizcs thc jtlsticc tl at it

cr)
nd tl c mc ncc(l hr tlac1 hebunf,thc reF vc,at the
hcart of thc Hegdian interPrctao n J mcrcy,Particulady in rl,c Phcn mcnofo /
cd c aS the truth f thc
lfind thc m vclncnt to :ard PhiloS Phy and abs lute kn
Po1 tia

seasons) AbovC all,wc

Christian1 chgion PassCS thr u8h the cxPcricncC of rncrcy 12 Mcrcy is a relt,

in its csscncc an

bebunJ

It is translauon as wcll In d

c, it is

ch Hz n of cxPiation,

rcdcn)Ption,rcconciliation,and salvati n

hcn Portia sayS that111crcy,abo c thc sccPtrc,scatcd( n thc intc

ior throne
in d1e ng s hcart,is an att1 ibutc fG d hinrlsdf1and that d1crchrc,as an carthl)

vCr,rnercy rcsen2In`cs a di inc Po ver at the mon1cnt .hcn it clcvates,Prcscrves,

P
and negates[ lcl justice(d1at is,thc law),what c tll1ts is the rcscml,lance,thc
analogy,thc Hguration,thc111axilnal analogy,a sort of hun1an translatjon

f diviI1ity:

in hun1an Po :er lncrCy is vhat llaost1 CsCn11)lcs,

hat1uOst is and rcveals itsclf
a di :inc Powcr C hcn show hkcst God s
):

But n erc is abo c thc sccPtred S

ay,

It is cnthroned in thc11earts of kiI gs,

It is an attril)ute t

G d hin1sclf;

And carthl)P wCr d t11d1en shoxl likcst God

Whcn me1 cy 0ns iusu

442

JAcQuEs DERR1DA
VVhich docs11 t luCan,nccessa1

il),that1ncrcy co1ncs onl) on10nc l)crs n,uP

therc, ho is callcd G d,h on1a Pitying Fathcrvho lcts his lncrc) dcscCnd uPon

us No,that can als

lnean that as s on as the1 c is Incrcy,ifin fact thcrc is any,the

so-ca c(l human cxPcricncc1 cachcs a zonc of di inity: 111crcy is thc gcnesis of thc

inc, fthc hol or thc sacrcd,but als thc sitc f Purc translati n (A risky intcrPrctati n It could,lct us n tc too quickly,cffacC the nccd f r thc singular Person,
(h

fk)r thc Pard ning Or pardoncd Pcrs n,thc

ho irreducil)le t

the csscntial quahty

`
fa(hvinity, and so forth)
:ery site of thc thcol
This dnd/oal iS thc
^P htical, thc hyPhcn Or trans~
8ic
lation bct
ccn thc theol gical and thc P htical;it is als
vhat undcr
ritcs Pohtical

sovercignty, the Christian incarnation of the l)

body,thc king
t

st vo

dy of God(or Christ)in the king s

bodics,This analo cal ~and christian~aruculation bet ,ccn

o Po s(di inc and royal,hca enly and earthly),inS

e1

thc sovcrcignt) of rncrcy and the right

far as it PasScS hcrc thr

uEh

f gracc,is als the subhmc greatncss that

auth rizcs r cnablcs thc autl)orization f evcry rusc and vilc actioI1that Pcrlllit thc
la`vyer P ltia,llaouthPicce of all shylock s Christian ad crsarics fron1the Incrchant

Antonio to thc dogc,t gct thc bettcr fthe Jcw,t causc him to losc c crything,
his P und of flcsh,his moncy,c cn his rchgion In cxPresSing all thc cvil that can
bc thought of thc Christian l^usc as a(lisc

hcn
sh l ck

hc raiscs a huc and cr

ursc of Incrcy, I aIn n t about to Praisc

f r his Pound

f lcsh

and insists n thc litcr~

alncss of thc btlnd I anal zc Onl thc hist rical and allcgorical cards tl,at ha

dcalt in this situation and a

c bccn

thc discursi c, logical, thcological, Phtical, and

cconon1ic rcsou1 cs0fthC c nccpt of rncrcy,the lcgacy(our lcgac))ot thiS Scmant

tics of l

lcrcy -l)
cciSCl) inasn1ucl)as it is jndissociabk

jnterPrctation f translation

orn a certain Eur Pcan

ARcr thus Pr P sing thrcc justi cati ns for n1 translati n of scclsons and
vclb alld noun),I hvc gathercd tOo many Ons to sscmbk

H(f/l,ebuIaJ

thc hct that m `Jr

d1oicc aimcd fo1 thc best tl^aL1saction Possil)lc,thc n10st cconomic,
sincc it a o
s me to usc a singlc
vord t translatc sO many ot11er
v rds, c cn
languagcs, vid1their(lcnotations and c nn tations.I an1not surc that this transac-

tion,evcn ifit is thc mOst ec non1ic possiblc,1uerits the namc of Frdns`

strict and Purc 3ensc of this

Fi n,in the

vord, lt rad1cr seems onc of th sc thcr things il1

rr,a transaction,t1 ansR)rmation,tra

a , rI d

c`~and a tl asurc

cnuon,if it als sccmcd to takc uP Irc

t1 o c lrr u,

i cJ

a challc11gc,as anot11cl
saying gocs,consistcd nly in disc
crin8 vhat =as vaiting,orin :aking
hat vas
(SincC tllis in

cl c

SlcePing,in thc languagc) Thc treasurc trovc an1ounts to a travail;it I)uts t

rk

ithout adcquati n or transParCncy, hcrc assun1ing thc

shaPc fa nc
vriting or
c
riting that is PCrforn1ati c or Poctic, not only in
thc languages, fl1 st of all,

Frcnch, vchcrc a nc v usc for thc vord cn1crgcs,but also in Gern1an and Enghsh
Pcrhaps this oPcrati n stdl ParticiPatcs i11 thc travail of the ncgative in

hich

Hcgd saw a rc`

c(
/hcbunJ) If I SuPPoscd,thcn,that thc quasi tlanslati

transaction l thc`vord rc`

n,thc

(an Enghs11vord in thc Pr ccSs

lc is indced rclcvant

of FrcnchiIication), that ould pcrhaPS quahfv thC effecti`cness c)f this travail and

its suPposcd right to bc lcgitimatcd,accreditcd,qu

ted at an ofHcia111narkct Pricc,

But its PrinciPal intercst,ifI can c

aluatc it in tcrms of usur)and the n arkct,hes

in
hat it lnli8ht say about thc ccOn

my(9f cvcl`y intcrlinguistic translation,this thuc

in thc strict and Pure scnsc of tbc

0r(l t111(l

ul)tcdl), in takhn:uP a challcngc

/HAT

kn ItFc dnr

un df],aw

IS A

RELEVANT

lang11 c,a

rd is acJcled to tllc F1cn

443

TRANsLATION?

word i1)aw d The

usc tl at Il)a c St madc fthc w rd rc`cvcr, en rClc ant un(lo , also bccomes a
challcngc,a challcn e,ln rc Ovcr,to c ery translation tllat ould likc t0 vclc mc
into aI1othcr|angua:c all the c nnotations that have acculuuIatcd in this
rd T11csc
rcmain innumerable in thcmscl cs,PcrhaPs unnamcablc luorc than oncvord in a
ord,lnorc than nc languagc in a singlc languagc,bcyond cvery Possible comPat_

ib it
f hom n ms Vhat thc translati n
vith thc
rclc ant also dcm n~
xs

`ord

stratcs,in an cxcn 1)lary fashion,is that cvc1 translation should bc relc ant by voca~
tion It vould thus guarantee the suH jI
of thc body ofthe origi11al(sur `ilcIF i1 the
)

doulDlc scL1se that Bel lan1in givcs it in The

LzbcrFebcn
Isn

l)rol ngcd

t this

vhat

Tcask f thc Tlanslator, forr`cbcn and

ljft,continuous lift,Fivinf

l)ut also life aRcr death),

,,

a translation d cs?I)ocsn t it guarantcc thcse rll@ sur ivals l)y

losjng thc flesh duril

gal)roccss0fC0nve1 sion[cJ,dnJc ?By clCvating tbc signiser t

hnc prcscrving thc111 urnful and dcbt-ladcn mc1 1ory

f thc shlgular body, the rst body, thc uniquc body that thc translation thus

its rncanh1g or valuc,all thc

clc ates,PrcScr cs,and

ncgates IrcF vc|P SincC it is a qucstion of a trava

as vc notcd,a travail of thc ncgati c this rele ancc is a trava

thc lnOst cl1ig, atic scnsc of this

vhich mcrits a rc~clab rati n

rd,

attcn1Ptcd clSc hcrc but cannot undcrtakc hcrc,13T11c measurc ofthc rc`

ancc, thc pricc of a tI^anslati

n, is al

-indced,

of l ilourning,in

that I ha e
,

vays hat is called n1caning, that is,

Jarhcir,
PrCservation, truth as prcscr ation (

bell

or1

elc-

:aluc,

Jar n) r thc `=aluc of rneaning,

nalnely, xx hat, in bcing h ced fron the b dy, is elcvatcd ab vc it, intcriorizcs it,

spiritualizes it, IDrcsCr`cs it in n1cn ory

A R thhl andournhl n1cn1 ry Onc

cs the
aluc lueaning or luust

doesn t cvcn haVc to say that translation l)rescr

raisc IrcFd

crl thc body to it:the very concePt,thC alue of lncaning, thc111caning

f rneaning,thc`alue of thc Preservcd valuc originatcs in thc n urnful exPcricncc

f translation,of its very Possibility,By rcsisting this transcriPtion,this transaction

vhich is a translation, tbis 2 ,=c, shylock dchvers hiI11sclf int thc grasP of the
`
ccn JudaiSn1and
hc cost ofa
agcr bet
Christian stratcgy,bound hand and
fo t (
:
f
r blovc thcy tI anslatc then scl cs, although not into onc
Christianit), bl
anothcr)
I insist on thc Christian din1cnsi n Apart iom all thc traces that Chr tlanity

has lcR n thc hist ry oft

anslati n and thc n rluative conccpt of translation,aPart
i

c)md1c hct that d1c

d ,c,Hcgcl s.1Ill+lac unf(o11C nlust nc

jc1

Ft)rgct th he

a
cry Luthcran thinkcr, undoubtcdl

`as

hkc Hcklcggcr), is exPhcitly a spcculati c

,c of thc Passion and Good Friday into abs lutc kn0 vlcdgc, thc tra ail of
rc`
l

ourning also describes, thr ugh thc Passion, through a n cm ry hauntcd by the

body lost yct Prcscr cd in its gra e,thc rcsurrcction of thc gh st or of the glorious
body`vhich riscs,riscs again Ise r

c| -and valks

Vit11 ut wishing to causc any gricf to Hcgcl

s ghost, I leave aside thc third
mo
Cmcnt thcat I had ann uncc(lin Por a s sPccch(which w ul(l ha c dcalt with
translation as PrayCr and bencdiction)14
/1erci thc th))c ou11a c

)1

takcn 1u ou
c

gi

cn111e,Pard n,

n,c

r,

for ivc

thc th11cIl)avc

444

JAcQuEs DERRIDA

Notes

s
:

r Ir :T
:jfFl

Jh,

fT :1

$
: !il! !1

lJ

(Paris:P1 csscs uni

crsitorcs

F,

iI

iI

::|

dc F1fance,1962) Trans]

,fT

r
: ;
nch, ed Dcrek Attrid:c and Danicl Fcrrcr (Calnblldgc Calnbh(lgc
:`

U11ivcrsity P
ess,1984)

Trans

scc st Jer n C,
m Jcnc
Pr

r rcrcn (
57)lA anslau ,ll
^m
For d1is rckrcncc I
lumc Transj
mn indebtcd to thc adn rablc rcccnt
rk(stl unPubhshcd)of Andr s claro,

f st,Je1 me s

s%scs
If nc

lcttcr is includcd in this

br s s:Q dF'c vdhdFions sur

d c dducrcur

rcflccts on Jakobson s classi6cation, nly

inFcrF nJuisr c

translation(thC

PCration that transfcrs from onc langua c to anothCr and to

hich onc m st
oRen rcFl rs as transladon in thc ProPCr r st1 lct scnsc)iS go`c1 ncd by the

cconolny I havc dcscribcd and, xx ithiI

it, by thC un1t f thc
\o (l Neither
9nrr

isric translati nn r inrers mipric translati n is go crncd by a l)1 inciPle

`jn
of ccono1ny
c,

abo c all by thc unit ofthc ord IDcrri(la is rdtrI lng to d1e

cssay by Roman Jakobs n KPrintt d in this lume

Tmns|

(1985) Trans

IsCC Dc1

This abstract arithmetic,this apParcndy arbitrary cconomy of n1ultiPhcati

n
by threc~thrcc ti1ncs n orc than thc rnonctary signs
Points us to thc scenc
f Portia s thrcc suitors at thc end f the Play and the cnurc Pr blC1 atic of

ida

s essay, Dcs Tou1 s dc Bal)cl

F
cd,Joh11Russcll Bl
vn,vo123d Thc rdcn di nt,/ rhc}lor sJ

2sfldkcsPcdrc,Cd uj1a Ellis~Fcrlnor(London:p"cd1ucn,1951),4 I 224?,Tl tll

26;hc1 caRcr abbre atcd J
s
of I%njcc
i

[Franqois-Vict

r Hugo(1828-1873),thc son ofthc P ct,novchst and dramacrsi n f shakcsPcare s

rks bct
ccn

tist Victor Hugo,Pubhshcd his Frcnch

1863and1873 Trans]

/lc n2 sr i uPosSiblC,thc absolutc in1P ssible,thc in1possiblc par cxcellencc is

r as thc n rc r`,cIz, it11P sSiblc, the beyond of inaI, SSible is

Possiblc

unt to thc san1c thing,

Possil)lC Thcsc rcndcrings arc cr (hffcrcnt yct an

bccause in the t cascs (thc nc c n parati e, thc other supcrlati c) thcy

ind uP saying that thc tiP fthC sulun1it(thc Pcak)bcl ngs to anod1cr order
than that of thc sumn1it; the highest is thcrcf rc c ntrary t or thcr than

/HAT

Is A RELEVANT

TRANsLATION?

445

hat it surPasscs;itis highcr than thc height ofthe lnOst bigh:the n1

st in1Pos_

siblc and thc lu rc rhdn imPossiblC l)el ng to anod1Cr order than the iIuP

ssiblc

h1gcncral and can thercf re be P ssiblc The mcanil`g of possiblc/ thc signiHcance of thc concePt of P SSibility,rncan vhile,has undcrgonc a mutation,at
the P int and li1 it f the i1t possible ~if I can Put it this vvay
n1utation indicatcs

hat is at stakc in our reflccti n n thc imp

and this

ssil)lc Possi~

bihty of tra11slation: thcrc is 11 lo11gcr any l)ossiblC c ntra(liction bct :ccn

P sSil)lc

and in1Possiblc sincc thcy bclong to t

Enghsh crsi n

vo11ctcrogcneous orders
An

of Dcrrida sc n11ucntary on AngClus silesius aPPears in On

Da dVo d and J hn P Lca cy Jr,cd

(Stanbrd,calif stanbrd uni crsity Press,1995 Trans]

hc N m ,trans

Th mas Dutot

cntry in thc O~%rJ nJ`jd D criondrJ`gi

cs so nC SPlcndi(l 11ses or

such clivcrse111canings as t rcnder m re PalatabIc by thc addition f son1c

11

c1 ich

sa

oury ingrcdicnt,

moderatt,,to a

to

c iatt

adaPtr

accon11nodatc t a particular tastc/

,to tcmPer,to Cmbalm;to oPcn, rd

rarc and n orc archaic(sixtCenth ccntury)usc

to

A mom

prcgnatc,to copulatc/
as in when alnalc11ad)once seasoncd thc malc,hc ncvcr aRcr t ud1cs hcr,

10

11

i1

c st alluded t cI1a : cll,t11cn,JosePh c nmd,hr examl)lc,w11tCS

in Thc sccret sharer I

vould gct thc sccond n1atc to rehevc nlc at that

h ur ;then I rcturncd on dcck f r lny rchc

Curiously,thc nrst tilllc that the rd rc a c seclncd to mc indisPcnsablc f r
anda g(vc hc, tranxla 9tk w d cbunJ was n thc ca n dt n
"
analysis f thc si:n scc c Pui s cr `ta E r midc Jnrrt,tf1`crion a F sen, o ic dc
IhRx

tD

c ,a lccturc dcIi crcd att11c Coll gc dc FI^ancc in Jcan Hyppolits s sc111inar

during January 1968,rcPrintCd in J d- cs

Minuit, 1972), P 102 [SeC Dcrhda,

lntroduc tl nt Hcgcl

de F Phi` soPJli (Paris: Editi

ns(lc

Thc Pit and the Pyramid: An

s Semology, d ins gr P 1` soP /,tmns Alan B

Univcrsity of Chica8o PrC s,1982)Trans )R/1 st ofthc s callcd

rds that ha c intcrcstcd me cvcr s"1cc are also,by n n1cans
vord (`hdrl

or2, suPPl ment,

acci Jcnta y, untranslatablc il)to a singlc

(C11ica

undeci(lablc
(hff rancc,

hyn1cn, and so on) This liSt cannot, t)y(lc

cl surc

In er,l, n mcnDRu`

l nd, tllc cnd c, Di

nition, bc givcn any

nbd on,just bcfc,lc

absolutc rchgi n and

DtIs tibsoFLIFc lJ1sscn, thcrcf rc at the transition bct ccn

vledge~as thc truth f rchgion

absolute kn
ISeC Dcrrida,s`ccrrc dc/lr rx;` Jrdr dc`d dcFrc, rrd d F du dcu F cr`d nou c``c
inFern on Fc(hHs:Gahl e,1993);sPccr gf drx;%c sr Fc gf rh DebF,rhc

g lr uminJ,dnd

rf,c Nc FilFcrndFjor,dF,tmlils Pcggy Kamuf(Lc)nd n and

Ncw York:R utlc(lge,1994)Trans.l

14

T11is v uld bc a n1attcr,

vithout sPcakin furthCr ab ut thc doge and thc Statc,

cxan1inh1g and veighing justice on onc sidc(and justice hcrc n1ust bc under~
st
d as tllc la ,thc justicc that is calculablc and c?

d,aPpliCd,aPPlicable,
and n t thc justicc that I(listinguish clscwhcre
m thc law;hcrc justicc
rc

thc juI idical,thc judiot

,P sid C,indccd Penal law), T cxaminc
:cigh
justicc
on
onc
sidc
id)sal ation on thc thcr,it sccms11ccessary
and

1ncans

to ch

se bct
ccn thcn and t

cnouncc lav so as to attain salvation This

v ukl bc likc gi iI1g an csscntial dignity silnultanc usly to thc` ord and thc

446 JAcQuEs DERRIDA

value fP d er; Prayer
vs Onc t go beyond the la
ould l,c that vhich all
to vard

salvati

n or thc hoPc f sal

ati n;

ould bcl ng to thc ordcr

it

l)rgivcncss,likc bcncdiction, vhich vas c nsidcred at thc bcgi )ni11g(1

ncss is a dotlb

bc diCrj J,:

ccci es it,lclr wh

f0r thc PcrsOn

vh

gi e~

grants it and for thc Pcrs

er gi :cs and r whoc cr takcs) Now f Praycr

bclong8to thc ordcr off rgivcncss(
hethcr requestcd or antCd),it has no

Nor
in
Phil
S
Placc at all in thc la
Phy(in nto_thc l gy,says Hcidcggcr)
e

But bcf re suggcsting that a calculation is an cconon1y again lurking in this

logic,I Icad tlacsc hncs

om Pl tia`sPccch Just aRer saying`vhcI1mercy
scasons justicc/

she( r hc)continues

Thcrc rc,JC`
Though jusuce bc tlly Plca,c nsidcr d)is,

That in thc coursc ofjusticc,nonc of us

c do Pray for rncrcy,
should scc salvati n
And that san,e Praycr,d th tcach us all to rcndcr
Thc clccds frucrcy I havc spokcn thusluuch
To n1itigatc d1c justicc of th)Plca,

Vl ich if thou F ll
v,this strict court of Xrenicc

Must nccds givc scntcnce gainst d1cn1erchant thcrc

[

ParaPhase
(F9F tI

Thus,Jevv,although justicc(thc go d

la

lr

,41 193-210I

)Inay bC)our argun1cnt

your allcgation, hat you Plead,that in thc nan1c of `hich y u plcad,

your causc but als

y ur

PlCa),c nsider this;that vith thc sillnPlc Pr ccss of

the law(the silnPlc juridical Pr cedurc)n ne f us :oukl attaIn sal auon

Pray,in tl uth,for

rgi

Praycr, this praycr, this

cncss(mcrc))( cd

cry

Praycr(F

r mcrq D alltl ths

r)that tCac11cs us

l,J J `

tlr sc7,,,c`r

mcrcihl (to%r vC)t )c eryonc,E crytl)ing

we

is thc

to do

I htlx c just saltl is to miti

gatc thc justicc f your causc;if you PcrsiSt, if you continuc to pursuc t11is
causc,thc strict tribunal of Vcnicc vill neccssardy havc to o1 (lCr thc arrcst oF

thc mcrchant prcscnt hcrc

Chapter 30

Ah

Marl<NOrnes

FOR AN ABUSI E SUBTITLING

Translators arc likc bus

n1atchn akcrs vvho Praisc a hall ve ed

as bcing` cry lo cly thcy arouse an irrcpressiblc(lcsirc for t11c

beauty
riginal

Goctllc,lr ms nd R cr ns(trans S H a t)

W J
lr

an thC

A{

il|

f {

kR a

thcatcr xx aIltl

thc movie s laaurdcr by incomPctcnt

subtitle Thc dcath of a text through t anslati n is an agc_old tr Pc,but it takcs on

nc 1ncaning vith its transPositi n into cincma Thc cry Possibility f that dcath
thc mo ing imagc
imPlies a atc of animation,a statc tlaat is,aRcr all,cssential t
As in thc casc f htcraturc,that dcath is a discursivc conditi

n,but vid1nln.it also

constitutcs a PcrcCPtual category, SPcctat rs oRcn6nd cinema s Po vCrful scnse of

mimcsis mudtlled by mbtitlt,s,cvcn by skllhl ones Thc oH nd, K n,ol)je
~its sights and its sOunds

is a ailablc to a ,but itis cas y obscurcd by hc graPhic

tcxt throughvhich vve neccssa1ily aPProach it Thus,thc Pacity r

a /k
ardncss

subtitlcs eas y insPires ragc,

I began d inking about thc vagaries of thc subtitle xs hcn I translatcd m

hrst

1991)It was an cxPCricnce llcd with surPrises,Hc1 c was an cxtraordinarily d sc

form f textual analysis vhcre cvcry clcmcnt of crbal and visual languagc is1 cad
cn amc by h amc,I was hscint tcd by thc
f the imagc,rcpcatc(lly,hnc by linc,c

vay this Particular sckl f ln analysis naturally raiscd thcorctical Problems in thc
subtitlcs for()ga` a shi11sukc and Iizuka T

shi

s=1 Fo ic

CclP1Fd

(E

ci n n,,cl

coursc of v rking out Practical soluti ns tO sccn1ingly shnPlc Problcms,But n thing

1999/revised 2004

448

ABE MARK NORNES

is sin1Plc

:hen

it c mcs to subtitles;c

cry turn of Phrasc,c cry I)unctuation ltlark,

akcs holds imPhcations for thc ic vin cxPcricncc

of forcign sPcctat rs Hovvcver, dCsPite thC rich c n1Plcxity of thc subtitlcr s task
C C1 y

dccision the translat

r l

irtually ignored

and its singular rolc in rncdiating thc forcign in cincma,it has bccn

in Hhn studics,
n translation studics,in contrast,thcrc has bccn a l)1

ohfcration of

rk,but it has aln10st exclusivcly concc11tratcd n Practica1issucs f r translato1 s

r the Physi logy of thc Pccuhar brand f sPccd reading dcmandcd by subtitles,
Scbolars in cithcr disciI,hnC l

c yct to cxPl rc in dcPth thc cultural and idcol

ical issucs I vill attcnd t hcre l As f r cincma s global audiencc, it is likely that

no one has e cr c luc a vay

olu a forcign ihn adn1iring thc translati

n Ifthc sub-

titlcs attract con)mcnt,it is nly a dcsirc for rcciProca

i lcnce,a rcvcngc for the
tcxt in thc face ofits c rruPti n, F r,as ve shall scc, all subtitles arc c
It is particularly curious that considcring today

rruPt,

s celcbration f othcr culturcs,

this c rruPti n

has gonc unconsidercd,unchcckcd I susPcct thc cxPlanati n lics in

y,C cn hiddcn,P sition in tllc hh1 s journcy s om production
t cxhibiti n Fighting this c rruPtion ill rcquire Pushing the fact of translati n
out of thc darkncss XlVc Illust undcrstand thc lhnits of thc subtidc in ordcr to

CxPlorc nc v mcthods Thc

iolencc f thc subtitlc is una idablc,but thcrc is no
reason that it should neccssardv lead to(lcad1
r that that vi lcnce should n t bc
s1d)tiding s ancillt

valuablc,cven cnjoyable In the1990s c are witllcssing the cmc1 gencc of a nc

vhich is by naturc positively abusivc XVith all thc attcntion
f rm of subtithng
clirccted tovvard multiculturahsn)and divcrsit ,n /is thc tirnc to rcconsidcr thc
odc f translation thr u8h xshicb our cincn`atic cxPcricnccs with the f rcign arc

lucdiatcd,L

kil)g

closely at translati ns

betxxccn Enghsh and JaPancsc,and n10ving

bctween P ctical and thcOrctical P lcs,ths PaPer`vill dentiI s

mc f

tl,c

dilcn11nas subtitlcrs face as cll as their rcsponses to thcm ovcr thc past70ycars,

c movc to`Vards creativc solutions through stratcgic abusi cncss

Only thcn can
I havc claboratcd thc notion of an abusivc translation originally pr

PhiliP E Lcwisin The Mcasurc ofTranslation Effccts,

in Frcnch and translatcd int
an thcr critic

st1

Poscd l)y
an essay hc ohginally wrotc

Enghsh hiInsclf(sCC LCwis in this

anslation of Dcrrida

s essay

lumc) T analyzc

La lnyd1 l gie blanchcr Le vis dehn-

catcs thc diFfcrcnccs bct vcCn thc Frcnch and Enghs11 1anguages, ar uing that
vhcn it occurs, has t m
translation,
c vbatcvcr n1eanings it caPtures fron1the

original int a
amcxx ork that tcnds to in11

and a( Fferent construction of rcahty

oSC a different sct of discursive rclations

(p 259) ThC disshnilarity l

creatcs di fercnces that si1uPly cannot bc ovcrc

activity of translation, This is furthcr con)P

ct

vccn languagcs

me, inc itably c mPron1ising thc

undcd by thc tcndcncy for translation

ate on meaniI1g to thc exclusi n oftexturc and matcr~

iality As both
vritcr and translat r
f his essay, Le
is disc vers a frccdon1 to
of cssayistic texts to conCcnt

di crgc

fl on1the originaI text una adablc t thc tyPical translat r, It is fron1this

Sition that hc I)1

P

PoSCs a nC v apProach, d1at f the strong, forccful translation

that values cxPc11mcntati n,tampcrs vith usagc,sccks t match thc Polyvalcncies

or Pluriv citics or cxPrcSsivc strcsscs0f thC

riginal by Pr ducing its o

n

(P262)

This is t locatc thc strcngth of a translation in its abuscs Whcrc an original tcxt

ith signiHcation, thc translation

strains language d1rough tcxtual kn ts dcnse

0rlus analogous violcncc against thc targct languagc CorruPt subtitlcrs chsa
thc i lencc f thc subtitle
hnc abusi c translators rc cl in it
Pe

FOR AN ABUsIVE sUBTlTLING

449

Put rnorc concretcl ,thc abusivc subtitler uscs textual and graPhic abuse
is, cxPcrilncntation ls ith lan

quahties _to brit1

that

uagc a11d its grammatical, morph logical, and visual

the fact of translation from its P sition of obscurity,to critiquc

vhilc ultirnatcly lcading thc

the irnPerial Pohtics that 8r und corrupt practiccs
vie :er to the foreign riginal bcing rcProduced in thc darkncss of thc theatcr

This riginal is not an rigin thrcatcncd l) c nta 1ination,but a locus f thc indi~
idual and thc intcrnational vhich c an potcntially turn thc ln) into an exPer cncc
ol r ns`dr
n

A corrupt Practice
Facing thc violcnt rcduction(lcmandcd by thc aPParatus,subtitlers ha
an ethod of translation that consPircs to hi(lc its ork~al

asst1rnptions

olll

its o /n

ng ith

c dc eloPcd
its idc logical

rcadcr~sPcctator3 In this scnsc c111a think of thcn)

as corruPr Thcy acccPt a iSion of translati n that i lendy aPpr PriatCs thc source
tcXt,and in thc l)r ccSs of convcrti11g spccch into riting vithi11thc til c and sPacc
hn1its f the subtitlc thcv c nforrll thc riginal to thc rulcs,rcgulations,idioms,and

frame of rcfcrcncc of thc target languagc and its culturc, It is a Practice of translation that smoot11s Ovcr its textual violcncc and(lomcsticatcs all othcrness vhdc it
PrCtends t bring tbc audicnce t an cxPcriCncc of thc k)rci n

The Pecuhar chal-

lcngcs Poscd by subtithng and thc`iolencc thcv nccessitate arc a

uattcr of cOursc;

the are :ariations of thc dif cultics in an translati n and in this scnse arc analogous
t

thc Pr blClus confrontcd by t11et1 anslator of Poctry.It is thc subtidcr s rcsPonsc

vhich arc corruPt Subtitlcrs say they Pr m tC lCarning and

holkate cllloyal)lc mceungs with thcr cukurcs,b1 lnging d1c scnse behnd act rs
spccch acts to vic
crs through thcir skillful rcndcring at thc cdges f thc screen

th se challcngcs

In fact,thcy consPire to hi(lc their rcpcated acts of violcncc thr ugh codi cd rules

rruPt~~fCigning comPlCtC_
iolcnt xx orld.Onc ofthc fcw atten Pts at thC izing thc subtitlc
tt,uchcs on tlacsc issueb,although it is tlltil11atcly unsclosIing,Thnh T Minh ha
and a traditi n f suPPrcSsi n It is this Practicc that is c

ncss in their

xx l

rltcs,
`

The durati n of thc subtitlcs, for cxamplc, is vcry ideological I think

that if,in m st translatcd611ns,the subtitles usually stay on as lon8as
thcv tcchnicall

can~ Rcn much longcr than thc tirnc nccdcd c cn

f r

a slo rcadcr~it

s bccausc translation is conccivcd hcrc as Part f thC

Pcrati n ofsuturc that de nes thc classical cincmatic aPParatus and thc
tcchnol gical c110rt it dcploys to
1aturahze a dominant, 1 icI archicall
uni ed vorldvie

Thc succcss of the mainstrcanl Hh11 rchcs PrcciSCly

vcll it can hi(lc Iits articulatcd artinccs] in

on ho

show Thcrcf re, thc attcmPt is al vays

t Pr tcct

vhat

it
iShCs to

the unity of thc

subject;hcre t collapsc,in subtithng,thc acti itics of rcading,hcaring,

and sccing into onc singlc activity, as if thc

/hat

cre all the same

hat y u hear is1nore oftcn than n t,

you rcad is vhat y u hear, and

hat 0u scc
(T1^inh1992: 102

450

ABE MARK NORNEs

Wc can acccpt Trinh s gloss to thC CXtcnt that ve rcc gnizc ho v,in this modc oF
ublcsOmc texts arc tted

translation, all f rms f(liffcrencc arc suPPrCSscd and tr

into thc most c nscrvativc of framc

v rks

Take thc cxamPlc f sCxud difFercncc,In JaPancsC gender is clcarly markcd

hnguistically,and subtitles dramatize(liffcrcncc through stcreotypcs

fthc
ay n1cn

oromcn sJ,ot Fd sPcak In subtitles this is acc

mPhshcd priluar y thr ugh sentcncc_

gnal Particlcs For cxamPlc,thc malc cnding zo has a hard,asserti c sound,

hiIc

ftmale sPecch iS soRcncd by Particles likc d and no As vith any corruPtion,habits

arc hard t brcak and beha i r is rulcd by con cntion At the l)cginning of the
JaPanCSC Subtitled crsi n fR boc P, ri11stancc,thc kmdc a11(ln alc cops mcct
cach tl crjust aRcrthc kmdc omccr bcats a row(l 'criminal into submissi n Aftcr
c

this disp1ay ofn

-n nsensc

brutahty thc ncxx

Partners arc intr duccd to each ther,

thcy gct into a squad car,and drivc a fay,

he action is innocuous enough,but thc
dialogue in olvcs an intcnsc play for P
Fcn2d CY

d c(217

knI,ml,1

In JaPan tl is was subtitlc(lin t11eR)llo in

e in a w

lDtart r

manncr

FdsJai cI1Inrcn sur1I d / I 1ll drivc

f,,i ni
=d nad dserclrcn / I can t lca c it to
ou

FcJmcI`c:
Il ti`

that s cntirCly linguistic:

I bctter dri c until you know y ur way arc)un(l

Iu d|

cc

vcr

Not Only is this c

n ersation

rcduccd to its barcst,litcral n1caning, but thc po :er

dynan ic is changcd flo 1a strugglc o er kno

lcdgc to a si1nPle d n1inati n

on an s soR sentcncc-Hnal l)articlc;vtz contraSts :ith the IuaIc of

ccr

Thc

s curt crb

ending;thc diffcrcnce strongly suggests11c occuPieS a suPcl

i rP siti n(a Positi n

cemcntcd by dcPloyn ent ofthc sec nd-Pcrs n Pr noun iz12i, xxhiCh onc uscs only

vith

sub rdinatcs), The w l an s subtitlc v uld ha c bcen much strongcr vith a

(liffcrent Particle,such as o This particlc is assOciated vith Patriarchal powcr and
is tyPica y uscd by l liddlc a cd v mcn
hcn

thcy vant tO sPcak f rccfully Indecd,

i'tz in any contcxt

P actually using
Vith ut thcir accoluPanying in1agc,thc lines rcad likc a gan8stcr talking to his lll ll

it is dif cult to in aginc this aggressi c fclualc c

Thc tra11slator took grcat lil,ertics, n atching thc substancc of thc targct languagc

ith the imagc but evacuating thc Po

cr Play2
VVe may be ablc to undcrstand thc basic, undcrlying logic of corruPtion by
turning to its mOst cx emc manikstclti n dubhn: Thc j urndF,c cF
iJhF
f

l: !

f J
& Tl;;
l

:( : 1I1

vhich ProducCS a11c tCXt frcc fthc c nstraints n thc translat rl)ccause thcrc
is no dcbt to an original,This allo s the translator t brin t11c rcadcr(rcad ctDnsL Jmcr)
a rcadily digcstil)le Packagc that eas

by the riginal nlrn

y suPPlants any idcological baggage carricd

/h c subtitlcs arc dcscribed as PuriSt and chtist, the author

argucs thc dubbcd sOundtrack is hbcrating;rnass audicnces

becausc thc(lubber c|an rcsist thc idc

v l n t

rcsist the forcign

gical underPinnings that link6llll t

gcoPohtical strugglcs strange,thcn,that this is thc cssay s conclusi n
61n

FOR AN ABUsI

E sUBT1TLING

451

Dul,blng I lm stly succcc(ls in d%cing the hct of the lm text s

forei8n rigin;or,rathcr,it ivcs its nc v audicncc thc chancc to(lisavo

cntrilo~

vhat they really kn0 v,hcncc Pcning an a cnuc for cultural

quisrn thr ugh voicc l)oStSynchr nization

In doing so,thc dubbcd

aPPears as a radically ne`v Pr duct rathcr than a transformcd old

nglc tcxt rathcr than a d
Tai vancse

hn

nc,a

ublc Onc,Likc a JaPanCSC gamc comPutcr,a

shirt,or a German car,Pr ducts that ha e l)ccn c nstructcd

t c nsumcr dcsires in an intcrnational markctplacc through thc

rcduction f thcir cultural sPcciHcitiCs, thc t ~bc~dubbcd lFn riginal
initlally hl s an imPoltant critc on with which m st othcr inter
t

national con modities also comPly

t()bc a bre n

lm in rdtl

it forcgrounds its function, ccasing

to bcc

mc just a slm ,l In thC inter

national markctPlacc thc Hhn riginal thus f`Jnctions as a transnational

decultured Pr duct;it bccomcs thc ra

matcrial thatis to bc rcinscril)cd

rcnt cultural c ntcxts of thc c nsumcr nations thr ugh the

use of dubbin8
into thc(hf

(Ascheid1997:40)
Just a lm indccd Asidc h m an insum cnt thcoo'auon f tl anshtion itself,this

SusPicious cssay rcduccs thc forcign t nguc to nothin m rc than a cultural dis~
where dul)bing is Pcrcci Cd as a stratcgy of cmPowcrmcnt This is a
Hne cxamPle of a 'alorizati n of Postln dcrn Play bcing cooPted by caPital The
ad antagc

exchangc facilitatcd by the

moncy for Plcasure This is thc l

l)e-dubbcd hu is silnPly of thc caPitahst aricty:

gic of corruPti n in its dubbcd crsion,thc Onc

PracticCd by distril)ut rs f rvh rll translation scr cs littlc1n rc than surPlus valuc

Today s subtitles ParticiPatC in it to an unfortunate degree; any translat

r
vh

vishcs t think othcrisc is bhnd,

Thcse f rms of corruPti n c ukl bc critiqued fr m thc idc l gy of Hdchty,

vhicl,in kcs thc auth rity of thC riginal and P rtrays it as an cndangcrcd purity
or origin This
vould rc cal ho subtitlers arc reluctant to discuss the issuc ()f
Hdchty,as it` ould eXPose their violence and makc then1aPPCar incomPCtCnt
Vc
c ukl als

cxtcnd the domain f this Purity undcr siegc to thc tcrrain of thc scrccn

itsclf,hkc thc JaPancsc cincmato8raPher :h dccries ugly,suPc1 imPoscd Subtidcs

for dcsP iling thc in age and seParating sPectators fron thc bcauty of the riginal
(F lllami197

81-84) hdeed,any mct sure of dclity is a and d dle aPP at

Ho
c ver,cvcn though thc tcrm c rruPt threatcns to posc

itsclf
nl n t pCrn it
tl

e riginal as tcrrit ry unsPoilcd by subjectivitv,therc arc thcorctical rcas ns that

thc abusive translator stecrs clcar fsuch easy binaries to takc a quitc(liffercnt tack

Thc Hrst stcP is to simPly CxP sc thc act f translatlon,relcase it9Om its sPacc f
SuPPrcSSi n, and undcrstand :hat subtithng actually is and ho it camc to its
corruPt conditi

The aPParatus of transIation

The Practicc of subtithng has bccn c cn m rc obscurcd than the translation f

rittcn, Printcd tcxts Indccd, m st Pc Ple Probably ha c ncvcr thought of

452

ABE MARK NORNEs

subtithng s

rr ns`dri n,

ab ut f rci8n

Thcrc is no question that Enghsh-languagc

l1n criticism

cinCma has takcn the mcdiation f subtitles cntirely for granted

Outsidc Of dle Titing ahlled at Pr ksSi nal translat rs and tbc acaden1ic audicnccs

ft1 anslati n studies, irtually n thing has bccn vrittcn ab ut thcn) Indccd, thc
anslators thcmsclvcs,al n8 vith thci1 tcchnicians, hn Iuakcrs, ritcrs,cc nsors,
and the Producers that11irc thcn1all,go to great lengths to suPPrcss any ackn0

edgn1cnt f thcir c nspiracy It has bccn n tcd morc than oncc that thc unlucky
t1

translator is an author but not The Auth

r, that hcr translation is a 'ork but n

Thc Vork But cvcn this dynan1ic is abscnt froln b

th P Pular and sch larly

disc urscs on the cinema,This abscncc sPCaks doubly ofthc d
lui11al)ce ofthc imagc

and the uttcr suPPrcssion of the subtidcr s ccntral role in cnabhng a61In s border
crossln8
'

o transPort thC subutlc n its spacc of obscu1 ity and uncovcr thc ro t f

its

corruPtion, v C must considcr hat is spccisc to it as a Particular modc of trans~

lati n

This includcs its 111aterial conditi

cincn1a a lllassi e aPParatus11eccssitatcs a

Hh11 s

ns and its historical c ntingcncy, In d1c

iolent translation fthe sourcc tcxt T11c

uttcrances arc scglucntcd by tiIuc;natural brcaks i11sPccch al~c nlarked for t11c

ten1poral bordcrs of thc subtitlc Thc translat r dctcrn1incs thc lcn8th f cach unit
oft1

n to thc framc,that is,cl

vn t a24th of a sccond As thc transla~
anslation do

ti n

Procccds,the translator strives to rnatCh thc tirning ofthc subtitlc

and ln,oti n ofthc s

vith thc sound

urcc tcxt A humor us linC,for examPlc,rnust bc arranged to

meetits audi - isual Punctuation Once accon1Phshed,thC translation mves through

tlae hands f coundcss tcd111iciansi sOmc of
hom think n thing of adlusting a
subtitlc here r thcrc f r thcir `n caPricious,technical reasons As ve vdl sCC,this
can lcad t thc kind f elubarrassing rnistakes that1nakc translat

rs cringc

Fina y,thc translation is graRcd onto thc riginal text in ne

thc casc f nlrn) ThC Subtitlcs arc Ph

ofthrcc
ays(in

oPtica y and sand vichcd t gcthcr

l1,ith the sound and imagc as a third6hn strip,litcrally a thi
d track or thcy arc
cut into thc cmulsi

to raPhcd

n itsclI

inciscd, scratchcd
C)r, morc rcccntly, thcy comc to l>Cl)urned int
coI

nt

the ery tissuc

f thC

imagc,

thc tissue(,f the celluloid vith a

Putcr_drivcn lascr

Bcyond thc dif cultics P scd by this con1Phcatcd pr ccss, the translat r

n thC Path of corruption The

cons onts an array of challcngcs that sccrll to lcad dO

sPace amd tilllc available for translati

n are dccidcd by thc aPParatus itsclf;this n1ay

bc analogous to the challcngc Poscd by l)octry,but is actuaHy a(liffcrcnt Problcn1

h1Hln1the machh1c runs at a constant sPccd and1uindlcssly unsP ols its translation
at aI1unchanging1 atc Thc translat r111ust condense his translation in the Physical
sPacc fthc frame and the ten Porallength ofthe utteranCe The readcr cannot stoP
and d vcll n an intcresting linc;as thc reader scans the text,thc1nachinc instandy

oblitcratcs it Thcrc arc Protocols for this condcnsati n,but thcy diffcr dcPcndh g
on thc translator and thc aPParatus Thc nu nber of sPaccs available f r text dePcnds

on d)c%rm fthc hlm(16111m,35mm

,the le11s(1

scriPt f thc language, and thc subtithng meth

33, 85,CincmaScoPe),t11e

d itsclf 1 11c translat

n1incs ho v many lcttcrs Or Characters arc legiblc in thc scc

r thcn(lctcr~

nd r t or thrcc

ava able t cach tide k is oRcn s"d that actors talk twicc as%st as sPCCtators can

rcad,but this is hardly a useful starting Point for the vork of translati n, Donald
Ric11ic,for cxamPlc,allo

vs f

r about onc .ord Pcr f t,or a t Vo_hnc titlc Pcr12

FOR AN ABUSIVE sUBTITLING

453

et(Richie1991:16) Japanesc subtidcrs are fond of citlng thc rulc,

F ur char
3T da Natsuko exPlainS h vv this rulc vas arrivcd at: thc rst
subtitlers had t dcterminc how hst thc typical JaPanCSC could rCad,s
thcy showc(l

ft

acters Per sCc nd

a Hlm to a Shhbashl

ishd(!)and

camc up witl

thrcc to bur charactcrs Pcr sCc nd

with a13charactcr hnc40vcr thc years thc JaPanCSC Subtitlcrs rcduCcd dle hnc
to tcn to prcvcnt sloPPy Pr

jccti nists lr n1cutting

ff thc charactcrs at thc cdgcs,

but s
n thc f ur~charactcrs-Pcr-sCc nd rulc vas clad in ir n

(By vay of contrast,

subtitlcs in othcr languagcs can bc t vo to thrcc tirncs as l ng, (lcpcnding on the

hrmat,aPelturc,and a numbcr

f thcr

hctors,)A ually,this

hist

ryis hr m rc

nuanccd than thcir rcPrCsCntation ofit In any casc,against this l1 atrix of thnc and
sPacC, thC translat r sublnits thc riginal text t a iolent reducti n that m st
rcadcrs c nsider incPt~ifthcy dod8c thc translator s feints and Pausc t think ab ut
it at all

The JaPanesC languagc sccms ady mtaclc r subutling r nc thng,JaPancsc

does n tvastc Precious sPace n gaps bct vccn vords and can cvcn brcak a linc in
m ~w rd K IlJi(Chinese characte
thc ma mum amount of mea ng

)cxPK

in a n1iniInum of syllablcs; ncol gislns and abbrc iati ns arc cas y acc mPhShCd
thr ugh thc crcatiVc con11)ination of k
n`i EvCn bcttcr,JaPancSC oRCn lca cs ut
tl c subject,dlrcd
cct,
r
othcr
Par
of CCch,m1 lng much ncc(lcd sPacc.

Bccausc this f rccs spcakers t

its rcaders t

bc avvare of contcxt, thC langua c itsclf prcparcs

scck out vhat subtitlcs lca c unsaid Finally, in additi n

t itahcs,

Japancsc has thc cn iablc ability t bc inscribcd b th h riz ntally and vcrtically,a
rcsource vhose abusi c Potcntialis Pr cati C Finding thc sourcc languagc a richcr
hnguistic vorld than onc s vvn targct lan:uagC iS Probably a uni crsal_-and frus~
trating exPeriCncc f r translators,but vvc1nust not lct this imprcssion lcad t

vard
an csscntiahst relauonshiP t translati n and its t ols, A far morc po vcrful

:round f r develoPing a translation attuned to its tiluc is a thorough historicization,

eSPecially one that takcs into account lnultiPle nati nal c ntcxts To a i(l this is

irt
vith the dangcrs dcm nstratcd by the nationahst chauvinism of post

var

JaPanCSC subtitlcrs.
Thc subtltle has nc cr bccn cntircly ign red in JaPan Sincc at lcast the 1930s,

cnJ%cc sccl1 0sd%rclp lms ha c bcm Ptlbhsht d on a m basis.Holyk C Cr,

e bulk of thcsc cntain comPlctc translations f the hns, and this sPcaks1n rc

tl

br the JaPanCSC Hlm world s aPPrc0ation fthc a

f sccnario wrking than of
subtithng Pcr sc At the samc tilmc,thcrC arc currcntly sch

ols dc otcd to training

translators,and thc namc ofthc subtitlcr is al vays includcd as a crcditin thc JaPancsc

PrintS f bre n slms(at lCast in much of thc P stwar cra),In hct,a number f
these translators havc achie ed rcPutations am n

gCncral audicnccs. somc subc hns!Thc m st%m us shimizu Shu i,Okacda Sh i,Kamishma
Kin i,and Toda Natsuko~havc PubhshCd autobi graPhics,ho v~to books,and tcxt_

titlerq cvcn ha

tcaCh Enghsh con crsation ;

hilc many of history S rnOSt fam us essays on translati n ha c cmcrgcd in the

coursc of Practice,thcsc authors

vritings on thc art of subtithng arc decply disapPointing. Thcir conccPtion f translati n is regrettably Si1nPhstic F r cxamPle,
thc Russian cinclaladc adaPtation and subsequent Japancsc transladon
frrdmFer
books that usc subtitlcs t

natuI ally

raisc the issuc f thc auth rity of thc original text; obh

i us

t this kind

f issuc,T da Natsuko~l)y hrthe m st PoPular subtitlcr in Japan uscs thc lm

454

ABE MARK NORNEs

only to suggcst
hat a Pity it vould havc bccn if dubbing had crased thc rnain actor

beautiful, vclvety voicc (Toda 1994 10) Similarly, her n1cnt r shi1nizu Shunji
dcschbcs his subtitles hr Olivicr

s OFJlcrJ

N ting that the grcat actor s PCr rrn

anccvas lnorc thcatrical than cincmatic,hc lnadc rnuch

f hs8 ing to thc unusual

lcngth of listcning to a taPc rcc rding of the sOundtrack

hile translating(shin

6162),N

izu

,ide their most

translators,shakcsPcarc s ords Pr
`v
daunting task, a tcst case for dac m st basic,PreSSing thcorctical issucs in transla-

199

rm st

tion This d cs not occur to shin izu or Toda In b th cascs,thc actor and his voicc
rePlacC ShakcsPcarc as thc sources to vhich thc translator
cs a dcbt,
Thesc auth rs undc1 standing of lm hist ry is just as imP
crished;thcy have
donc littlc or no rcscarch int

thc Past or Prcscnt c nditions of their cld,but thcy

nc cr hesitatc to cxplain or analyzc it In his

shinji l)ascs his acsthctics of cinen1a on a na

narration

s phy of Subtithng/ ()kacda

vc cquation of s cnt and sOund 61n

1e unProblCmatically comParCs thC narrativc function of sdent era

intcrtitlcs t

thc lcss

Phil

that of sound subtitles in thc1980st support his acsthctics of cinema

ords a hn has thc bettcr6Hc docs n t bcgin to consider thc ast nt _

logical and scn1iotic(liffcrcnces bet veen silent and sound cincI a For exan

Ple,hC

docs not c cn rncntion the crucial r le of thc bcnshi,thc fam us scrccn-si(lc nar1^ator

of JaPancsc lt,nt mm wh
ered b th

nt rl

ati

=e commcnttlry ancl mimickc(l

thc oiccs fthc charactcrs This is a tyPical cxamPle fh

si1nPhstic is thc conccp

tion of cincma vith vl)ich c rruPt subtitlcrs Pcrate

Furtherm re,thcir undcrstanding of thc rclati ns11iP f Subtitlcrs t thc v rld

hl1n industry and its PohticS is particularly inadcquatc Toda rcduccs

Alncrica
standard Practicc of dubbing to thc fact thatitis a nation of hn
that fcels uncannil sirnilar t statcmcnts ovcr vhich

1i

rants,a commcnt

a numbcr

fn inistcrs ha e

rcsigncd in rcccnt ycars Ccrtainly an adcquate exPlanati nvould havc t

clcal vith

ac mPlcx erdctcrn ination of f rccs:the cmcrgcncc of Enghsh as a lin ua ianca

f intcrnational busincss and PohticS;thc vorld d n1ination of Holly v d,its l ca_
tion vid1in uS b rdcrs,and its ncar total don1ination of thc h

me markct;and an

cducation systcm that Placcs n0

a1uc on f rcign languagc study Furthcrmorc, vhilc
mass narkct Hhns luay bc dubbcd, it is incorrect tO say this is standard Practice

Thc adual markt,t hr rcign hlms has histotlml|demanded sul)udcs,a11(lths h

also bcc mc truc of rnainstrcam relcases for foreign Hlrns as of thc 1980s
Toda s brand of radical reducti n is comPlemented by tcdious gloating o

cr thc

JaPanese languagc, thc scnsiti ity of JaPanese SPectat rs, and thc sPCcial sk ls
rcquired f thc translat r flrns Toda
Japancse PcoPlc s SPCcial tcndency to
tant tO scc thc Original crcated a uniquc subddc nadon,unii ndJii,
ku o ul;hCrc,
1

ve

arc haPPy that c cry JaPancSc can read,an cxtremely sPccial c nditi n any vhcrc
in the w dd (T da1994 11),Okaeda apancsc PCoPlC s intcndon IshikJl t wc rds

thc riginal is str ng[and nc f thc rcasons] subtIdcs arc the mainstrcam I

]
Consiclcring t11is,subtitlcs arc immo , Vc could say,
f thc
JaPan;Nation
(Okacda 1989
subtitlc Culturc
6), Subtithng is not in a rcPrcsSCd condition in
JaPan;rather,it is o cr alucd through thc idcahzati n of JaPaneSC languagc and its
vn

Practicc of translati n ofthc f

rcign Con11n n sensc lnight dictatc that dubbing

wuld bc d1c tlanslation method fch icc br kr cnt nauonalists(scc,br cxamPlc,

thc w rkf Marjnc Danan 1991); howC cr, thc JaPancsc case suggests how
subtithng1 ay also nd itself subjcct t Cultural and national chau inisln In JaPan,

FOR AN ABUSIVE sUBTITLING

b th thc usual lncd1

ds f rcPrCSSing thc subtitler and

455

JaPan S unusual fetishization

Thc deHcct r disa

v thc
hich the act f translati n
crasurc of(liffcrcncc and thc inequahty of languagcs
of thc subtitlc achicvc an idcntical effcct in thc cnd

al

ays

tl

reatcns to exPosc

A submerged history
Thcrc is a PrCSSing nccd to updatc()ur aPProach to
t

lIn translati n and PerhaPs c en

undcrtakc nc v translations of ld ln texts To Pr vidc sOme contcxt for this

projcct~and to lther Push subtitling iom its obscurc(lP

siti

n~we must

uncoVcr its history Likc thc vorkin8s f thc aPparatus,this hist ry has bcen ign rcd
(or, in thc casc f JaPanCSC authors,rcduccd t anccdotc and gossip) This Sh uld

hcn vc n tc that subtitlcs vcrc invcntcd shortly aRcr thc c n1ing

fs und_the m mcnt whcn tcxt was globally suPprcssc(l om d1c cincma

not bc surPriSing

N1uch has bccn n adc of Holly vood s inno ati c attemPts t o Crcomc thc
bstaclcs sound P sed to busincss in non-Enghsh spcaking countrics. Ho
cvCr,
currcnt historics conccntratc exclusi cly on thc carly soluti ns:teaching stars nc v

languagcs and makng idcntical forcign languagc vcrsions vith different actors on
the samc sct( r CxamPle,vinccndeau1988,Andrcw1980,Danan1999,Gomcry
1980) surprisingly cnough,thc invcntion of subtitlcs~thc grcatcst inno

ultilnatc solution to the ProbIcn

ation and

~is a gaP in ur hist ry Thcrc vcrc intcrcsting

PrCcurs rs to t11c subtitlc as translators attcmPtcd a nulubcr of strate8ies t

trans_

P thC unwicldy aPparatus acrOss thc languagc barricr In JaPan and othcr parts

of thc v rld on thc cusP f thc s und cra, a tyPical v rk~around involvcd silcnt~

lrn~stylC intcrtitlcs cxPlaining cach scctiOn of thc Pl t Rudolf Arnhei1n, that

bstinatc critic of thc talking hhn,chscusscd his frustration vith these early attcnnPts
at translati n in a 1929cssay Cntitlcd, Sound Fihn C nfusi n

But
vc are alrcady caught in the n1idst f a babcl f tongues Erich
Pomn1cr wantsto mix languagcs when hc makcs his ncxt uFA luni
FilmaktiengcscllschaRl Hlm,This will als

rcc

not only l)y

ay of artistic lncasurcs,but als

tl

crsal

lllm to judge his act rs

se ofthc Bcrht7sch
l

j Th SC with no hnguisdc gcniuscs among thcir actors must citlacr

scll talking hns as silcnt abr ad,in vhich casc thc c al guc scencs arc
sh rtcncd
ah

and rcPlaccd ith laborious intcr-titles (a pr ccSs VhiCh is

cady bc8inning to raisc gcncral protcst),or they1nust shoot thc same

nhn txlicc,as a talkic and as a s cnt, Both pr ccsscs arc only possiblc

hcn the hn is a Piccc f industrial vastc f r thc1nasscs and not art,

For a v rk of art is n t a shirt vith rcmo ablc slcc cs,

(Ar11heim199 33-3+l
Arnhci1nh Pcd that Such frustration
ould rcPcl sPCctators3 oll thc talkic and turn
thcm back t thc silent nlm H wcvcr,translators wcrc scarching hr ncw mct1 ods
Luckily, thc Pcoplc that subtitled thc nrst

lrns (and in s

and c nvelltions of subtitlll19ha c c mmitted tl

(l

ing vrote thc rulcs

or mem Hcs to Print Herman

XVcinberg vas thc nrst translator in the vorld to usc subtitlcs;hc is pr bably thcir

456

ABE MARK NORNEs

invcntor In thc course f his carccr, hc Clairned to havc titled ovcr400nhns in

Sicilian,JaPaneSe,swcdish,Hindusta11i,slDanish,Brazilian,Grcck,Finnish,Czech,
Hungarian, and Yug sla ian(sic!) , , , ob iously, a bchever in kn
ving thc targct
language bcttcr than thc sourcc languagc, (surPrisingly cnough, this is n t so

unusual In his 1989Pro lc, (Dkacda shi11ii clai1ns cr 1,000titlcs to his crcdit,
including Cirj7cn Kdn , srtir IIois, and Hh 1s in Frcnch, Gcrman, Itahan, Russian

and sPanish(C)kaCda1989 229) NeedlCss t say,one must vondcr about quahty

in the facc f such cnthusiastic boasting ovcr quantity)HcrC wCinbcrg exPlains,in
his0 vn vay, thc cxPcrirncntation that led t

thc c (liication f thc PracticC

someonc ith noth")g bcttcr to do onc day disco ercd thc PrinciPlC
thc Ph

~clCCtric ccll vhich madc it P ssil)lc to transrnit s undv a es

into hghtvavcs and icc- crsa, and which n 1nadc it PosSiblC f r

mo ics to talk. But vhcn thc Hl1ns I xl`as vorkin8 vith talked itvas in
vc dO nollP Full scrccn titles vas the
French and Gcrn1an
Vhat d

rst

ans vcr,stopPing

thc acti n and giving thc audicnce a brief synoPsis

ofvhat thcy vverc going t sce in the next tcn n inutcs Tcn n1inutcs
latcr,an thcr RIll~scrccn synopsis This vas not only s ly but ann ying
as th sc in the audicncc

ho

c uld1u1derstand

at thc j kcs in bet :ecn thc full sc1

the languagc could laugh

ccn tidcs vhnc th sc h

(and thcy c nStitutcd thc m ority,by far)sat there glun

c uldn t

(l ubly irri~

tated l,y thc laughtcr f thc linguists in thc l) usc Obviously S mcthing
had t l)c donc t Placatc thc cust n crs bcf rc thcy startcd as ng f r
thcir111 nc back 111cn s meonc discovcrCd thc cxistcnce of a mcchan~

m callcd a m ola [,.j It had a countt r whiCh cnablcd you to

mcasurc c cry Piecc of dial guc bccausc it,too,`Vas no v equiPpCd vith
that rnagical Phot ~clcctric cc s that you c uld t10 v rneasurc11ot only
thc lcngth of cvcry sccnc l)ut that c)f c cry linc of dial guc Al d

from

thesc mcasurements wc werc ablc,l)y tlac trial an(l crror mcthod l

to dctcrn1inc what wc wcrc doing and why

hcw!And whcn I say

VC

In1Can J,,c,as no onC knc v anV morC than an onC Clse did about

it and I scclned t bc thc only onc vilhng to go aheadith the actual

vas cry
cautious and suPcri1nP sed hardly norc than25 r30titlcs to a tcn_
vvriting and makc sOn cthing out f it. At thc bcginning, I

minutc rcd,[ l

Thcn I d8o

into thC thcatre during a showing to

vatCh the audicnces faccs, to scc ho V thcy rcactcd to thc titles I d

v ndered if thcy
vcrc going to dr P their 11Cads shghdy to rcad thc
titles at the l)

rcad thc tid

left t

ttom f thc screcn and then raisc thcm again a tcr thcy

watching a tc n s

match an(lm ng your hcad om

right and l)ack again)but I nccdn t ha c vorricd on this sc rc;

thcy didn t dr P thcir hcads,they lncrcly dropPcd thei1 cyes,Il`oticcd

This en,b ldcncd mc t inscrt mol c titlcs, 'hc11warrantcd,of c urse,

and l)it by bit rnorc and1n re ofthe original dialoguc got translated until

at thc cnd of my work in this neld I was Putdng in anywhcrc iom100

to 150titlcs a rccl [

as

l th , I must rcPcat, only

hcn thc chaloguc

arrant it,
good cn ugh to

(XJVCinbcrg1985:107-108)

FOR AN ABUsIVE SUBTITLING

This nc tcChnol gy ftranslation is vhat enablcd I1 lly vo dt

457
a

id any inter-

lm mtnrkct h JaPan,ncw tCchnology

vho
adding canncd sound to image caused dcbatcs n lnany fronts, olll the3cns

ruption in i dominancc of tlle internadond

sa

`thcir livchho

scenarios t

ds threatcncd t

thoughtful critics thcOrizing a nc v Practicc for

lcRist critics vith industrial critiqucs A/1ost rclcvant to thc discussion

at hand, A/larxist critic I vasaki Akira argued thc talkic vas

anti intcrnationahstic

ki) r tl ew

un(lCmPh izCd

0nal chal ter of nlms,Pc.rtku

1930 74-75), Although n t his luain point,
this uncxPcctcd a varcncss of the s urce culturc through thc inscrtion of thc
sOurcc languagc/sound is PrcciSCly the quahty that subtitlcrs camc tO suPPrCsS
:ery carly period Tokyo s Tcigcki and Horakuza
Thcrc
crc altcrnativcs in thc
l flj

s i

tllc n

larly in the narrati c dran a(Iwasaki

thcatcrs cxPcHmcntcd with titlcs ProjCctcd to thc sidc

f tllc scrccn an(la numl)cr

of Hollywo d61ms uscd JaPancSC Amcricans ftDr dubbin8sOundtracks M re oRcn

than not,thc bcnsJ,i ul(l call translations o er the soundtrack, vhichvas turncd
d
vn t facilitatc thc narrator s comPctiti n
vith thc nc v sOund tCchnol gy7
Theaters ad Ptcd diffCring concePti ns of translati n Thc famous bensJli Matsui
suisei rcPrCsCntcd onc aPProach, vhich restrictcd thc translauon t bare_b nes Plot

su 1Inarics

throughout the l1n;ho vevcr,in othcr Asakusa thcatcrs,bcnshj attcnded

to cach indivi(lually spokcn linc Once c eryeck,Matsui s Shibazonokan Thcater

hcld no cxPlanati n talkie dayS (rJkii muscrsun, i dJ) for th SC who (lishkcd thc
bcnsfai

s intcrfcrcncc with the Plcasurable s unds f the riginal(Tachibana 1930:

118 119)
Ho fcvcr,thc n1cth d that bccamc standard oPcrating Proccdurc

as

thc suPCr~

imP sed(stll9)tidC in pa nthescs because they wcrc n t always at the b

thc f1

amc Vithin

tt

m of

a yCar r two ofthc tdkie s Pubhc aPPearancc,thc m or studi

lms This includcd shiFnizu

thc Hrst:ansladon with nlm subtldcs
in JaPancsc Thc nlm was on stemberg s @rocco,an(l tlais is Tamum s dcs ti n
brought translators to Ncw York tO subtldc thc latcst

Shunji and Tamura Yubhik ,wh

c nductcd

of thc Pr ccss
First of all,thc hrst Pr

blCl1

vc CnC0untcrcdas vhcther to usc crtical

or horiz ntal lincs, For this, I Pcrformcd various cxpcrilncnts In thc

case of ertical lincs,thrcc-and~a~half fcct of Hln
cre required t rcad

onc Iinc wkh12charactcrs,Howc 'cr,WC und that if wc PrintCcl thc

samc hnc h rizOntally it vould bc imP ssible to rcad ithout ve r
morc fcct Bcsidcs thc dccisi n to Print vcrtically,
c had to decide
to Put thc subtitlc On the right or lcft si(lc, It vas imPossiblC t

scttlc

n a Position.We d Put thcn10n the right to av id covering somcthing

on thc left and icc crsa So ve
vatchcd Prcvic s and in estigatcd thc
blCm
scene
by
sccnc
I
Ab
ut30ct rds Per rccl was the hmit

Pr

Vc lxcrc carehl to a id showing thc cml)arrassing sight of tidcs

om

onc sccnc running ovcr into thc ncxt.

(Tanaka1980:207)
ARcr reading thcse rst-Pcrs n accounts by the Pionccrs
it vould

Hlln translati n,

aPPcar that thc c nvcntions of subtitling ha c changed httlc sincc thcir

invcnti n This is tO say that thc rulcs and rcgulations that g vcrn thc producti

458

ABE MARK NORNES

of subddcs(exdusivc of thosc rchtcd t

thc aPParatus itselfl wcrc sct during the

age of thc Hollyvood studio systcm C)nc n1ight think d1is cxPlainS vvhy subtitlcs
lo k

and function t11c

ay they do HovcvCr, it must also be stresscd that vvhilc

thc subtithng aPParatus itsclf has changed littlc,thc PracticC of subtitlers has, and
the changcs thcn1sclvcs are closcly ticd to thc idc

gical contcxt at the momcnt

f translation.Likc visc,any theorization of subtitlcs lnust bc considered against its

hist rical rn n ent, vhich

points us t thC veakness f Trinh s analysis f subtithn8

Her understanding f a subtithng butt1 cssing a uni ed subjcct position and thc
i1nPhcit call for an oPP sitional a ant~gardc is anchored t decPly in1970s suturc
thc ry(see

C cd1998, :erman1983an(l Ro(l wick1988hr goc,

l

l histo1 l_

ographics of this thc ry) WhilC I sharc hcr conccrns ovcr thc idc logical din cnsion
of subtitling, I steer a vay fron
izati n

such esscntiah'cd argumcnts and to ard a the r_

groundcd in a stron hiStorical c ntcxtuahzati n,

Lct us focus n the examPlC f JaPancSC subtitling and its historical de

cl

P~

luCnt, A Closer c nsidcration of Taluura s dcscription suggcsts thcre arc cruCial

diffcrcnccs bct vccn PrC :ar and PrCsCnt subtithng convcntions Unfortunately,rn
st
of thc%l ci :n lmS(liStributcd in Jal)an l)Cft)rc Worlcl Wtar H wcre dcs

oyC(l in tl,c

Fihn Ccntcr rc in thc 1970s (According to shhnizu Shunji,Films Inc,in Tokyo

ho cls a35mm print of Tamura sJ or cco)OthCr Prewar phnts of rcign Rlms c
cxtrcmcly rarc,and should thcy cxist they

v uld

be equally(lif cult t

ie Thcrc

is,ho vevcr,a vay around this ProblCm

Whcn a mm wasimP

rtCd ht JaPan,thc H mc Ministry rcquircd thc mbmis

n(cens rshiP scenario):Kcn Vrsu cJd1l,on tyPically includcd a
c mPlete translation of c cry uttcrancc and a (lcscriPtion of ncarly cvcry sound
cffcd,Thcy d hdtlded an cnl h lisd of th Hln1 s sul,tldcs Ody3coues

crc n adc,thc ofHcial c Py that rccei cd the H mc Ministry scal,onc for studio
sion of a

c,,

ctsu ddjh

use,and onc hr prcscr tttion at the Mhis y(with thC Cstal)lishment f the Film
Law of1939,two m rc coPiCs were created ftlr thc Home Ministry s Inrmati n
Burcau and the NIinistry of Education) In any case,it should not bc surprising that

nly a handful

f thcsc Prcci us sccnarios arc cxtant

shimizu shu ji rcccndy acquircd thc

cn

ersu ddihon of Iror

PrCdictably suPcr cial, but ProvidcS a useful starting Point f

ct

His analysis is

r exPl ring the rcal

history of JaPancse subtitlcs shi1nizu counts 297 subtitlcs in Tan

ura s

crsion

Tamura s original translati n uscd only 234, but aRcr sccing a tcst Print hc fclt
thc cxtra 63 titlcs
vcrC ncccssary9 Thr ughout his b ks, shirnizu oftcn notcs
that l)chrc thc war subtitlers uscd s mcwhcrc bctwccn a half and a thir(l of thc
subtitlcs uscd tOday With thc k n cFst1 ddiJ, ,, f r l @rocco in hand, hc attcnnpts
to nd the ditrcncc First,hc Parscs thC sccnario accordin:to today s standards
and(lcc,ldes his own c unt would come t 492 Thcn he counts Kikuji Hir
post iar subbing of thc lm,which

uscs491,Findlly,he comparcs Kik

shi s

s and

TaInura s actual transla ons,c ncluding that outside of a kv/

l(l di,Ji,exccS

long subtitlcs, and Tamura s choicc not to translate Dictrich

s songs, thcrc is n

signi cant

vely

diffcrcncc

I Hnd this a rathcr starthng conclusi

n Putting the actual translation of vords

aside f rthe n10n ent,the differencc bct

vccn297and492strongly suggcsts ve arc

dcahng
ith
r ng
thc

t
o ery dissirnilar conccPtionS of translati n shirnizuas lDursuing
qucstions Rather than vondering about the Phrasing ofindividual titlcs,

FOR AN ABUSIVE sUBTITLING

hc sh uld ha e l)ccn askng, If Tamura chosc t subtitlc nl)11alI

459

f thc utterances,

tllcn what cxactl)w hc translatlllg' I%'r ds rhc o cd frrdns`urjo,,P

I havc hul1(l tlac cn crsu ddihon br Kh8Vid r sJlc Ch /l,`(1931),which
contains shlmizu Chiyota s subutlcs10Consistcnt with Slllmizu shu"i S writing,

roughly half o the Hln s uttcranccs

^cnt1Intranslatcd Only328ofthc nhn,s869

hncs rcccived tidcs "Upon cl scr cxan1ination,thc nrst t11ing o11c noticcs is that

thc translatl n Pal^cs doxl'n the Hlm Prin1a1 ily to narrativc m

cn1cnt T11is mcans

vhicb the translator dccn cd insigni cant are

irtually (or evCn

rittcn
out
of
thc
Hl1n
bccausc
thcir
lincs
go
unsubtitlcd
F
r cxaluPlc,
PlCtcly)

ccrtain charactcrs
con

not only arc thc hncs f JackiC Co ga 1 half sistcr lnosdy untranslatcd, shilnizu
ignorcd all rcfcrcnccs to hcr, Thc hn nc cr srn 1y cstablishes dacir rclati nshiP,
so f r
ic ,crs of thc subtitlcd
crsion shc is sin1Ply a cutc little girl` ho sh ws uP
cvcry oncc in a xs hilc,sayS SOmcthing incon

PrChensil)lc,and then disaPPcars, Hcr

cxcision om thc Hhu :ia subtldcs Iuarks d1c slln with a Patriard1 ll rcading Placcd
bcr
ccn text and 1 cader/sPCctator

An tl)cr crucial critcrion for sclcction aPPears t

bc then1atic,T,lc CJ, m`is vell

kn wn as an ca1 ly resP nse to thc social cffects f dlc Great Dcl)1

charactcrization rev
b xer)br

cs ar und

ssi0n Thc hln

di orccd her l ) r husband (thc

c thcir s n
om the ChamP s

the
r cnvironment Hovevcr,shiInizu s transP

a rich man;the mothcr wants to rcmo

Custody to sa c the chdd fi

lati n

a
vhO
n)an

tcnds t

lea

rll

c ut crbal rcfcrcnccs to thc Class(liscoursc oI thc HlIn

the Only Subtides that rctain it Point t

irtuall

1sual tnarkcrs f class vhich thc audiences

v uld n t have n1isscd, such as thc diH rcncc bct /een thc Chan1P s HoP-h uSc
aPart1ncnt and the ln thcr s luxu
i us hotcl signi cantly,c cn class(hI1 rcnces in
sPCCch itScll~i11flccti n, cabulary,g1 an11nar,and thc likc-
in thc st lc f

lation in a sPccial Section dc tcd t Ozu

nc f

JaPan

are largcl)unrcHcctcd

the subtitlcs,Wc can hnd the rcal effects f Shin1izu s selecti c transs PcIss

nJ f n9(Dc

oR

ro,

1933)in sTs,

s Chcst hlm thc ry journals At thc tin1c, this hlm was Rcn

con1Parcd t Thc CF,cIJ P f r its narrati c centcred n an intcnsc father~s n rclati

nshiP, and aPParcntly Ozu l)ascd thc script on

id r s
lru In 11is s s articlc,

R/1ura Chio atten Pts a structural c n1Parison of the tv shns scril)tS to in Cstigatc
thc differcnccs bct
ccn sound and silcnt Hb) sccnario iting C)nc ol his conchl
1

n tcm s of st tellhg,lFltlnccsl Mahon s rm,text hcdy scena"o stuC

and
id r s dircct,sohd(lircctorial n1cd1 d precisely sho v us thc instinctual lo c
sions

F hther and child H :evcr,thcy do notin any vay(lcscribe thc : rld t1 at l wer~

nliddlc~class pcoPlc inhabit

(RIura 1933: 25) This Suggcsts that thc translator
rcgards sPccch Pril arily as a` chiclc for narrative ProPulsi n,and that n1any f the
choices rcgardin8 hat t rctain as relevant ha e quitc scri us idcological imphca_
tions H xx e er, the n)ost imP rtant criterion is als the lcast obvious
rJ,c chd,IlP has(at|cast)thrCC momcnts ofn1clodramatic cxcess`hiCh a1
atin

r thci1

translation, By

cxccss

ef
scin~
n)Can elcmcnts such as 1ise-cn-sc nc,

sOund,acting,and`vriting vhich arc11cightcncd to c n1Plcment Cn)otional chstrcss

Thesc sccnes arc thc horsc racc vherc Jackic C ogan s horse stun)blcs just as it is
about t
vin, thc jail sccnc vhcrc Wallacc Bcery rcjccts JackiC and tells hi1nt
go to his rn ther,and thc l)riZC ght at thc cnd, Shirnizu s translation scts uP caCh
sccn c_ and thcn si1 1Ply stoPs For cxamPle,thc narrati
con1cs PriI 1ar y

e tcnsion of the horsc racc

o111 thc ann unccr s call

ith ut his descI1ption of Coogan

460

ABE MARK NORNES

come_fron1-behind bid f r rst PlacC,it is imP ssiblc t tcll hich horsc is in vhich
P

Sition Thcrc arc no subtitles Pr viding this inf rmation The heartbrcaking ja
vith a quiet
by far the m st memorablc momcnt of the ll l ~bcgins

sccnc ~

ccn thc Champ and his traincr sPongc, (Df thcir ninc lincs, all but
guc bct
txx o are translatcd(and thcsc wcrc casy t guess by contcx0, Vhcn thc Chan1P S
dial

son Dink arrives,thc tlaclodrama g1

adually intensises xx,hilc thc subtitlc c

unt clrops

stceP Fr m hCrc until thc m mcnt Dink Ica es thc jail crushc(l by his%thcr

hcn thc
n through thc Pris n

CxPloSivC rejccdon,only nine of241incs arc translatcd! Ncar thc cnd,xx

t

VO sCrearll at each othcr and thc Cha1nP violcntly strikcs his s

bars,the subtitlcs st P,This brcaks thc rnost cherished rulcs ftoday s corruPt Sub_

tidcrs wh ~in a sccmingly naturJ way_assign mcaning to cvery uttcrancc as a

mattcr f coursc
This rcturns us to our original qucstion

cxacdy was thc oblect of transl

hnguistic asPccts that contributc t

ionP

If not thc rncaI1ing of c cry linc, vhat

On the ne hand,Shimi7u was ignohng

cxprcssion and sirnply translating thc narrati

mcaning l)chind thc v rds Hc gcncra11y uscs a translation stratcgy that striPs the
hncs()f dialoguc to their l)arest,n1ost basic functi n fn ving thc Plot(grantcd,

as
as hc intcrprcts it)On thC thcr hand,br m mcnts whCn thc sPccch act itsclf
contributing to thc overall cxPrcsSion f thc Hlrn s cmotional in1Pact, f e chosc noF
Fo rr nsFcIr ImPhcit in this decisi n vas thc assulnPtion that thc grain fthc v icc
vas rnore imPortant than the lucaning it articulatcd

Thc cxamPle of The Chdf,,P is n t an isolated Hukc In fact, othCr rCP

rts

concCrning Prc var subtithng Practices suggcst a varicty of graPhic tactics that als
cxhil)it a translatlon stratcgy focused

n thc matcriahty of languagc For cxamPlc,

ks ne
sPaPcrs; as thc camera nears thc
thcrc is a sccne in vvhich a b y ha
boy,his v icc gcts loudcr on thc soundtrack,At thc san e tin e,thc JaPancsc subtitlcs
iding a
translating d e boy s
oicc gro v corresPondingly largcr and largcr, Pr
in J

graPhic rcPrcScntation of thc incrcasing volun1c,12Furthermorc,JaPancsc subtitlcrs

routincly Placcd thcir titlcs in different arcas of thc scenc dePending n thc cinc~
matographcr s con1Positi n It as thought that thc Position f the vords sh uld
c n

PlCmcnt lYlisc-cn sc nc and lnoe1ncnt,At thc samc thne,thcrc arc indicati ns

cll, Onc st ry fr m critic
c as

that subtitlc positioning dcPcndcd upon narrati

Yodogawa Nagaharu dCscHbcs a drcamy Hollywood l C Sccnc whcre thc subtidcs

aPPearcd bctwccn thC t v 1 vcrs(T da1994 26-27), Ofc ursc!
cCn t
Thc conccPti n f translation in thc talkic Pcri d circulatcd l)ct
bctvccn

a hcrmeneutic search for,and translnission of,n1caning,and a curi

`o Polcs,

us f re-

grounding of thc matclial quahtiCS of languagc (or a ch icC n t t translatc

underPinned by the me alues) The rc n r tl is in(lt,tt rminacy hcs in the
hist rical rn

mcnt,Wc can detect as1nuch fron1an articlc about thc subtiding of

orocco which Tamura ptll)lishcd tcn days bc rc thc hlm s Public rclcasc: T11is
timc,thcrc was thc al thttt with t o w subtkles,thc meaning wotlld n tc mc
thr ugh, At lcast, I th ught that it vas ncCCssary t usc thc samc numbcr f titles
as silcnt rno ics spanish and P rtugucsc subtitles uscd far too n any subtitlcs,1norc

than400subtidcs br onc lm Howc cr,becausc JaPancsC au(liences arc scnsitlve

to thc feehngs f slrns,I bchc cd it vas unneccssary t attaCh rnorc than30subtitlcs
pcr rccl

(Tamura1931) This is an aPProach t

translation that rches on a c nccP

tion of cincma gr undcd in thc sncnt era In thcja sccnc of l,e ChczIl,P,thc subddcs

FOR AN ABUs1VE sUBTITLING

461

y corrcspond to thc narrati c m dc f thc talkic as it sct up thc prcn)isc for

initia

thc confrontati n bctvccn fad cr and s n;then it shiftcd back t

sdcnt cincma for

thc mclodramatic hnish

While this seeryls to be a likely exPlanation, c must rcturn to thc silcnt cra
to adcquatcly undcrstand the speciscitics f this national cinema contcxt and its
hist rical rn mcnt. Onc n1ight say that thc lD nsl,i vas thc Hrst form of dubbing in
thc prc~history of thc talkic,Thcsc scrccn-side narrators vould dcscril)c thc acti n
on thc screen and suPPly oiccs for all thc actors,ehn1inating the nccd f r thc translation of silcnt hhn intcrtitlcs,Aar

n Gcrovv s rcsearch into the critical disc urscs

surroundi 1g

thc ngurc f thc bcnsJ,i rcveals that ref rmcrs f the Purc Film
Movemellt sought to moder ze JaPanCSC cincma by n ating the r le fthc b nshi
and revising thc standard use ofintcrtldcs(Gcrow1996:33) The benshi,they k,
should a id FI
vcry Clocuti n f r c cryday spCCch and stick cl scly to the nhn_
maker

s Pl tting

instcad of thcir indcPcndCnt claborations Of thc narrativc In othcr

v rds, thcy h
vould bec me in isiblc, much hkc thc corruPt
Ped thc bcnsFli
subtitlcs oflater dccadcs In thc cnd,the bcnshi ProvCd rnorc po verful and P Pular,
sctting the stage for thc unusual subtitles ofthc talkie era in JaPan,WC can attributc
thc t
o stylcs of Prc~subtitlc b

nsl,i transladon~paraPhrasc vs hnc~by linc~to

thcsc vcry discursivc tcnsions dcsigncd by thc Purc Fihn AJl

vement Sccond, thc

samc rcformcrs called f r thc chn1inati n of intcrtitlcs,sincc lrn as csscntially a

isual medium This could als hclp cxplain vhy so fc v subtitlcs erc uscd in thc

1930s comParcd t t day Thesc arc Probably Precedcnts c ntributing to an o crdc rmhtltion of rces bcaring down on JaPan srst subtides
By thc cnd ofthc dccadc thc shift t

thc Post var emPhasis n narrati c lucaning

bccomcs dctcctablc In a1939articlc cnddcd

Titlcs,

ThcImP erished JaPanesC fsP kcn

Ota Tatsu critiozcs contcmPorary subtidcs and calls n translators to work

toWards a ncw JaPanCSC languagc br lm translati n.Hc uscs troPes hr translation

stratcgicsvhich havc circulatcd thr ugh ut thc history of translati n thcOry

understanding Ia lrnl mcans not intcllcctually,but Pcrkctly

1atching

thc feehngs, as if nc
vith thc samc atmOsPherc, and s aking thr ugh
t

thc insidc f tlac hcarts of thc JaPancsC masscs Thus wc must stop

the sP ken titles that are mcssen crs

SP

brought iom a rcign languagc;

kcn ddcs uld be mcssengers iom a mccdng with Jt,pancse

languagc, In other vords,thcy arc not translati ns off rcign langua8c,

but thcy must crcate in JaPancSC thC things that are trying to bc
exPrCsSCd in thc f reign languagc

(()ta1939 51)
T this cnd, Ota calls for thc cnd

f dircct translation

f forcign
vords and the
n subtidcrs must

crcation of a ncw JaPancsC languagc sPccincally br nlm translati

stop rclying n thc ad icc ofcxPcrtS hi1 cd froI1univcrsity literature dePartmCnts and

vritc subtitlcs that sPcak(lircctly to thc soul of thc masscs T this end,subdtlcrs
must rccognizc the hmits of dzlJi and rcstHct tllcir usagc of charactcrs to a lcvd
attuned to thc1nasscs,` hiCh hc dctern1inesis some :hcrc at or bclo v thc elcmentar
sch l graduatc s lc cl subtitlcrs must stri c to be like thc bcnsJli,

vhich is t say

bcc me nevith thc fabric f thc Hhn sO thcy may speak dircctly to thcir audicncc

462

ABE MARK NORNEs

in the deePest sense(again a conccPdon fthe b nsJ,i consistent vith thc rcf r1 crs
ofthc Purc Filn M
cmcnt) Ab c all,thcir subtitlcs should n t be dircct translations of hrcign words,l)ut stH for a Pcrlk dn a h ith thc JaPanCsC s tll
This last asscrdon is cruciaI bccause it exPrcssCs the shift, and its hist rical

mon1cnt, n10st clcarly C)ta is calling for a subtithng Practicc that complctcly
d n inates

thc forcign As ith thc R man Pocts rclati nshiP to Grcck litcraturc

and Earl Christian translators rclationshiP to the Hebre v and Grcck Biblcs, hc

hoPcs to cnlldn his wn language in thc Pr ccss f aPPr

thc dro s)lcttCr[

wn

la11gua

iati n st Jcromc statCd

f translati n luost dircctl : Thc translatOr(hd not attcnd

j,but by right of ict ry c ricd thc scnsc caPu c ht hs
(sCe Jcromc in ths
olumc) ThC issuc f transladon cuts s aight

thc Prcn isc of this ki

t

l)

`d

to thc rclationshil)of sclf and d)cr Ota s cssa ,

vrittcn at a tilne vhcn
(lccp
into
China
and
c

s
Pcnctraun
ntcn)Plating a colonizatjon of Asia,
JaPan
rc cals a totahtarian
ish f r a subtidc that crascs di"erencc and incorPoratCs
thr ugh

reign n1eani11g into a Perfected, harn10ni'cd 1

ass I

eadcrshiP It is a thc ry of

translation ta rcd t JaPan s gCoPolitical asPirations C)ta s ision of a meaning

oricntcd translati n :ould cv l c int thc codes f corruPtion in t11c Post :ar

Pcriod, a stylc of translation that effaccs its violcnt, mediating Prcsencc

by hk ing in thc margins of thc framc and discrectly translating everJ
thc s

uttcrancc on

undtrack

Wh e

C)ta calls f ra nc vvriting and a nc

languagc,he still(lcknds In st of
ent of titles H
vc cr,an

the Pre :ar(lon cntions,such as the nun)bcr and PlacCn

CxamPlc n1thc d1cr si(lc ofthc lobe lna tcaC11us that convcntions themsclves

can bc changed m st easily at Particular n1 mcnts ill histor

vhen thc rulcs
go crni11gl)racticcS tarc i11nux,Jcan Eustachc

foFhcr nd rh

s Tf,

ll J,

rc lL

il,dn

/ r

rdin,1973)is a cCntral Post1%8nlm madc in thc wakc fthe Frcnch Nc

Wa c This lrn n10vemcnt vas centercd on brcaking cincI atic convcntions and
'

cf Fd P

indulging in those things Only cincma is caPable of~it

making This hbcratcd Eustache

s t1

vas csscntially abusivc hn-

anslat(Dr to dcal

f thc

"th
thc ProblcIn
v rks nl at that kind of
momcllt h Hlm h t,ly Throu h tlt thls dcvcr Hlm,tl c trtnllsPa ncy of thc
subtitlc

s violcncc ith t11c kind of exPcrirncntation that

subtitlcs xx ould bc intcrruPted ith the brackctcd n

111is Pr

nrrdns` rtib/c , nc P1In

tc

`r

`idcs a cogcnt cxan1Plc of thC flcxil)ihty of subtithng that is engagcd in thc

cincn atic lDracticc fits t"11c Thc very c nccPtion of this subtitle vas P SSiblc onl)

bccausc thc Frcnch Ne XVave Fihn_n1akcrs were systcmatically attackin

: C

Cr)

con cntion f ci11cma T^hc frccd n to exPerirnent vitll textual knOts f in

Possi_
fc n1ust not
l)ihty,ho cvcr,can makc the untranslatable Frcnch Pun translatablc

rejectimPo

lity,but

cmlD1 aceit Momc11ts of unt

anslatabi

it

,~a nea1 l constant

conditl n lor thc subtidcr~arc tin1cs |or cc/cbrczF1on, R)r not only arc the) PI

PPortunitics f r translators
Ply thc highest skills f thcir craft, They are n omcnts crying r abuse
le Cd

Cnc untcrs vith thc f rcign,but t11cy arc als

The abusi c turn

Thcrc is a Potential and cn cr8ing subtithng Practicc that acc
able hrnits il

unts R)r thc una

oicl

timc and sPacc of the subtidc, a Practice that d es not fci:n

FOR AN ABUsI
cOI

E SUBTITLlNG

463

e must
ork to vard a subtithng that engagcs
Cnt and

PlctCness, that(loes not hide its PrCsencc through restrictivc rulcs

rcconsidcr our c)
nl istorical

11)oll

i lcncc vhich is n t corruPt, but abusi c,

To sketch out the charactcr f abusi c subtithng and cstabhsh somc scnsc for
h
v it hts int thc contcxt ofits0
n history,I Pr Posc C diVidc s und hu histOry
toda s scnsibihticsvith a

into thrcc cp chs of translati n,thc last of`vhich is only just cmcrging

hc

histor

of translation discoursc is Jll of triPartitC formulas to dcscril,c differcnt rnodcs of

translation,flom Dr dcn t No alis an(lG cthc t Jak bS n Thc cpochsIsug8cst

Lnay bc sccn as historical Phascs thr ugh hich ci11cn1a has Passcd,but thcy also
`

SurPasS this diachr nic structure and aPPear silnultanc usly. Thc P tCntial for this

vill bC Particularly iluPortant for ur undcrstanding f abusi c

f translati nn1ay bc(lcScribed in
subtithng Roughl) skctched, the thrcc cPochs
ving n1an ncr
thc f ll
Thc rst kind f translation occurs in thc talkie cra It uscs a straightf r vard
si1nultancity

intr
Pr se t

duce thc Plcasurcs of forcign tcxts The languagc ofthc subtitlcs thcm~

selvcs cxhibits a Functionahtv clcarlv (lcsigncd to con1municatc thc P0

vcr f the

f reign
riginal as cficicntly as P sSil)lc In d1is rcsPcct thC 6rst cra of subtitlcs
bhngs d)c Ryeign tcxt to thC spcctators on thcir olx n(lomcstic tcrms,At thc same

timc,thc translat r remains fully cogni'ant fthc n1atcrial din1cnsions of languagc

~b th

its graPhic and aural qualitics It rnay t)c that this is a c

translation anch rcd rn11

ncePtion of ci11cmatic

that transition into an1Ph Cd aurahty Ho vever, vhilc

there can bc no qucStion of its hist rical sPcci city in this instancc, vc still luust
resist rcstricting a givcn modc of translation

s cl P

lnjFi9in any PCri d ofcincma

s

h1thc scc nd cPoch of cincmatic translati n, the translator Pretends to ln e

toWarcl thc breign,(lwdl thc1 e,and bring its vndcrs t thc w ung cr wds This
cra is rcPlctC vith

ulcs dcsigncd to

rcgulation actually accolaal)lis11cs

ua1 antcc

a translation

s quahty,but hat this

s an aPPr Priation of the sourcc tcxt and its

thor ugh don estication T11e rulcs also cn rcc a tcrritoriahzation and ProkSsion~
ahzati n f translation,producing stars and cxPertS and cxcludin

all altcrnatives

This modc of translation, =hich I have contcmPtuously callcd corruPt, conforms

des All that

the R)rcign to the
an e ork of thc target languagc and its cultural c
cannot bc cxplained ithin the sc crc lilnits of thc
cgulation subtitlc gets cxcised
or rcduccd to d mcstic mcani11gs vvhich arc often irrclcvant or inaPProPriatC Thcse
subtitlers clai1nt

bring thcir rcadcrs/sPcctat rs to a PlCasurablc exPericncc of thc

)rcign, but in fact theh

in11)overishcd translati ns kccP audicnccs ignorant of thc
conSPiracy and thc richcs that remain hiddcn fron)the cincmatic cxPcriCncc,
Thc nal Part f this triPtych brings11s to thc abusive F r this eP ch f trans~
lati n, I `vi`h to t
ro anod1cr Phrasc li n Gocd1e,both l r thc P
vCr of its
imagc tl11dt D sPccil;
h d)usi c stll,titling is not In d c tllird a8c of G thc s
I

)1

o'n peri di7ati n of translati n, the oal of the translation is to achicvc Pc1 fect

idcntity`vith thc riginal,sO that thc Onc docs n t cxist instcad of thc d1cr but in
thc tlncr s Placc (SCC G cthe in this lu1nc) Hcrc thC translat r iclcntihcs strongly

ith thc sOurcc tcxt and thc culturc in vhich it vas Produccd,so lnuch so that hc
ccdcs thc Particular Po vcrs of his o n culture to accomPhS11a translati n thatinvitcs
thc readcr/sPectator to a novcl and rich cxPeriCncc
f thc forcign ()f coursc,
G ct11e s( onccPtion f translation is(lccPly ticd to R mantic notions that scck to
dc nc thc sclfthr ugh its :arious othcrs~an thcr f rn1of domcstication I

ovc cr,

464 ABE MARK NORNEs

abusj c subtitli11g a oids this kind of crasurc of diffcrcncc,scckJng to intcnsi

t11c

interaction bct ccn thc readcr and the forei8n This translation docs110t Present a
f

rcign divested f its Othcrncss, but stIives t

translate from and vithi11the Place

of thc thcr by an invcnti c aPproac11to languagc use and a vilhngncss to bcnd thc

rulcs,both linguistic and cincmatic

As
c have seen,the kc

(hffcrcnccs bct vccn tlac translati n of printcd tcxts

and thc subtitling frnoving imagc lncdia arc that thc cincma adds thc human icc

the equation and is ProPPcd uP by an aPParatus that r cluires a iolcnt translati n

hich in turn cxhil)its rnanv ofthe traits Ph iP Lc vis calls abusivc E cn thc subtitlcs
rthc m st nondescriPt,rcalist Hlm tamPc1 with languagc usagc and flcdy ig1orc
r changc Inuc11ofthc s urcc tcxt;ho :cvcr,co1 uPt subtitlcrs suPprcss thC fact of

this

:h c tl)c abusivc translator cnjoys forciolcncc ncccssitated by thc aPParatus,

r undh1g it, hcightcning its in 1Dact and tcsting its lirnits and Possibdities T

the
cxtcnt that Le 'is s abusivc translation(lcm nstratcs a ncv articulation of Hdcht

1ll t Play ith con ention, 11is 111 dcl is attractivc to thc subtitlcr f thc
cmcrgcnt third cPoch This thcOrization v l Pr
C Particularly attractivc in an age

in its

whcrc thc cxpcricncc of thc brcign is aluc(l,an(l whcre al)usc hdPs injcct a
PalPablc scnsc fthc frcign,
In thc Derridian aPproach to translation thcOrized by Lc

vis,abusc is(Jirected

ns
Vhilc this is a componcnt ofthc
abusi e subtitlc,tlac ojcc and cnds fabuse do nc,t am unt to a merc RsurreC
tion of 1970s lln thcOr and its ``alorization of expcrhncntation in con)bating
at b th language and its1netaphysical assun11)ti

ood rcahs1n
ith a dcc nstructivc or Brcchtian avant-garde13
Thc Problems
ith such a Position havc sincc bccn argucd on n1any 6 onts: its
Euroccntrisn1, it$ chtis1n, and its inability t account f r PoPular rcading m des,
Stdl,
c may consider thc critiqucs of Poststructurahst
hn thc ry thc scguc
bctvvccn thc scc nd and third cpochs of subtithng
Bccausc ve arC intercstcd in thc d n1csticating tcndcncies of thc c nvcntional
thc c ils of I

subtitling practiccs of thc sec

nd eP ch,
ve may P sition abusivc subtithng as a

critiquc of(lo 1inant idcol gy

c cr, it docs not amount to a silllPlc cxPCri~

H

mcntation dcsigncd to bl ck idc logical intcrPc ation thr ugh distanciation

tcchniqucs.Faccd vith thc l sscs ine itat)lc in all translati n,the abusive subtitler
assum cs a
csPcctfIll stancc vis- -vis the origil)al tcxt,tampcring vith botb languagc

and thc subtithng aPParatus itsclf in

rder t rclcasc
vhat

Laxx

rcncc Vcnuti has

n ofa

called the remainder, textual and ci11en1atic effccts that cxcccd thc crcati

narrative focuscd equi alcncc and : rk onl)in thC rccciving cultu1^e(scc venutiin
this volumc) It is a ne v notion of Hdcht attcnti c to thc arious aural and visual

qualitics oFlanguage in m tion Picturcs,this in additi n to thc linguistic and litcrary

styles of scrccn vriting

Lct usl k ata numbcr ofc ncrcte examPlcs that suggcst that c

rruPt subtitling

PracticCs arc obsoletc and the timc r abusc is HPc Donakl Richc, who has
sul,tidcd s

mc ofthc m0 famotls Japancsc lms,is

Rdn,onc fthc

tllc translator of Kurc)sawa

rn st abusi c translati ns c cr undcrtakcn( /ith thC P ssiblc cxccP~

i net s aPpr
Priations of kung fu6bns in post-1968
dubbh1:dW dy Allen s Il st , Jc' ,P)I4w h Ct-oning

tion of thc situationist Rcn

F1 an or thc
of talhes,Jal9ancsc Samurai Hlms hun(ht11ecessary to codiI a crsion of at Prc
MC i JaPancsC languagc should sou1 (l like They cndcd uP with a samurai vcrsion
F

FOR AN ABUsI

Pcrcci ed as da1 ingly cxPcl^ilncntal) Ho

E sUBTITL1NG

ay
Cver, thcrc is n0

465

to b1 ing d1is

Vith ut brcaking thc la vs of

imP rtant clcmCnt fthc genrc to a f reign sPcctat r
lPtion,whid1is cxacdy what Richic attcmPtcd He Titcs, Carlled a 'ay by
con

all thc Pagcantry I relaxcd lny guard and th ught to intrudc a bit f pcriod col r f
my wn J I leR tlt tllc occ lcDnal PrcP siti ns in a ay con11url,11t J rmal

court Enghsh son cthing likc Ivant you to go/ I foohshly rcndcrcd as I vould

vith you go Not inc rrcct but, in dialOguc titles, c nlPletely inaPPr Priatc
(Richic1991: 16) Obvi usly rcgrctting his exPerimcnt,Richie hnally cxemPhnes

vhCn hc calls for a scruPul usly anonym us kind f

the scnsil)ihty f corruPti n
i

;;S :1 :l :ta :'

l:Ct

F1I:

`1

thc car as thc imagc cnters the eyc

t11csc subtitlcs

crc

quitc x

tiT:

:nIf

Thc languagc should cntcr

(R)id,), I coukln t disagrcc 1 orc Actually,

itten dialogue I on t even use cxClamati

ndc
Iol

for thc x

n Points

ay thcy rclcased ccrtain cffccts into

cr %T

anonymous translati n, Richic sell ccnsors his smart impulsc t abusc the tcxt

/oung con ntcd

Rol)

ConnccFion (T ,ndi,,

I,J

ith Ya namot Masashi s Tc7)dmt,, d

1991), which cdcbratcs Osaka s culturc an(l

nlilar issucs

on ushon,

tllalcct This lm is stllDtdcd

F ols

Cr ss Bord F C1h d okdi o ko u)and

vccn T0kyo,H ng Kong,and

Hong Kong/Tokyo,ncti n/d cumentary,

thc coursc of its90- dd n1inutcs it criss-crosscs bct

Osaka,blu1 ring t11cb undarics bct vcCn

Hong Kong comcdy/JaPanCse c mc(ly,mJc/kmalc,and cvcn insi(lc mo e/

l:
I

thc sccnario dcPl ys an analogous fast-and loosc aPPr ach to sPcCch9 r vherc it
celebratcs linguistic rnarkcrs c)f Class and regional diffcrcnce.Anod1cr tactic he uscs
con1es far cl scr t thc sPirit of abusi cncss (Dbscenc cxPrcSsions likc k,t,ncf,1k1 sll /

and n9 J`al e all

tt

d 9

d#/@

om Y ung s cxan1Ple First,this is n t the kind

Ve can lcarn sc cral things

vhich oRen lcavc bsccnc languagc

untranslatcd Granted,it uld havc bccn far ln rc abusi c to actually11sc bScCnv0uld risk damagin8thc Hhn s chanccs at intcrnational
itics in En hSh,but t do s
e sCCn,thc ccns rs lurk at cvcry stagc of hh1a Pr ducti n and
distril)uti n As vc
c expcct of corruPt subtitlcs,
of ccns rshiP

distributi n S Young runs thc gauntlct of ccns rs by cxPcrirncnting vith language

1ncss of tbc origh)al sccnari and

in ays that arc analogous to thc lif guistic Play
vith t11c sccn ingly untranslatable, thc abusivc
its vcrbahzation sccond, faccd
subtitlcr n1ay Seek to Pr ducc Polyvalcncies and knots of sig11ihcation that lllay not
coincidc l)rccisely vith thc Problcm in thc s urcc tcxt Not all of Y ung s subtitlcs
using n nstandard gran1n1ar ha c a onc~to-onc CorrcsPondencc vith silnnar utter_

anccs on thc s undtrack Ncverdlclcss, his aPPr ach cucs thc sPcctator to thc
elaboratc Playfuh1css of thc clial gue that vould have bccn c mPlctcly crascd by

466

ABE MARK NORNEs

encss,Young,likc Richic bcforc

corruPt titlcs Third,dcsPitC l)is instinctual abusi

hin1,als rcstricts hi1uself t

the tirne/sPace/graphic lilmits

Attuncd to his historical l ment in thc third cP

f the standard subtitle

ch,Y ung hints at thc P

ssibili

ties;but a truly abusi c subtiding vould havc becn as ild as thc o1 iginal Hh 1 It
vcould ha c br ught thc spcctator cXccedingly closc t thc nhn,This vould aPPcar
radical fr n the PcrsPCcti c of thc scc nd

Cra, but surely you,

vho hve in thc

cmcrging third era,can f cl thc Pr blcms vith cOn ention

Therc arc Iuorc daring and thrilhng cxamPlcs of thc cn1crging abusi
clsc vhcrc,PlacCs

=hcrc caPital doCs not cnf rcc

t1

e subtitlc

c rulcs and rcgulations fc rruP

tion In thc sPring of1993, Profcssor Laurcl Rodd f thc lJniversity of Colorado
assigncd hcr JaPanese translati n class the task of translating subtitlcs f r thc

s FdxinJ %,, dn Rt,FtJI ns rdILJsd n00nn

ofItclmi J
'

indudcs strings of k

2,1987)Thshh

Pening
scquence

(ChincSC :()rds)and Snatchcs of classical JaPancSc Thc

r of hns,but

class quickly lcarncd to appreciate the dificultics facing thc translat

thcir intuitivc soluti ns t conFronting thc Practical issucs had little to d

ith thc

corruPt rulCS of thc scc nd ePoch s subtitlers Thcy rcgrcttcd thcir inability to
CxPcri1ncnt by Putting subtitlcs in differcnt colors and in differcnt Parts fthc fran1c
In fact, thcir excrcisc :as hyP thctical and nothing :as Prc cnting thcm fr

indulging in the n ost utrageous inno ation(thc ncxx tcchnologics f idc

,hich

hnk the aPParatus vith con Puters can casily luaniPulatc thc n1atcrial asPCcts of thc
ls arc in Placc,but thc
subtitle thr ugh colors,fonts,sizes,and aniInation).ThC t
profcssionals, likc thc studcnts abo c, chcck thcmsclvcs,hcld l)ack as thcy arc by
thc incrtia of con cntion and thc idc l gy of corruption
Actually,this has n t rcstraincd onc grouP of translat rs

h ol11

v110m ,cn1ay

w ycars,
cl
Pcd ar un(l JaPancsc animation(dnimc)thr ughout thc

lcaln much In11E1ct,this articlc was insPircd by tllcir work In thc past Ii(
a massi e hn(lc)m has clc

v rld A substantial Porti n

of thc fan acti ity conccntratcs on translation scriPts

arc postcd on intcrnct nc vs:r uPs and circulatcd am ng clubs and indi kluals Fan
11ackcrs w

tc soRware r thc Amiga an l othcr comPutcr Plat rms,s ftwalc that

n hands Gr uPs collab~

/orking outside
ritc dnir,l

enablcs thcna t takc the subtithng aPParatus into thcir

crsi ns of thcir fa
ft11cn1ainstrean translati n industr)i,lacking any forlllal trai11in ,thcSC fans havc
ns ncF h sccncs ith ox edaPPlng did guc,they
Produced abusi c subddcs quj'
oratc on not-for-proht subtitlcd

ith untranslatablc
usc diffcrcnt col rcd subtitlcs C nfr ntcd
rds, thcy intro-

ith a dc nition that s mctin cs

Hlls thc scrccn F otnotes! Somc taPeS includc small-tyPC(lc niti ns and cultural
ducc thc f rcign vord into thc Enghsh language
exPlanati nsvhich are illcgil)lc on thc Hy(here
Pr

t c l

luadc P SSiblc by vklco vhcrc thc

vc ind a c mplctcly ne

1cxsing

ic vcr halts thc aPParatus s1nindless

march and rcads subtitlcs at leisurc) : 11Cy use diffcrcnt fonts,si'cs,and col rs t
corresPond to luaterial asPccts f languagc, frorn voicc to dialcct t0 Vrittcn tcxt

vithin thc fralnc And thcy frccly inscrt their tidcs all o cr thc scrccn It is as if
history folds back n itsclf and vc Hnd a rcsurgcncc oft11c subtithng Practice of thc
talkic cra,but thc undcrlying diffcrcnccs Put thC t o
orldS apa1

Thc cxamPlc of dn n,c hnd n1

valorizations of anti-Holly

rc cals thc distta11cc bct

d cxPcrirncntation and thc abusi c subtitlc Both1nay

bc canny on idcological ProblClus,both rnay inno

lattcr attcl

l)ts

vcCn thC Rcn chtist

cngagc rcadcrs scnsibilitics

ith

ati Cly

brcak c n cntion,but thc

thc same scnsil)ihtics xx1th

hich

FOR AN ABUSIVE sUBT1TLING

467

thc readers cn agC thcir texts Just as thC sPect or aPPr achcS lms om

hraway

lDl

Cs to Cllloy an cxpcocncc ofthc c,rc n,tl)C abus c tlanslator attemP

his r hcr subtitlcs in thc Placc of thc thcr,Rathcr than sn

tcl l()

tc

thcring thc ln under

thc regulations of thc c rrupt subtitlc, rathcr than sm othing thc r ugh cd8cs of

R,rcignncss,rathcr than convenin8c crything into casily c nsumablc n1caning,thc

abusi c subtitlcs al ays(hrect sPcctat rs back to thc original text Abusivc subtitlcs
circulatc bet vccn thc f reign and thc fan1ihar,thc kn

And is this not a chal

actc1 lstiC

:`

crC

cn and thc unknovvn

i i

of thc R)reign lrn s structurcP The sul)titled m ving

hnagc is a constcllatcd gurc; both the riginal and thc translati n are shuultaneusl) a ailal,le,as if tl ey wcrc cn fdce.M ti1uPortant, icwcrs Work o r thc H nal
text x1 hcthcr thcy undcrstand its languagc or not, Although corruPt subtitlcs
v rk
strongly agai11st this reading l)racticc,abusivc subtitlcs cnc

uragc it

The tilnc is riPc

r abusc,if nly bccausc we are in an agc whcrc m

ing imagc

\udicnccs
bring thosc talents t the fOrcign hn, but they8o cnti1 cly unuscd Indccd,
vhat
once vas radical cxPc1 ilncntatlon is no thc stuf f Hollyw od cincma, 1TV and
hteracy h1cludes thc abihty to 1nanagc comPlex tCxt/h11agc rclations,

PoP-uP vidc ,c mmcrCials,sitcOn1s,and thc nighdy ncws ComPlcx imagc/text

rclationshiPs arc a norlnahzcd tcxtuahty fi n1cvcryday cxpcricncc(excCCdingly so

in JaPan) Fron.this pcrsPective,corruPt Subtithng is actually archaic Thus,abusc

ns And
hcn
abusivc subtithng l,ccon1cs norluahzed,
vc 1ll think f othcr tcrn1s~or sin Ply
is dircctcd at convcntion, c cn at sPcctat rs and theil^ cxPcctati

droP thc adjccti c It is likcly that abusi c translations vdl l)cgin ith anirnation,
comcdics,thc art filn , and thc(locumcntary

texts that arc thcInlsclvcs transgrcson subjccting thc lnOst

e or cssayistic~l)ut thcrc is nothing l)okling us back

non- iolcnt Hln st abusc, Thc Only

tl`cr c11

icc is corruPtion

Notes
For cxccllcnt l)ibli graPhicS collecting this

:ork, scc Ga 11)icr 1994and(lc

Lindc and Kay1999 I ould likc to cxtcnd1ny thanks to r)arrcll Da is,1)a id

I)csser, and Particularly to La =rencc

cnuti, Makino Man oru and Aar n
GcrO vR)r

their hdp and commcnts whilc iting this cssay Gc1 ow in

1

n on thc Purc Cincma Ado cn1cnt

His disscrtation On thc m vcmcnt is groundbrcaking
ork(GCr w1996),
ucular hclPcd mc flcsh out thc sccti
PaI

A11analogous rcvcrsal fP
cr n ay l)cl und
f

in thc t1 anslation of Trlc X~fiFcs

r JaPanesC tclc ision,in this case thr ugh the aPPaI

atus of dubbing Muldcr

is dubbcd by a n1anvith a husky,deeP,tou:11-m an

oicc,
hilc Scullcy s rcla~
ti cly

lo :, busincss_hkc tonc is rcPlaced 1th thc high-Pitchcd voicc

nc

11is
lnaniPulati n f thc material quahtics f languagc~in this casc thc grain of
thc vOicc ~ rc crscs thc sexual Play and Pohtics f thc sho v XVh c lcss
dran1atic, thc Rob co` cxan1Plc diSplays thc san c dynan1ic As I
vill arguc
usua ) ass ciatcs ith soaP oPCras and xs cathcr rcP rt

bclo v,standard

announccrs

subtitlcs ign rc the n atcrial asPccts of languagc

scc r cxamPlc,Tocla199 27,Ok ch198 18,Kamijima1995

22,

468

ABE MARK NORNEs

T da(1994:27)is
f

r hcr hist

rCP rtin hcarsay;it aPPcars shc has(l nc no rcal rcscarch

BiograPlllCs ll ClLldc T (la1994,Kamijima1995,and

Shimizu1985 Thc latter

w~

isthe m st hmous,btlt Kamijima s is the mostintcrcsting ofthc bunch H

rs l
king

to b oks arc PoPular among translat

to add aricty to thcir usual

slatc fb ring busincss translati ns;a fcvc ofthen arc apParcntly uscd as tcxt~

bo ks in classcs

ffered b

mc

f thc m rc high-Pr slC

Subtitlers

scc

Kamijima1995,Ok da1988and1989,shimizu1988and1992,
Okacda1989 194-195 Far rn rc disturbing is his ignorant h moPh bia vvhcn
he Prcfaccs a scction on hol scxuahty and subtithng with a l)izarrc asidc
imPlying Amcrica has h mOs and JaPan d cS

n t,an(l

cxPlicidy blaming

AIEls on An crican h n 0scxuals

This stratcgy condnucd wcll into thc Postwar Pcri d in many Parts f ASia
that uscd narrat rs throughout thc silcnt Peri d
Thc subtitlcr s collaborau n jth structurcs of ccns rshiP is an ilnP rtant

timc tc,eXPlOre in this c nt

In JaPan,
subtitlcs
crc strictl ccnsOrcd in both Prc
ar and p st
ar eras N ore
rcccntly, ccns rshiP has largcly bccn (hrectcd at the imagc cxclusi e of thc
rm fc uPuon I d

n th ,c

undtrack shirnizu scr ed f r manv ycars on the l) ard f Eirin, one()f thc

Prhnary cCnS rs11ip authorities in JaPan Okacda has a curious Passagc in bis

lcctures about subtithng PornograPhy For CxamPlc,hC varns his studcnts n t

to translatc Oh, that feels so good dh cctl ovcr thc uttcrancc/sex act
bccause thc translation vvould ncvcr PasS cCnsorshiP Pr cCCdings;h:cvcr,if

thc subtitlc aPPcars bcf rc or aRcr, as in

ll n1akc you fccl good, thcrc
I

v this PracticC affccts thc translati n ofn ainstrcam

ProblCm H
tCXts is lCft uncxPlainCd(Okacda1989 2O1-202)
sh uld

l)cn

shimizu 1988

h c shi 1izu s account sa s this :crsion nevcr rcached

350

A Quick N tC
Pul)lic thcatcrs,a contcmPorary articlc suggcsts othcrWisc In

n thc Talkie/ Hayashi Chitosc cnt to the tr ublc of counting hnes of

dialoguc and subtitlcs Hayashi sc unt: 387spokcn lines/229subtitles xlith

f r an a cra c of32 hncs/19 subtitles pcr rccl

Vhilc
he notcs that thc m st(lialoguc-hca y sccne f thc lrn uscs morc subtitlcs
(41ftDr521incs),Hayashi st Ps his analysis with thc basic a1gumcnt tllat lcss

4 inscrted subtitlcs/

is bcttcr I arguc bclo v this is n thing othcr than a sdcnt cra-sPcciHc c nccP~

tion f cinema cardcd over the sound barricr(Hayashi 1931: 39)

10

Thcsc and thcr

C ccd n

kcn cFsu dc11J,on arc PrcSCr

cd in thc N1akino Mamoru

and thc Kaxs,akita Institutc.Shirnizu Chiy ta was, along with

Tan)ura, nc ofthe bunding mcmbers of nem

zinc fr m thc earl

t vcntlCth

ccntur

ytInP ,tl C

PrCmicr lm maga

thc Prcscnt

Longcr lincs rcquircd multiPlc subtitlcs,1naking the t tal numbcr f subtitlcs

360, Thc thcr kcn cFsLI ddih n I insPectCd aPPcarcd t ha c si nilar subtitle

counts,Thcy may bc found in thc Makino Mamoru Collcction

12

This was rclatcd t mc bv Komatsu Hiroshi,who saw thc Print while xs rking
at thc Nati nal FilI

13

Ccntcr f Japan

An c AScheid s articlc n(lubbing attcInpts to av i(l thcsc traPs,but dls illto

othcrs bccausc f an inadcquatc thc rization of translation itsclf

FOR AN ABUS1
14

I11 1973 Rcn Vionct crcatcd inccndiary sul)titlcs f

E sUBTITLING

469

r a Hong Kong kung fu

ln called rhc C`ush(dir D Kwang Gcc and Lalu Nin Tung,1972),ThC

credit for thc translati n vent to Association Pour lc d vclopPcn cnt dc la

luttc des classcs ct la proPagation du rnat rialislnc dialcctiquc/ and thC rclcasc
c PcuF

tltlc was d Di

cc s r s briqu sP(cdn r c Di
e

fec

c Bre BricksP)

Robcrt stam and`ecr`

Ella Shohat rcp rt that A scquCncc of devastating karatc

bl
vs v uld be subtitlcd: D
nvith thc b urgcoisier (stan1and sh hat
1985 35-59) For a contc1nPoI^ary rcvicw of d1is curious translati n,scc
s1973 11011l llhd tJP, J D P actud a bvc,tt Japanc
dctcctivc sln
vith Allen s parodic(lubbing on thc sOundtrack.()nc could als
i111aginc an abusi c(lubbing,although ulti1natcly dubbing is rnircd in c

rruP

tion bccause it con Plctely crases thc cxPeriencc f)reign s und, ne f thc
n1ost crucial n

ate1 ial

asPccts flanguagc Thcsc cxaluPlcs arc als

vhich indulgcs in thc abus1 c translat

their Par dy,
cncing the forcign,
sourcc tcxt.

vhilc sharing thc corruPt translator

curious for

s Pleasurc in exPcri^
s(lon1ination of thc

Chapter 31

Ian Mason

TEXT PARAMETERS IN
TRANSLATION TRANSITI ITY

AND INSTITUTIONAL CULTURES

1 Introduction
S

IIc P n iWc

:`

iT

uu

hncs are issucd to all translat rs vorking for thc institution,in thc f rn1of glossarics1

dCS0f Practicc and so on;or it rnight simPly )c a devcloPn)ent hich

ut of sharcd cxPcriCncc,thc nccd tO flnd con1nl n
aPProaches t recurring Problcms r through ad icc and trainin o
rcd to nc

cn11)l yccs Rclativel) littlC has becn

ittcn about such Phcn n ena and thc issue
stylc uidcS,t

ro s er a pcriod of years

of instituti nal aPProacbcS to translating rnight be considcrcd to bc a ncglccted l

ct r

vithi11thc hcld of translati n studics Thcrc arc fc oursc son c cxCCPtionS M SsoP
(1988, 1990) |ooks at thc assun1Pti

ns 11ndcrlying ad icc t

tran

lators issucd b)

the Fcdcral Govcrnn ent of Canada and thc in1Phcations of the Pohcy, Koskincn
(20OO)asks Sin1ilar qucstions of thc translation(l

institutions,noting on the
a)

and thus

that tht

ctri11c ofthc EuroPcan LInion(ELI)

ELI tcnds to cle cloP a culturc of its0 vn

PS its o vn kholll in 11 dialccts shc thus sccs thc translations

Produccd by EU institutions as inrrd-cultura (K skincn2000 58) But thC Pri1u aI )
value c)f thcsc studiCs is that thcy oPcn 11I
a ncld f cnquir and l) int to the nccd

de cl

furthcr 1 cscarCh i1 tO

suCh n)attcrs
\n aPProPriatc qucstion

ill

l)c; clo tl e

rm

guidctincs issucd by institutions affect actual translati

nal l)racticc in any uniR

xx:a)P it1 in thc sc

Pc of thiS alticlc, it ` l n tl)e

)ossible to rcach a vahd and

rchablc ans
cr to such a br ad qucstion Thc e idence adduced, llO vc er, lnay
1c
s about thc control of translat rs b thc
bc sufncicnt t cast doubt n sOme
institutions vhich en11)loy thcnl
2003/re

ised2004

TRANsITI ITY AND INsTITUTIONAL CULTUREs

471

For Mossop,it is thc goals of thc institution that dctcrn1inc thc general aPProach
takcn bv translat

rs

Customcrs may cll ask%r htcral rcndcrings,but whcthcr or not litcral

renderings gct Produced

vill dcPcnd on

d ctrinc f translation allo vs

vhcthcr thc institution

for this aPPr ach

(M SSop198 66)
VVhat xxc havc hcrc arc thc makings of a tcstable hyPothcsis It should bc P

ssible

to track,in s mc systcmatic ay,thc transfcr ofstated Pohcy into PracticC,to gaugc

the extent to vhich translat rl)chavi ur is innuenced by the institution

s goals or

po|icy on translation
Nov, onc :ay of1ncasuring this` uld be t matCh aCtual lexical choicc by
translators t the ad icc t be f und in thc in~housc glossarics, stylc guidcs and

thcr guidchncs issucd t

thcm Butthis,of c ursc is thc rnorc consCious and dchb~

cratc cnd of thc imPlcmcntation of Pohcy If a gi

a paI ticular

of tcrminology calls f r

cn iten

vay it`vill bc trcated, irrcsPective f thc

rcndcring, thcn that is thc

translator s

n PrCfCrrcd stylc and inchnati ns But thcrc arc other tcxt Parame~
hat they can rc cal about undcrlying attitudes t0vards
tcrs s1.orth cxPloring,for

tcxt and translating.Pron1incnt an

on these is transitivity,a kcy Sitc for cxPloring

basic strategies sincc it Pcrtains to thc ay Processcs arc vic

vcd and Prcscntcd In

syStemic Grammar(e g Halllday1985), anS l0is lo tcd withh thc i(leat0nd

x

ancti n,PCrtainin t the rcprcscntation of cxPcricntial rncaning in the clausc, It

sh

s h
v sPcakCrs cncode in languagc their n1cntal Pictu1 c of reahty and l)o v
they acc()unt f ,r thcir cxpcrience of tlac world ound tlacm

(simPs n1993:88),

Fowlcr(1996 74), agcncy,state,proccss and So n`t11C ClCn ents of transi

ti ity, sccn to l)c the basic catc:ories in tcrms of vhich hulnan l)eings Prcscnt thc
s that any text,including a trans_
orld to thc1 sclvcs throu h langua c It foll
F r

xx

lati n,

cmb dics a rcPrCsentation of cxPeriencc, signallcd thr ugh thc transitivity

systcln,and that shiFts in transitivity I))ay consequcntly invol

c shiRs in rcPresenta_

und uP ith Point of vie v Thc lattcr

ity but also in lves such Paramctcrs as dCixis,

d n.In this
ay,transitivity is closcly l)
is of coursc not rcstrictcd to transiti

modahty and thCl aticity But ShiRs of transitivity n)ay inv l C shifts f Point of

ie v For although indivklual choiccs f ProccSs typc Pcrtain at clausc le cl, thcy
concatcnatc at tc

t lc cl t

rnl an o crall pattcrn of rcPrcsCntation,

Rcturning no :to the starting hypothcsis al)

ut instituti nal(l ctrincs affccting

indi idual translator stylcs,it`vould seem that translator bchaviour xx`ithin thc Para_

mctcr of transiti ity could usef` lly bc comParcd to vhatc cr institutional advice is
:ithin thc gcncral
a ailablc at thc tirnc ft1 anslating Broadly,onc n1ight cxPcct,
variety oflan uage in usc and ruaking allo ,ancc for grc l n1atical or i(li matic Prc

r^

cnccs of Particular la11guagcs,somC CVi(lence f consistent translation Practice

ithin an institution, sPcciHcally, thcn, in

scckiln8t addrcss t
o qucstions
1

hat

follo vs,

:e Shall bc intcrestcd in

Vhat cvklcncc is thcrc, if any, of a uniforn1ity of aPPr ach acrOss diffcrcnt

languagc scctions,consistCnt ith thc l)rofessed aiIns of the institutionP

472

IAN MAsON
T
vhat extent do actual shiRs f transitivity contribute to signalling signi
cantl

diffcrcnt

alues at thc levcl

f tcxt and disc urse in translatcd

d cumcnts

As suggcsted above, there can, for the tiIne l,cing, bc n dcsnitivc ans :crs to
such questions The investigation rcPortCd here is sirnPly on too small a scalc t

bc

yicld rehable and gcncrahsablc ndings At m st, vvc shall bc ablc t Put
for
ard somc tcntati e hyPothcscs, t bc tcstcd against l ngcr and br ader
ablc t

data scts

2 TransIating for institutions

Thcrc is sc Pc for a1nuch lnorc dctailcd invcstigation ofthc guidancc

institutions to translators, bc thcy full-tirne in-housc staff

ffcrcdvithin

r regular r ccasional

cclanccrs,so%r,wc havc n morc than a Patchw rk f insigh om a aricty of

vith discussi ns in MossoP (1988, 1990), Kos ncn (2000),
sourccs, together
Munday (2001),Wa ner, Bech and Mardncz(2002) It iS intcrcstlng to comPare
some of thc instituuonal P hciCs reportcd by thcsc sch0lars,Accordin8t MoSsoP

(1990: 346n), thC [Canadian] dcral g crnmcnt s translation d ctrinc statcs

that ne should render n t thc vords or thc structures of thc sOurce~tcxt but
rather the messagc or,in othcr w rds,the auth r s intcnd n (Translatiom Burcau

198 3;emPhasiS ml11e)In milar von,a latcr d cumcnt(Rc"s H ndb ok1985)

from thc samc s urcc ad iscs against kccPing sla ishly to thc cxPrcssions and struc-

Imphcd hcre is a vie v that structures bclong t the

r
formal rnakc~uP f tCxts and arc cntircly seParablC fr rll thc rncssagc to bc rclaycd
in translation This woukl,in PracticC,Cnt l wholcsalc changcs to sourcc tcxt(sT)
transitivity structurcs in thc intcrcsts of rclaying intcntion Thcrc arc, of coursc,
many questionablc assumPtionS hcrc F r thc mollOcnt,lct us lca c thesc asidc and
turcs choscn by thc auth

comparc thcr institutional attitudes and pohcies

A further asPect f the Canadian Translati n Bureau s Pohcy is thc requiremcnt

f authcnticit

Authcnticity is thc imprcssion convcycd l)y a translati n that it is not,

in hct,a anslation,that it was comPosed in thc tar8et languagc f1

thc Outsct,that it is an original PiCcC
(TranSlati

It is, t

om

f vriting,

n Burcau1984 6,citcd in M ssoP 1990: 347n)

say the lcast, an intcresting t

st to our understanding of thc n ti n f

authcnticity to cx nd itto a pr ccss whercl)ys

mcthing whch is,in hct,a trans

lation is Presentcd as sOmething vhich is not! What is bcing ProPoscd hcre is, of
course,an illusion;but it is a vidcsPrcad ne The suPPoscd in isibility ofthe trans_

latoris wclhngr ncd h Wcstcrn(and CsPecially Anglo-Amc1 lcan)culture,as amPly

documcntcd by
cnuti(1995) It is als
ticity is inscribed in the Treaty of R
EU institu1t
ions,

rth n ting t11at thc n tion of authen~

`
mc(1957)and undcrhcs translation policy in

T RANSlTI ITY AND INSTITUTIONAL CULTUREs

473

f institutional translator bcha i ur

arc thc Eur Pcan ParIian cnt and uNEsCO,using e idc1 cc m translations of
hich (]uring
the debatcs in Pa11ian1cnt and of articlcs in thc UNESCC) Couricr,
The t v institutions sclcctcd for this stud

its existence(1948 2001)vvas a rnonthly Pubhcation that aPPearcd in n

any dil l rcnt

languagc cditions Bod1 sets f translatOr utPut arc aVailablc n thc intcrnct,
at
vvv3 euroParl eu int/omk/omnsaPir so/debats and w v v unesco
org/courier rcsPCcti cly Eidcncc of fHcial guidancc on translation I)ohcy is
availablc in a numbcr of pubhcations and s

me sahent Points are vorth recording

hcrc K skincn(2000 54)writcs ftlac Eu c mmission

s Translati n ser ice that

thcrc is a clear,all)cit unwritttsn,prclcrcnce ft)r surhCe lcve

assun1c(l to guarantee that1 k:adcrs of th()

sagc

Equi alCncc, she ilahns,

a1

similarity,xS bich is

ious translations all get the sam()lllcs-

is oRcn taken t mcan lin8uiStic corresPondcncc,

r litcral rcrcndcring (2000 55) In l".c vith this and vith thc n tion of aud1cnas(liscusscd ab c,it is of cial P hcy in all Eu institudons that translations

ticity

arc not refcrrcd t as such but rathcr as languagc vcrsions

That is,thc translati ns

arc Prcscntcd as iftcxts cre draftcd in all lan uagcs sil ultancously,as if n

s urcc
text cxistcd(VVagncr,Bcch and p 1artinc`2O02 8-9) This Cnsu
cs that no tcxt can
bc takcn to bc n10rc auth ritati c than any thcr and that thcrc is, conscqucntly,

c n11)lCtC

cquahty l9ctxl ecn all ofHcial languagcs,In thc Particular casc of thc dcbatcs

of the Europcan Parhamcnt, thc intcr cntions of succcssi c men bCrs, all sPCak~
ing in thcir
n nativc tongue, can bc rcad all in nc language, as if thc dcbatc
itsclI bad bccn n onohn:ua1. These Prcscntational fcatures are ill
tors ofi11stitutional P

rtant indica_

hcy and oftbc va)tranSlations arc exPcctcd to be vic vcd l)y

thcir uscrs

Munday(2001 30reP rtS that uNESCO hasissucd a sct f Guidelincs lc,r its

cry rst rcquirCtranslators(Kidd 1997),in

hich it is sai(l that accuracy is thc
Iuent

for all translations The organisation s translating activitics,of coursc, sPan

a rangc of Hclds and gcnrcs,including documcnts for llat.cth1gs and c

hich

discrcpancics bet

and ta1 cderehre

nfcrenccs,in

ccn different languagc crsions can bc a sOurcc

f troublc

s11unncd as hr as Possil)le In tl c case of Peri (licals~t11c%cus

of this study it is said(Ki(ld1997 3)that whilc accuI acy is still of thc grcatcst
irnPortancc ,joun1al editors .ill insist on rccciving a rcadablc tcxt

As Iunday

bscr cs,s0mC0fthc tcrms uscd hcrc t o&tr advicc to translators arc fthc most

aditional kind,al) h1t vhich aPPhcs lnnorc gcncrally t POhcy statcmcnts on trans_

lati n

Tl1cy arc also usually undcr~sPcci

litcral , mcssagc

arc all tt rms lich

cd

accuratc , idiolnatic`

bcg morc qucstions d an

thcy I

cqui alcnt`

csolVC,as is

noxs morc or less 111iversally rccognised in thc Hcld of translation studies F

solnc of the rcquircn ents n ay bc sCCn to conflict

mcnt bcin leR to thc translat

inally,

vith cach thcr,the nnaljudgC-

r,

3 Transitivitv:the evidcnce
In thc h:ht of all this,
vc rcturn to thc initial qucstion

unif rn1ity of PracticC

vhat cvidcncc is thcrc

vithin institutions?For thc PurPosCs of analysis, a basic

m()(ld f transitivity ks as use ],bascd nd1 sc

ad

anccd b)Halliday(1985),si ul)SOn

474

IAN MAsON

ablc31 1 Process,Participants and(ircun`stanccs

Proccss

PtlrrjciPtlnfs

Irdrc"d a

C c

n ccs

`msr

lcror/C;@vl
P1

iI)August

ic c`s loll

Ijc n adc thc c

Vr3df

,'inf

sc9

11tc

cr/T .Jcr/rcr idJc

Shc askcd hiln a qucStion

TlK k)lccast warns o rmn
l c r l

sc

lxc,,sinJ

r/Phcno2 Cnon

Hcr11cad achcd
Shc lorgot his11an1c
Rc ri n
inf, dl r2

C(Il c`/
Jill
Ji

as

rrrib1

rc

at brcaklast

talkati`c

has n1illi()ns

il

thc

bank

n odka

Jill got clrunk

(1993)m1(l Mtlrtin,Mattllicsscn and Paintcr(1997) schcmaticall)=,t11is can bc

rePrCsCntcd and cxcmPhnCd as in Tablc 31 1
using a small corPuS of rand n11y selcctcd tcxts in Enghsh,Frcnch and SPanish
and thcir translations into each other languagc,shifts of transiti

ity
crC

tracked in

thc translati ns ofsPecchcs dch crcd in thc EuroPcan Parha1nent and of articles that

aPl)earc(lin d1c uNEsCO c

vrj r

Attc1111DtS at quantiIicatic)n ofthc h11dings pro cd

hc irst problell is that, givcn struCtural/systen1ic

clifferenccs betwccn languagcs, a nun1bcr f shiis arc obhgat ry (Calzada P rcz
1997:13o)and ill be intr duccd aut matically b)any con1pctcnt translator,Thcsc
t

l)c fraught ith dif6culty

thcn gi c n indicati

translators

n at all c,l

thcrc is no c hoicc l)ut t

st1

atcgics or sPontaneous bcha`i ur sincc

shift Conscqucntly, they havc to bc ltcrcd out f any

anal sisvhich sccks t c unt shifts i11troduccd bv thc translatr as a dehbcratc action

thcir Part

An examPlCiSthe Pron n1inal

vcrbal c nstruction in sPaniSh,

a ProcCss can l)c PrCsCntcd in an agcntless xsa

nati c strtlctu1

hereby

and thc translator has to Hnd an altcr~

c il)English(oiCn thc Passi C) ThuS,d1c scquencc,

Dc n haccrsc asi~vn se ha hCch

as

~cl riesgo quc se coI rc

(CalZada P

rcz1997:153),

n1ight bccomc if jt is not donc in this vav~and it has l)ot in foct l)ccn d nc in
t11is way~the risk that is run
t11c translat

runs thc risk

l But cvCn in thcsc cascs,thcre is choicc and

r oPtcd hcre f r if he fails t do this~and hc has nOt donc it~hc

,i(lcnu1in:thc agcnt of thc matcHal action proccss Tllc shift t11cn

bccomcs a signincant nc but if a shiRs f sPaniSh Pron

countcd, the rcsulting Rgures

`oul

n inal

Pr ccssCs are

l 11ndOubtcdl obscurc thc rclati c incidencc

on translations f translat r chOice

A sccond pr blcrll is thc b undary bct vcCn disallo ved structurcs and thosc

hich arc(n re or lcss str ngly)(hsPreferred It v uld for cxan PlC l)c lDossil)lc to
tra11slatc

TRANsITIVITY AND INSTITUTIONAL CULTUREs

475

Cela Permct d acucr raPi(lCmcnt lc Pcrsonncl

(A/1ossoP1990)
as This

allows raPid c acuatlon of staf

c cn

This hohtatcs c acuating tl c staf

quickly But ncidcr f thesc is a PrCfcrrcd Pti n in Enghsh In this vay staf can
bc c acuatcd quickly (N SS
P1990: 343)is a far rn rc likcly oPuon Thc di iding

hnc bct vcen this catcgory and thc prcvious Onc is fuzzy, lcading to cndlcss Pr
lc1ns f classiHcati

n,Th sc

b~

shi s vhich arc Pr Pcrly t11cf cus of attcntion in this

studv arc thc ncs vvhich rcsult fron1thc indcPcndcnt cxercisc of choicc by the
translator

0rc-or lcss automatic shiRs bscurc thc truc picture Finally,therc is

thc issuc of thc rclati c signiHcancc fshiRs Many altcr the sensc in vhich a Pr ccss
ma bc ic vcd b thc tcxt rccci cr in a signi cant vvay, particularly vhen thcy
/ith othcr shifts in thcir tcxtual cn ironmcnt. ,thcrs, h v cvCr, ma
c n11)inc

aPPCar relati cly insigniscant, F r cxamplc, a Frcnch Mcn11)er of thc Eur

Parliamcnt(MEP),c mmcnting on an in(lustHal acodent,

Pcan

ffcrs,

1a PCns c va aux icdlncs,

hich is translatcd as My thoughts arc ith the victilns

uttcranccs rcccivc a(liffcrcnt transiti
Rclati nal Pr

it

Tcchnically, thc t vo

analysis, as N1atcrial Acti

n Proccss and

ccss rcsPcctivCly Including such shifts in a quantiscation of total

shiRs,h
vcvcr, vould tcll us vcry littlc ab ut translat r bcha i ur and v uld cr_

hc11n any gurcs rcPrCsenting si nihcant shifts Yctit is dif cult t dc6nc a rehablc

~i c rcPhcablC~b undary bctvvccn thc insigniHcant and thc rcst

For rcasons such as thcsc, quantitativc analysis vas abandoncd at this stagc in

the rescarch Nc crtheless, thcre is scoPe f r a quantitati c study of rnore liFnitcd

featurcs,such as thc trcatn1ent in translation

f ParticiPants in ProcCssCS rCprcscntcd

by Pcrsonal Pronouns,
vhcre there
vould seen1t be grcat variation
vithin thc

corPus
hat f ll
s is a quahtati e analysis of the verall PattCrns of trcat1ncnt of
in thc tcxts studicd Bcf rc prcscnting these trcnds,t vo hnal bscrva~
tions arc in ordcr First, thc analysis is in no
va intcndcd to bc n rmati c No
transiti ity

ju( Cmcl.ts or cHdcisms of translator

intcndcd as a contribution t

J ns aK intendc(l Rc th ,tl c bttl ly

Dcscriptivc Translation studics, in thc intcrcsts of

learning m rc of rcgularities of translat r bcba i ur sccond, the singhng out of

instanccs of shiRs is n t intcndcd t bc takcn as a Plca f r litcrahsn in translation
C)n the contrary, thc translat
sel es

s crcati

it

and thc lin1its vhich translators thcm-

imPoSc n this are the focus f our attcntion,

4 unif r lity of aPProaCh

/c no return to thc rst fthc t vo qucstions Poscd at thc

utset Thc Hrst broad

an(l gcneral nding is a Prcdictablc()nc (Dvcrall,thc translations f the sPccchcS to

thc EuroPcan Parhamcnt stay1 clativcly closc t thc transiti ity Patterns obscr ablc
in thc sOurce tcxts(sTs) ThC scnsiti

ity of pron uncen ents by Pron incnt P hti

cians and the nccd to a okl n1isrcPresenting not only intendcd mcanings but the

rds actually sPokcn by thcln coukl conccivably bc a n tivating factor hcrc

Converscly,the UNEsCO CouiIcr translat rs disPlay grcatcr latitudc,as be ts thc

476

IAN MAsON

neld fj urnalism whcrc easc of Processhg by thc rca(lcr of thc anslau ns may
ie vcd abovc)
In the casc f the Parha1ncnt translati ns, n any shifts aPPCar t havc bccn
cffcctcd f r thc sakc f idiomatic Prefcrcncc For examplc, Enghsh n atcrial

bc scen as a high Priority(cf, thC Gui(lchncs rc

ProccSSes frcqucntly bccomc Frcnch non1inahsations; Frcnch acti c ProcCSscs

bccomc Enghsh PasSives; sPanish

sc hacc ctc bccomes Frcnch n fait and s
on;in En hsh,therc is ften l)crs nahsation f actors in matcrial ProccsscS,` hcrc

in Frcnch and spanish thc act r is not made exPhcit

hcse are,of c ursc,fan1ihar
contrastivc rcgularitics f natural cxPrCssion in thc lan uagcS c ncerncd and a

r1uayvcll rcgard such shifts as r utinc tactics Yet thc rc erse

scasoncd translat

Pr cCssCS are also c inced in thc data ith signiHcant rcgularity Pcrsonahsation lnay

bc addcd in translations from Enghsh into French and Enghsh non1jnahsations

bccome Frcnch material action ProcCSsCS
nJr s

nt,J,lintaFistlr1

ad Ption

n5

Frcncfl rl,tzFcricIr Pr ccsses

thc scparation

ad Ptc
maintenir ,11 cart

irnplclncntatlon

n1cttrC cn uvrc

co-opcration

coopcrcr

(:

Ab vc all, it is aPParcnt that a heterod x rangc of aPProachcs to thc task co~cxist

in l)

th institutions In s mc cases,therc is a hi8h incidencc f calques f sT tran~

sitivit

That such cascs are common isin no ay surPrising sincc thcrc is oRcn no nccd
t

altcr sT transiti ity in any vay A ProcCSs Iuay bcst bc rcPrcscntcd in thc targct-

languagc tcxt(TT)by the Samc Proccss tyPc Examplcs1-4bel

w,h wcvcr,sccm

to go bcyond this and arc charactcristic of a vidcsprcad strate y~cvinced in b th

institutions

of adhcring as closcly as Possil

le t thc f rmal

arrangcment ofthc sT,

1 sT By destr ying accumulatcd

vcalth and thc sOurccs of futurc
Pr duction,

total

var has sharPly incrcascd thc Prcssurc of cxistin8

PoPulati ns uPon thcir rcsOurccs and has thcrcby sharPly curtailcd

the libcrtics of ast nun11,crs f lncn andvon1cn, l,elonging not only
t

thc anquished nations,but also t thosc vhich vere suPPoscd to bc

victorious,
TT Al destruir la riqueza acumulada y las fucntcs de la Producci

n futura,

ha aumcnta(lo httnsamcntc la pK on dc la Isitl P bla

ciones cxistcntcs sobre sus rccursos, y, por lo n ismo, ha n1utilado
grascmcnte l lib h(lcs de un v to nomcro de hombles y mtllcrCS
PertCnccientcs no solo a las naci ncs encidas, sino tambi n a aquc as
que sc suponian ict riosas
la gucrrca mu lcli

(Couri ,Dcccmber2001)

2 sT It Ithc accident]rcndCrcd a largc nun

1)er of h

uses uninhabitable

and affcctcd thc clcctricity distribution systcm

TT Il a Par aillCurs rcndu inhabitablcs(lc nombrcuscs naisons et affect
lC syS mc

dc st1ibution lcctoquc
(WallStr m,1Oct bcr2001)

TRANSITI ITl/AND 1NSTITUTIONAL CULTUREs

3 ST I

l Parcc quc l Etat ct la n)

ric n

477

ont Pas v ulu imP scr lcs

n1csurcs nccessalrCs

TT I

l becausc thc govcrnment and thc town hall did n t want t

in1PoSC thc ncccssary mcasurcs

(LaguillCr,1Odobcr2001)
4 sT La oricntacion dc la PAC ha fa rccido la aParici n dc ciert s
ivorccc
Pr blemas La bosqucda de la con1Ijctiti idad a cual(luicr Prcci
la intr ducci n

dc m todos t cnicas cuyas c nsccucncias a largo plaz

sc descon ccn,
TT L ricntadon dcla PAC a hvohs

La rcchcrchc dc la con1P
n1 th dcs

PaS

titivit

aPPahtion dc certons Pr

t ut prix fav risc

bl n1cs

introduction de

ct dc tcchniqucs d nt lcs c ns quc11ccs;l n:termc nc sont

c nnues
(Jov

PCrcs,6JunC 1996)

Certttinly, thc hi8hcst incidencc of such calqucs is to bc f und in translations

bct vcen

Frcnch and sPanish,as111ight l)c cxPCctcd givcn thc syntactic sin1ilaritics

of thc t v

languagcs t hc calque is thc lo /est comn1on(lcn 1inator, as it vcrc,

of translating and may, for s mc translat rs, bc a default mcchanism, to bc o

cr-

riddcn nly vhcrc ncccssary, But calqucs arc also frcquent in translations in bod
dircctions l)ct vccn Enghsh and Frcncb r sPanish p rcOvcr, this is truc f both
instituti nal

in

scttings~desPitc thC institutional Prcfcrcnccs refcrred t

al)o

ariadon
Co cxisting with thcsc calqucs,ho
c cr,thc1 c is striking sT/TT
traI1slati ns to bc und h tl c immcdiatc cn ironmcnt of thosc just re ewcd

In thc C uricr, a frcqucnt, if not constant, trcnd is attcnuation of agency (in a11
translation Pairs) This Il9ay bc c

sahcnt P

siti

n r

cctcd

by agcnt dclcti n, disPlaccment to a lcss

re-lexicahsati n of Pa1 ticipants fr ln n 0rc to lcss sPCcisc

designati ns

In thc casc f Frcnch~t ~Enghsh tra11slati ns of onc ParhamCntary dcbatc,thcrc

arc instanccs of a m c

to vards

inCrcascd directncss affccting Pr

ccss,ParticiPants

or circumstanCcs In cxamPlcs5^9,highhghting has1)ccn addcd to dra v attcntion

to modi cations ,hich scrvc to intcnsif\ sOmc asPcct of thc crall Proccss

5 sT Mais Pcut^ n oh sc succodcr lcs catastroPhCS qui nt fraPPo 1 n

Pays l
l Sans quc la sohdarit Puissc se maniftstcrP
Bur cdn ne 'drt J f` c ch0r Cr rhc c rdsrroPhcs ll hic
co nF~

li iFf f sofiddII b n db`e

h vc

srruck mr

md I/t jrsc`

TT But can wc just sit back and watch thc disastcrs that ha e struck

France I
ith ut dcm nstrating somc Eut
Pcan s hdarityP
(BCr s,1Octobcr2001)

6 sT c cst un hon1icidc
Jr is

h micjdcJ

TT It is1murder
(Lag1

illCr,1Odobcr2001)

478

IAN MAsON
7 sT La rcsPonsal)iht du trust TotalFinaElf[
]cSt entl rc
TJ,c
.sP
n"

c
Tl
/Fl

sr

comPFcrc

9oF

TT Thc TotalFinaElf corP

ratl n

l is fully rcsPonsiblc
(Lagu lcr, 1 Oct

ber2001)

8 ST Lc gr uPc TotalFinaEll r cidivc,dc n anj rc tragiquc

c

zl`
rT/,cr FdlFJnd rJr u`^commirrjnJ dn@F 0 ncc,j d rr

TT Thc T talFinaElf

gr uP

J has actcd Cri mina y,oncc ag n

(Kh inc,1Octobcr2001)

9 sT P ur quc l on acccPtC dc P scr la qucstion(lc[

f1n

rdcr

rht,r clnc dcccPrs r dsk r c ucsFionJ

TT beR)rc xx c

agrcc to discuss
(Islcr B gui11, 1 Oct

hc intcnsi cati n occurs through

ari us movcs

ber20O1)

rc lCxicahsati ns,affecting Pr ~

cesS(9) rt tt bute(6),a(l(lCd m erial Proccss(5),Shi f ciKumstcinual m

CxPreSSi n of attitudc to accusation (8) and shift from PrcsuPP
a c8ati

to
ards

T11
bec

Siti n

to dircct

n(7) (It iS intcrcsting that at same ti1ne thcre is sOmc cvidcnce

fa n

convcntionahscd j dirCCtness
vhere routine cOurtcsics arc c nccrncd,

v qucr la s li(la"t a cc lcs ctimes I shall C okc solidc rity witl1, r

,

mcs
I "cl1JFd Fi fo cxPrcss n1y sohdarity with the
ictims ) What is most
j

strikiI1g,ho :c cr,is a gcncral tcndcncy in these translations to n1o

(lirccti

n of Pcrcci cd intended mcanings, Tl)at is, thcrc arc I)lCnty

e l`Jrthcr in thc

f discoursal

signals in thc co_text of thc exan I)lCS citcd,

vhich P int t a(liscourse of bla1 c
( ll whg a scHous industrial acci(lcno and can bc sccn t

cr jusuHc i()n brthc

mo cs h hl htc dh5-9,whch r e tcD intcnsi d1c blamc Or g1al sscnt h

thc c ntcxt of this particular dcbatc, t11en, signs of a c hcrent translator stratcgy
cmcrgcin the Frcncb-t -Enghsh pair But this aPPr ach is n t gcncrahscd and
i(lcly
arying apProachcs arc aPParCnt in thc translati ns of(liffcrcnt sPceches T11us,in
thC SPanish~t ~Frcnch Pair,calqucS such as exan11)lc4ab e c -cxist ith transla_

tions sho ving a large nun11)cr and variety()f signi cant transiti ity shilts
hc san1e
is t1 uc ofthc C ur1 r translati ns,
hcre cxtreme litcralncss in t11c transfer of Pr ccss
tyPcS fr m French to spanish c -cxists
vith Consi(lerable latitudc clse
herc In
sh rt,thc trcat cnt f transitivity pattcrns ,aries videly
ithin cach institution and

vithin cach languagc Pair,

5 DiscOursal shifts
Individual shifts n ay bc individually signi cant and pro ide soll c CluCs to transla-

aPProachcS to thcir task Thcy arc,nc erthclcss,gcncrally unhkcly to havc a

signincant imPact on thcir
n on thc recePtion of the
vh lc translated tcxt

hcrC,on thc d1cr hand,shifts c ncatenatc and estabhsh a trend

vithin a tcxt,a
tors

holc(liscoursc lnlay bc shifted, such that a diffcrcnt in PrcSSion may bc rCccivcd

of thc ST Pr ducer s attitudC r intcntions, In thc casc f the C uricr, a singlc
cxamPle i1l scrvc t illustratc thc P int Thc hnal cdition of thc pcriodical

TRANSITI ITY AND INSTITUT10NAL CULTUREs

(Deceml)cr2001)carricd the tcxt of a specd

deli

479

crcd by thc French ritcr and

statcsrna11Andro Mal1 aux at(JNESCO h1 1960,In it,hc11ailcd the launch of an

intcrnational calnPaign to Prcscrvc d)e n10numcnts of ancicnt EgyPt Wc n ted
ea1

ial ProccsscS to bCcon)c Enghs11

r Frcnch acti cn atc
a gcneral tcn(lcnc)

li`|I

passi

es and suggested that this n ight be a standard Frcnch_to-Enghsh translatOr

vc Cr,thc luovc is ra1 cly systcmatlc and ould n t

ProcCdurc H

attcntlon to itsclf But xx

16 instanccs of aCti

normally cl1 a

hcn,xl lthi11a1500_word articlc,thcrc arc no k vcr than

c l)r

ccsscs bcc n1ing Passivc oncs, an ovcrall trend is cstab-

hshcd in .hich ProccssCS lnlay l)e`ic``cd as haPPcning indcPcndCntly

fa8cnts

at lcast thc dynalnisn1of actors in ProccSScs is rcduced h)thc Enghsh translati

ol thc N1alraux spccch, this trcnd is accon11 aniCd l)y t`vo in tances of Rclational

Proccsscs (of bc" g - otrc ) bccon1h1g NIcntal Processes (of seen ing) and of a

gcncI al rcduction f thc rolc f Egypt on1Actor t Actcd uPon,aS in 10and 11

10sT I FgyPtc conquit

j sOn autonomic
EPF"on hcr durcliaoi

TT E Pt can)c into hel^o n

:)

11 sT la myst
s

ricusc Pr sCncc lDar laqudlc lCS

u tcs(lc

l EgylDtc

unisscnt aux statuCs dc nos cath drales

k,rks
frhc n rc us Prcsen hcrc rhc
cdFhcdr FsJ

EPr

iFC llJrh r c srdF cs

our

TT thc incxPhcablc quahty vhich brings tl)c EgyPtian n1astcrPiCces into

n cad1c(lrals
C0 1111union vith thc statues()f our

thin the subject

hl thc sT of both 10and 11,not nly docs EgyPte iaturc
Phrasc l)ut thc crbal Proccss itSClf is a Iuatcrial action onc '`scn antiC shift
in thc TT of10tun s this acti n intcntion ProccSS into hat simpson(1993 89)

n un

calls an action suPcrvcntion Process,that is

vhcrc thc Pr ccSS n1ay0ccur indcPcnd-

hilc,i1111,thc EgyPtian111astcrPicccS havc

cntly ol thc vohti n ofd1e actor R/Ican
turncd from actor to goal and arc thus sccn as aCtcd uPon rathcr than as acting

Thc EuroPcan
arhan ent t1 anslati ns arc not imn1unc s n thcsc (hscoursal
shifts(f r SuPPorth1g cvi(lcncc, scc the exccllcnt analysis in Calzada P

rcz2001)

f a sPcCch
crnn1cnt
s
handhng
of the
dch crcd by a SPaniS11 A/1EP, critical ()f thc British go
c11sis ovcr BsE (Bovi11c sPongif rm I nccPhaloPathy Or, n1ore P Pularly, 1ad
Co Discasc)and thc Eur Pcan conuuissiOn s allcgcd lack of6rnl1 css in dCahng
Vhcrcas thc Enghsh translation f thc sPeech(lisPlays a nun1bcr

vith thc Iuattcr

A good cxamPlc is Pro ided by thc Frcnch and Enghsh translations

l cascs f attcnuation affecting the t1ansitivity of Pr ceSsCs,thc Frcnch translation

cxhibits a ccltain an1 unt of intcnsincati

n Thc cxamPlcs are PrCsCnted as 12~17

bclo

12 ST La suPcditacion dc las decisioncs Politicas a las Prcsj ncs

econon1icas cn el Rcin

unido csti cn cl origen dc la Pr blcn1idca inhcr~

entc a la EEB

T e sub r ndhon Po hcd dc0xIOns onom C Prcssurcs in

rhc Jo F ol rhc inhcrcnr Prob`cn2l l BsE J

1s dr

480

IAN MAsON
TT Thc undcrlying Problcm
vith BsE is that pohtical dccisions have
bccn sub rdinatcd to cc n n1ic PrcSsurcs in the1Jnited Kingdom

13 sT N sc ha llcvado a cab la crradicacion dc la cnfcrmcdad

f Jlc dic Fion e seds h s nor becn c' d@ur rfir d`,,h s noF cdr
i

cd

scr u J

Thc(liscasc has n t bccn cradicated

14 ST No habr tra soluci n quc Pcnsar quc la C

dccisiones que Pucdcn Presentar ricsgos,
rJ,cre"iF`nor
dd

PFed d

bc

cisJ r,s

n r er soF1 r1 n

n1isi n

ha ad ptad

Fhdn ro b fi Fh r rhc Con,il,ission ds

whicf,cdn Pres nF rIsks J

TT The imPrcssion will inc tably bc gi en that thc C

ml
ission

has

adopted dccisions vvhich luay Prcscnt risks,

I5 sT La cnfcrmcdad sc

rigin con la introducci

n dc harinas dc carnc

Flc se se b dn 1rh rhc1nrr d crion ofb nc mc J

TT Ccttc lnaladic est due

intr ducdon

dc%rines dc viandc,

J,is discds is du ro Fhc inFrodtIcFion? bone mc F`

16 sT[cl g bicrno brit;nic

l forzand la adoPci n dc dccisioncs

crnmcnt brong the adoPti n f dc0si ns]

TT[lC g uvcrncmcnt britanniquc
c nt gnant l Uni n;adoPtcr
IthC British Go

dcs docisions
Fhe Br1rJsh Corernf,,cnr

forcinf

rhC tJr,i nF ddoPF d cisionsJ

17sT Preguntarn s si no es cl m mcnto dc quc la PAC(lcjc de

ccntrarse solo en ]
fds
Fo s

urscFvcs ri

is n r

oP conC nrrd iaJ so

he J,,omcnF`/or r

on

cG1P rComm n JricuFFurd`P

TT nous dcmander silc1 oment n

est Pas vcnu dc ccsscr d axcr unique_
`

mcntla PAC sur

f

,,l

sk urscF es rrfle z,,

h s

nor com ro xroP bdsin

rh

G1Ps /c,,on

AS Previ usly obscr cd,thc shifts rnay occur in a nun11)er

f diffcrcnt vays and

may,indi idual1y,bc f httle signi cancc But thcy are mutually rcinf rcing in that,

vithin a tcxt,thcy all go in the samc<hrccti n:tovvards attcnuation in Enghsh and

intensiHcati n in Frcnch In thc sT f 12, thc
sub rdinati n of pohticians t
cConon ic prcssure in the UK is PresuPPoScd (iC. takcn for 8ranted) and then
dcclarcd to l)c atthc r t fthc BsE Pr blCm,Thc sPccch act thus conccntratcs on
thc rcsu`rs f this sub rdination Thc English TT mcrcly cf

i,,,s thc sub rdinati n

and rclcgatcs tllc uK om b n:ll art oO thC Actor tc,a CircumstanJal h13,tl e
ST PrCsCnts an aCtion intcntion Process( vith an imphcd human agcnt hcld resP n_
sil,lc f r

thc8oal n t bcing attalncd) In thC TT,it simPly allCgcd that the goal

has n t bccn attained In 14,the Enghsh translation(lclctcs thc goal

(t

whom is thc imPrcssion

f thc proccss

gi cnP)an(l allows thc in rcncc that thc imprcssion

may bc unb unatc and e en%lse;in thc ST,howcvcr,thC crb pcnsar

(bcliCvC)

TRANSITIVIT Y AND INsTlTUTIONAL CULTUREs

is accon1PaniCd by(lcOntic modahty(thc n
si

ti

481

n ofbcing obhged to reach thc c nclu~

n)and associatcd vith an in phcd11uluan scnser~ us

Concrscly, thc Frcnch translation in 15 introduces direct causatlon(Cst duc

;/is duc t )and thus cnhanccs thc aCcusatory illocuti

nary forcc,its forcc as a sPCcch

act that Perf rn1s the acti n of accusation,by luaking it cxPhcit ThC translation

16adds a goal( uni n)t thC acti n intcntion Pr cCss of forcing ,thus cxPhcitly
idcntil
1g the Et1rc,l)can tInion as thc vicdm fuK
m crnmcnt attion Flnally,in
i

cxamplc17, vhcrcas thc ST prcscnts thc CAP(C mn1 n

Ag1 icultural Policy)as

actor in a 1cntal ProccsS,thc TT makcs thc CAP thc goal of a matchal acti n
Pr

ccss
vith an i111Phcd human actor In this
vay, the ca

institutions bcc mcs morc dl1 cct(i

k)1 action by the Eu

c itis timc r us to stoP basing Policy solely

on

) The combincd cffcct f thesc various shifts is a subtle changc to thc Osten/iIson 1986)in tl`c translated tcxt,luaking thc criticisms l)1o rc
si n(sPerbCr and
r lcss dircct than in the c rrCsPonding sT,

6 Conc1usions
In gcncral,thc limitcd cvidcncc On vhich this study is l)ased suggests that, crall,
thc Eur pcan Parliamcnt translations stay rly dosc to thcir sTs.Tbc uNEsCO
Cou icI translations cxhibit Ill

re latitudc, vid1a In rc frequcnt incidcncc f shifts

in transiti ity
Vithin this general trend, h
c cr, thCrc is a surPrising degrcc
f data ,ith
f variati n Cl sc calqucs of sT transitivity co-cxist in both scts
ra(lical shifts, in lvi11g jncrcascd di1 cctness, attCnuati n, PcrS nahsati n a11d so
n Occasiona y,a sct of shiRs with similar inten ing r attcnuating e ccts scr cs
h lc tcxt
1crc is, then, littlc
to construCt a(]iscoursal shiR at thc lcvcl of thc v
uniforlt1ity of Practice r cvidCncc f in ucnce f institutional guidclincs n trans-

lator behavi ur Thc Ovcrriding imPrcssion is onc of translators eithCr adhcring as

cl sel)

as P ssiblc to thcir source tcxt or, in(lcParting6 on) it, displayh1g traccs

vhich are prcscnt in thc

of thcr discourses, faint echoes of ide logical stanccs
cnvironmcnt(and vhich,by thcir cry11aturc,arc transindividual),Gi en thc11ea y
use l11adc of s cclance translators by b th institutions,this1nay n t seelu surPrisin

Yct thc Parhalncnt cxcrts Closc c ntrol o cr thc recruitlucnt of frcclanccrs and
rc1najns rcsPonsiblC f0r quality control of all t1

anslati 1)s,UNEsCO,lncam hilc,

issucs practical guidchnes to thosc it cn11,loyS o1 a frcclancc basis,A furthcr consid~

cration is thc aguencss of the gui(lclines issucd,thcir inhcrcnt c ntradicti ns and
thc qucsti nablc assun1Ptions

1ucssa(:c

n 1 ich

me conCcPts ( authCntic

accuratc`

9Ctc)are bascd Thc c idencc adduccd hcrc suggcsts that thc vholc issuc

of institutional culturcs of translating,in comPa11S

n to thc trcatlncnt of transitlvity

by translat rs,isvorth) of iu re systcn1atic cxPloration,across a range ofinstitu~

tions and languagc pairs

Chapter 32

Lawrence Venuti

TRA NSLATION'COM M U NITY'UTOPIA

Langua:e is a rcPosit ry of ancicnt errors

and a trcasury of Potential

truths,

Jean-JacquCS Lecerclc

An antinomy in thcOry
EN

THOuGH No oNE seemsbkelvt

dcnv that communication is

E thc Primdy alm tlrld hncd n of a tlanslatcd text,tclday wc c%r iom thinkln8
that translating is a siI
inf rmed

Ple conununicative act In contcmPorary translati n thc ry

by Contincntal Phil

s phical

traditions such as cxistcntial Phcn

mcn logy

and PoStStructurahsln, languagc is constitutivc of thought, and meaning a sitc of

n

ultiPlc(lCtCrn1inati ns,s that translation is readily sccn as in esting thc forcign~

languagc tcxt vith a domcstic signihcancc(scc,f

this

r cxamPlC,HCidcggcr1975,Lc is

olume, Bcnjan1in 1989). Translauon nc cr co 11nunicatcs in an untroublcd

;;1fT

lJ| ;:
(
:
(
irT
f

t:y
F(
f

f
l;

:: 1nl | :f {

; l t

,s& l

is totahzing, c cn if nevcr total, nc cr sean11css rnal It can bc said to

2000/'evised 2oo4

Pcrate

TR ANsLATION`

COMMUNITY` UTOPIA

483

in every vord of thc translation l ng beforc thc translatcd tcxt is furthcr Pr

by readers, madc t bcar other d mcstic mcanings and t

scr c

cessed

Othcr domestic

intcrests
seen as don cstic inscriPtion,nc cr quitC cr ss-cultural con11nunicatiom,trans-

lation has m vcd thc rists

brmul

t0 Vards an cthical reflection

vhcrcin remcdies are

cd tc,K 0re or P SC"c thC bre nncss ofthc m n text(sCc, r exam~

unters
Ple, BCrn1an, this volumc, and Venuti 1995, 1998) Yet an cthics that c
the domcsticating cffccts of thc inscriPtion can only bc f rmulatcd and Practiccd
Prin1arily in domcs iC tCrms,in domestic dialccts,rcgistcrs,discourses,and styles
And this rncans that thc linguistic and cultural direrenccs ofthc f
bc signallcd indirectly,by their disPlacement in the translati

diffcrencc introduced into

rcign text can only

n,thr ugh a domestic

alucs and institutions at home This ethical attitude is

thcrcf rc siluultancOus vith a Pohtical agcnda thc d mcstic terms of the inscriPtion

bccomc the focus frcvcriting in thc translation,discursivc stratcgics vhcre thc hicr_
:alucs in thc (l mcstic culturc arc disarrangcd to sct 8oing
archics that rank thc
Pr cCsSCs of dCfan

iharization,canon rcforIuation,idcol gical critiquc,and institu-

tional changc /`translat r may Hnd that thc cry conccPt of thC domcstic mcrits
intcrrogation f r its conccaIlaacnt f hctcrogcnCity and hybridity

vhich can comPh-

catc cxisting stcrcotyPcs,can ns,and standards aPphCd in translati n

/hcn n1 dvatcd by this cthical Pohtics f(liffcrcncc, thc translat r seeks to

build a comn1unity vith forcign culturcs, to sharc an understanding vith and of

thcm and to c llal) ratc on ProjCcts hunded on that understanding,going so hr as
:it to rcvisc and(lc cl
alues and institutions Thc ery imPulse
to all
P(l mestic
to seek a community abroad suggests that thc translator
vishcs t cxtcnd or

complctc a Particular d mcstic situation, to compcnsatc f r a dcfcct in thc trans~

lating languagc and litcrature,in thc translating culture As Maurice Blanch t ar8ues,
thc vcry n tion fc n11nunity ariscs hcn an insuf ciency Puts indi idual agcncy
int

qucstion(Blanch t1988 56) ThC cthica y and Pohtically m tivated translat

cannot fa to see the laCk f an cqual f oting in the translation proccss,stilnulatcd

by an intcrcst in the foreign, but incscapably leaning to

vards the recePtor ThiS

translator kn0
s that translations ncver simPly communicatc f

rcign tcxts bccausc

thcy makc P ssil)lc Only a domCsticatcd undcrstanding,hoxxc er much defan1ihar~

izcd,h
cvcr much subvcrsi e or suPPortivC of the don1cstic
In thc abscnce of crOss~cultu1 al comn1unicau n11na;:cctcd b d n cstic intclli~
hat kinds of c n munitics can translation P ssil)ly fostcrP
8ibilitiCS and intcrcsts,
XVhat con11nunitics can bc bascd n thc domcstic inscriPtion of the f rcign that
hn1its and rcdirccts thc c mmunicativc airn of translationP

Con 1nunication in translation

In thc 1970s, thc f rmahst thc rist Gideon T ur tried to dc nc translati n as a
Co 1FnuniCati c actvhilc ackn
dcd8ing thc domcstic valucs that con1c into Play,
the tar:ct n rms that constrain co 11uunication,Translation,hc
is com l,unicdFion Jn rrtins drCd mcss

vr tc,

cs VVithin a ccrtain cultural lin8uiStic

systcIn,witb all rdc ant c nscqucnccS r thc dcc mPosidon of thc

484

LA /RENCE

EN

UTI

source1ncssagc,thc cstabhshment

f the invariant,its transfer acr

ss thc

cultural-hnguistic border and thc rcc mPositi n f thc targct Fnessagc

(T ury1980

Thc cstabhshmcnt

f thc invariant

17;his cmPhasis)

n11munication in translati n is de ncd as

` if c
thc transn ission of an in ariant, docsn
t thc cry nccd to cstabhsh thc in

ariant

mean that translating docs somethln8m rC and PCrhaPS tbCr than communicateP
Thc s urcc mcssagc is alxxays intcrprcted and rcinvcntcd, csPecially in cultural
forms oPen to intcrpretation, such as literary texts, Phil

sophical trcatiscs,

subtithng,advcrtising copy,confcrcncc Papcrs,legal testim

ny I ocan the sourcc

mcssagc c cr bc in ariant ifit undcrgocs a Pr ceSs f cstabhshmcnt in

targct lan8uage and culturcP It is al

l1n

a ccrtain

.ays rcc nstructed acc rding to a diffcrcnt sct

f valucs and al ays variablc according to different langua es and culturcs T ury
ultiInatcly rcckoncd ith thc ProblCm fc mmunicauon by sidestcPPing it altogcd cr: hc shiftcd thc cmphasis a vay from cxPl ring an equi alcncc bct vccn thC
translation and thc forcign tcxt and instcad f cuscd n thc acccPtab ity ofthc trans~
lati n in thc targct culturc, Thinking about thc f rcign is thus prccmptcd in fa
r
of rcscarch that dcscribcs domcstic cultural n rms
But lct

s Pursuc this prccmptcd hnc of cnquiry. What formal and thcmatic

fcaturcs f a forcign no cl,f r instancc,can bc dcscribcd as invariant in thc translati n

Pr cCSs? Sincc canons of accuracy vary according to culturc and hist rical

momcnt, de

niti ns

of hat c nstitutes the in ariant vill likc hse ary Lct s ask

thc qucsti n of currcnt translation PracticCS Today,translators

f novcls int lllost

lan8uages scck to maintain unchangcd thc l)asic clemcnts of narrati e form Thc
:ritten to altcr
Plot isn t re
actions is dclctcd r rc ised
acters

cvcnts or thcir scqucnce, And none

f the charactcrs

Datcs,historical and gcograPhical rnarkers,thc char~

names~cvcn whcn d)c names are rathcr comPhcatCd and fclreign sounding

~ these arc gcncrally not altercd

r nly in rarc cascs (c,g, Russian namcs)

Contcmporary canons of accuracy are based on an adcquacy to thc foreign text an
accuratc translation of a no cl rnust n t only reProducC thc basic clemcnts

f narra~

u:hly thC same number of Pagcs,

In 1760, h
vcvcr, Abb Pr ost clai1ned that accuracy governcd his Frcnch
crsion of samucl Richards n s Pdmcrd c cn th ugh hc rcduccd the seven En:hsh

lun cs t four in French I havc not changcd anything Pcrtaining to thc auth r s
tivc f rn but sh uld do so in r

intention` thc Abb asscrtcd, nor ha c I changcd much in thc rnanncr in

hich

hc

Put that intcntion into vords (LCfCvCrc 1992a: 39) To us, such statcmcnts don

merely substitute a(hffcrcnt canon of accuracy (foundCd on notions ()f authorial

intcnti

n and stylc); d ey alSo sccm t0 CXcccd thc vcry gcnrc of translati n

Pr vost

s tCXt involvcd abridgcmcnt and adaPtation as

In currcmt Practiccs, a translation of a novcl can and must con11nunicatc thc

basic clcmcnts of narrati c
st l n t

f rrn

that structurc thc f reign langua:c tcxt But it is

truc that thcse elcmcnts arc frcc f on1variation Any language use is likely

to Vary hc standard dialcct by samPhng a(li crsity of subStandard rn in rf rma-

tions:rcgional r grouP dialCctS,jargons,chch s and slogans,styhstic innovations,

archaisms,neolo sms Jean Jacques Lcc dc lls thcse varhtions thc lem nder
bccausc dacy cxccCd c n1111unication of a univocal rncaning and instcad dra
un t the c nditi ns

v attcn-

ofthe c n1Inunicative act, conditions that arc in thc

rst

TR

ANsLATION` COMMUNITY` U TOPIA

485

instancc hnguistic and cultural, but that ultilnatcly cmbracc social and P htical

fadors(LccCrdc1990) ThC rcm ndcr

in htcrary tt,xtsis muCh morc comPlict

n198 140-1),

as wdl as PrcsCnt lJamcs

Any c )rnunication thr ugh translating, thcn,

d mcstic

tc(l,

urscs,PaSt

f coursc,usually a scdirncntation of formal clcmcnts and gcncric disc

vill

in ol c

the release of a

rcmaindcr,cspccially in the case f htcraturc Thc foreign textis rcvvrittcn

in d mestic dialccts and disc urscs, rcgistcrs and stylCs, and this rcsults in thc

odttmon o tcxttlal c s th p

thC rc lallguagc
and culturc,Thc translat r may Producc thcsc cffccts to c

od n

thC hi o

tcXt, trying to in cnt domestic analogucs for f rci8nf rms

rcsult vv
b itics

l al

`1nunicate the forcign

and thcmcs But thc

ays go bcyond any communication to rclcasc targct-orientcd P

ssi~

of rncaning

el,DecFd'es Pc'eird,Patrick
Considcr a rcccnt Enghsh translati n ofan Itahan n
Crcagh

s 1995 crsion f Antonio Tabucchi

s sosFicnc Pere

rd (1994), Crcagh

Enghsh consists mostly of thc currcnt standard dialcct But hc culti

atcd a noticc_

ablc strain of coll quiahsm that s mctin1cs vcCrs into undcrvv rld argot, Hc

rcndcrcd
taccva

) as

f ur
(

mcn with a sinistcr air )as bur shady lookng characters,

stare con gh occhi

apcru
stay vith your cycs oPcn ) as kcCp your cycs pcclcd/ un PCrs naggio

dcl rcglmc C% gurc in thc rc mC )as hgw

sCn pam ( with ut
( g t slceP
as bCddy
and
aa(lc,rm
c
as
hn
hiS
b
tllday
stllt,
Pyjam
( silCnt

gaggcd,

quattr uon1ini dall aria sinistra

13, 19,43, 73, 108, 196; Crcagh 1995: 5, 9, 25,45, 67,

127).Crcagh also mixcd in s llle distincuvcly Br lsh words and Phrascs He

bycs (Tabuccl 1994

una cr ica molto ncgati Ca

little b arding house )as httlC

cry negati c criticisl )aS slating/ Pcnsi ncina

lu in troublc )as rn jn a pick1c Parlano thCy

doss~h use/ sOno nci guai
to takc a dekk (Tabucchi 1994

rcndcrcd orrcn(lo

horr lc as bl ody awhl,

talk

)as nattcr/ and a vcdcrc

look

)as

80, 81,84, 104, 176; Crcagh 1995: 50, 51, 54,64, 115)
Within Parcnthescs I havc inserted altcrnati c rcndcrings to highlight thc rangc
and in cnti eness of Crcagh s translating, The altcrnati cs should n t bc rcgardcd

as someho i

rn

rc accuratc than his ch iccs In cach casc,b th rcndcrings estabhsh

n~
raPhical Cquivalcnce,a si1nilarity to the Ita1ian tcxt Consistent vith clicti
ary dc6niti ns Crcagh s choiccs c 11nunicatc mcanings that can be callcd

a lcxic

in ariant

only insofar as thcy arc rcduccd to a basic1ucaning sharcd by l)oth thc

Itahan and thc Enghsh

rl,l.lDw ,xa"Cs ths mcaI l ,Tl C
a11ation mi t be
CrCa rs anu

shift as that c nccpt has bccn(lcvcloPcd in translati n studics sincc thc

callcd a

1960s(see,for cxamPlc,Cat 11965;Blt m~Kulka th volumc;Toury1995) If

Crcagh s En hsh is juxtaPoscd to Tal ucchi s Italian, lcxical shiRs can indccd l)c
dctcctcd, shiRs in registcr fron

dlc current standard(lialcct

f Itahan t

my qucrics,

colloquial dialccts in British and A1ncrican Enghsh In resPonsc t

Crcagh adn1ittcd that

vari us

mc Phrascs arc luorc colloquial in Enghsh than in Itahan/

lnaking clcar that his shifts arc n t rcquircd by structural diffcrcnces bct vccn thc
t v

languages, but rathcr moti atcd by litcrary and cultural ailus:

I even

Crcagh stated, t usc nly idioms that vvould ha e bcen currcntin1938,

fthe

n vcl, and to hand thcm t thc right sPcakCr,t

enccs bctwccn thc charactcrs

tried/

thc Pcri

lnakc shght hnguistic differ~

(PerSOnal co csp0n(lcncc

8Dcccml)cr1998)

486

LA /RENCE VENUTl
Yct the n tion of a sh"td cs n t cntirely dcscribc the tcxtual effccts sct

oing

by Crcagh s choiccs

is translation signiflcs beyond his litcrary and cultural intcn~

tions by rclcasing a l)ccuha1 ly Enghsh rc1uaindcr

thc(li rcnt dialccts and1

gcncric distinctions,Tabucchi s novclis a l)ohtical thrdlc

dictat

cgiste1 s

ns In tcrms f

cstabhsh a rclation t Enghsl` litcrar) stylcs, genrcs^ and traditi

sct undcr thc P rtugucsc

r'\ntonio de C)hvch a salazar,it rccounts h

nc Percira,thc aging cultural

cdit r f a Lisb n nc
sPaPCr,is slo

1y radicahzcd o cr a fc :CCkS``hich chmax

vhcn he Prints an attack on thc f`scist rcgin1c Crcagh S Polyhngual luixturc f

standard and c lloquial,British and Amcrican,gi cs his Pr sc an cxtrcn1cly c
sational quahty that is consistent xs=ith Tabucchi
Pcreira s narrativc takcs an ral f rn1,an of

cr~

s prcsentation of thc thriller Pl

cial tcstilnony to an unnanlcd authority

(hCncC the curi us titlc) Yet thc Slang) Enghsh also altcrs thc charactcrization

Pcrcira l,y suggcsting that11c is lcss stai(l and l)c1

haPs)oungcr than thc clderly

journahst l CsCntCd in thc Itahan tcxt

1

At thc same dmc,thc B tish and American slang rckrs to molllcnts in thc
hist

ry of Enghsh languagc ction, It rccalls thrillcrs that address shnilar Pohtical

tllcmcs,n t su llc,wls fG1am Grccne 2c Coi,ndc,,rI F=1Jcnr(1939),

ich,hkc Tabucchi s,is sct(luring the sPanish civ XlVar and in lves an attcmPt
1

aid the RcPublican si(lc against Franco By virtuc of this htcrar) rcfcrcnce,
cadcr t (listi11guish l)ct CCn Tabucchi
Creagh s translati n in ciect in itcs thc

lcRwing oPPosition to hscism an(l Grccnc

1996: 180 1) Grccnc sa v11is

sm rc cautious hl)cralism(DiCmcrt

thr lcrs as cntcrtainments

cngagcd in social and

Pohtical issues,designcd not to Changc things but to gi e thcn cxPreSsion (`llain

1983 81) The linguistic rcscmblanccs bct `ccn Crcagh s transladon and Grccnc s
n
cl

highhght thc idcological diffcrenccs that(listinguish Tabucchi

trcatn

cnts of thc samc historical cvcnt,

s and Grccnc

Thus,ald1()ugh Crcagh s tlanslatiou caI1be said to conlmunicatc d1c rt)rm and

tbcn1e f Tabucchi sn vcl, ncithcr of thcsc fcaturcs c`capes thc a1 iations introduccd by t11c inscriPtion fan Eng sh languagc rcmaindcr Thc rcmai11dcr d es not
just inscril)c a don1cstic set oflh`guistic and cultural differenccs in thc

orcign text,

but supPhes thC loss fthc f rcign lan:uagC(liffc1 cnccs vhich c nstitutcd that text

Thc loss ccurs, as Alasdai1

lNIacIntvrc has obscr cd, bccausc in anv

tradition~

bcaring con1n1unity thc 1anguagc-i11-usc is closcly ticd to thc cxPrcssion of thc

sharcd bchc f that tradition/ and this

ivcs a historical chmcnsion

to languagcs

hich Rcn ls tO survivc thc translatlng Pr ccss (MacIntyrc 1988

384)

N1acIntyre argucd that this Pr blCn1 f untra11slatability is n10st acutc 1th thc intcr_

nationah'cd languagcs in~usc i11 1atc t vcnticth-ccntury 111odcrnity,

likC English,

hich havc1 1inilnal PresuPP siti ns in resPcct of P Ssil)|y ri al bchef systcms and

so
ll neut1 ahze thc hist rical(hmcnsi n of thc forcign tcxt(ibid,) In Enghsh
translation,thcrclorc,
a kind of tcxt xx hich cann t be rcad as Fl,c rc F jr js out of

contcxt1s

rcndcring it, it

is turncd

nc crtheless

rendcrcd contcxtlcss, But in s

into a tcxtVhiCh is no longcr thc author s,n r such as

nizcd b thc audiencc t0
hom

voukl bc rccog

it as addressed
(ibi

l: 385,MacI11tyrc

cml)11asis)

TR

NSLATION` COM MUN1TY` UTOPIA

487

CrCa h s translati n at oncc inscril Cd an Enghsh-langua:c cultural history in

1^abucchi s no cl and disPlaccd thc historical dirncnsion of thc Itahan tcxt This tcxt

ccuPiCs a Placc in a narrati c tradition that includcs rcsistancc novcls during and

nd V dd ar,as wcll as no cls al) ut hk undcr hscisrn,Albcrto

Morca ia s corlformis (1951; fle Co,,/orm^r),hr instancc,and Gior oB sa s

a cr

thc Sec

n d F,n ~Conrini(1962; llc Gdrdcn ofr c nz

Italian 11ist

y ContaiI1s a fascist traditiO11 ensuI

C n n^),Tllt

cry h

tlltat

ccl that Tabucchi s rca(lcrs

v uld

undcrstand the salazarist regin1e in distinctivcly Itahan tcrn

s,not n crcly as an allu_

sion to Muss hnrs(hctat rshiP,but as an allegory of currcnt cvents sosFicne Pcrcirtz

as !rittcn in 1993 and PubhshCd thc f llo ving ycar,
vhcn a ccntcr-right coah~
,ith thc clcction
ictory of s io Berlusc ni s Forza Itaha
tion gaincd P
cr in Italy

ho(lidn tl vc thc Itahan

lll oVCn1Cnt As Tabucchi hil
sclf sakl of his no cl, th sc
liucal situation took it as a symbol of rcsistancc m wit11in (Co onCo199
105,rny translatiOn) InvCsted :ith this Pccuharly Itahan si niHcancc,sosricnc Pcrcircz

k1 300,000coPies vithin a ycar f pubhcati n

Although hvorabIy recei
cd by Britis11an(lAn1crican rc =ic s,CrCagh s trans
lati n hardly bccame a bcstscllCr

Vithin t v yCars of Pubhcation thc Amcrican

cdition Pubhshed by Nexx E)irections sold 5,000 c Pics Crcagh maintained a
lcxic
vas insuf cient
8raPhical cqui alcncc, l)ut thc I cmaindcr in his translation
s

c1

to rcstorc thc cultural and Pohtical hist ry that n1adc thc no cl sO rcsOnant Ior
Ita

an rcadcrs,as :cll as rcadcrs in othcr EuroPcan countrics vvith si1nilar historics,

such as sPain

Con munication through inscriPtion

Can a translation evcr con n unicatc to its rcadcrs thc undcrstanding of thc forcign
tCxt that foreign readers ha cP Ycs, I vant to arguC,but this co 1Inunication ill
al

ays be Partial, b th inc

l,lctC and ine itably slantcd tovcards thc d mcstic

scene It occurs nl
vhcn thc d mcstic rcmaindcr rclcascd b thc translation
includcs an inscriPtion fthc f rcign contcxt in vhich thc tcxt nrst c1ncrgcd

Thc rm fc mmunication work hcrc is sccon(l or(lcr,built uP 1btlt Signi~

ng
t

bCy 11cl a lc ic graPhcal cqm alcncc,cncompassing but cxcccdlng wh

Valtcr BcllJamh ca ed`nR)rmat0n or sublect matttj F(BC amin ths v lumc)

TmI1slati ns dnt tarc more than tlansmis ons of mlDlcct mcltttxr,

Bclllamin wrottA,

comc into bcing`vhcn in thc c ursc of its survi al a xs ork has rcachcd thc age of

its f`ln c I understand thc term famc to mean thc ovcrall rcccPtion f a litcrary
text,not only in its
n languagc and culturc,but in thc languagcs of the cultures

that ha c transhted ,and not only tlac ju( mcllts of

ic
crs
t homc and abroad,
but thc interPretations of htcrary historians and critics and thc imagcs that an intcr-

nationally hmous tcxt may comC to bCar in thcr cultural rms and pratticcs,
both chtc and mass ``translati

n fa rcign novcl can c mmunicatc,not sin Ply

dictionary mcanings,not sil11Ply thC basic clcmcnts of narrati c forn1,but an inter_

PrCtati n

that ParticiPates in its

Potentially ctcrnal aRcrhfc i11 succecding

generations And this intcrPrctation can bc onc that is sha1

languagc rcaclcrs r whm thc tcxt was Writtcn Thc translati

cd by d1c f reign_

n will then t,stcr a

488

LA /RENCE

ENUTI

con1n1on undcrstanding xxith and of thc lorei:n cultu1 c, an understanding that in

althouJ) f r don1cstic
Part restorcs the historical contcxt of the f rcign text
rcadcrs

Takc, r cxamPlc, Camus s novd I r nJc (1942),AS Camus himsclf

ackn
vledgcd, the Pecuharitics f stylc, Plot,and charactcrization that distinguish
thc F1 cnch

tcxt

`/erc (lcri

cd iom Amcrican ction

ccntury,csPecially thc riting of Erncst Hcn1ing

b ilcd or t

du1 ing thc cal ly t

=cnticd)

`ay,but1n

rc8cnCrally thc hard-

ugh guy pr se of writcrs hkc JamcS M Cain,Thc styliStic aturcs f

r, makC this intcrtcxtual c nnection

sFrt,n
r thc Enghsh an8uagc rcadcr much m re c"cCtively than Stuart Gilbert s 1946

Matthcv Ward s 1988translation, Tf,

f

vcrsion, The dif1orcnces arc aPParCnt

n the oPCni11g Pagc

A ourd h ,maman e mo c Ou Pcut&re hicr,jc ne sals p ,J

u unt
gralnlne de l asilc: M re d ctidoc, Enterrcment dcmain
scntin1cnts(hstingu s Ccla ne =eut ricn(hrc C tait pcut-:trc hicr,
L asilc dc vic lards cst
N1arcngo, quatrc~ ingts kjlom trcs

rC~;

|l

Alger Jc Prcndrai l aut bus dcux heures ctj arrivcrai dans l aPr s~
midi Ainsi,jc pourral vcillcr ct jc rcr1tlcrai dem ns ir,J dcmand
d

deux jours(lc con n1 n patron ct il nc P uvait lDas n1c lcs refuscr

avcc unc cxcusc Pareillc M s il n tlx tp a content Jc lui m mc
dit: Cc n cst Pas de1na hutc Il n a pas roPondu J ai PCns alors quc
jc n aurais Pas dG ltll(lire ccla En sommc,jc n
avais pas;m cxcusc1
sCntcr scs Condol ances Nl ais il le fc1 a sans
C otait Plut t lui (lc lD1
doute aPr s^dcmain,quand ilrnc erra cn dcud P ur lc n10n1cnt,c est
l

un pcu con11nc si Ina11 an n otait PaS m rtc. APr

contrairc,cc scra unc affairc class

sI cntcrrcmcnt,

au

ct tout aura1 c
tu unc allure PluS

f6cicllc,
(Can9us1942 1)
M thcr dicd today (Dr,rnaybe,ycstcrday;I can t bc sure Thc telegram
om the Homc sa s YOUR r OTHER PASsED A VAY FUNERAL
TOMORRo V DEEPsYMPATHY Vhich lea es thc matter dot11)tfttl;
it could ha c bccn cstcrda
The Homc for Aged PersOns is at Ma1 cngo,s me sRy miles i m
rith the t v
Algicrs,
cl ck bus I shoukl gct thcrc cH l)cf rc nightfall Then I can spcBd the11ight thert

,kecPing thc usual igd bcsidc the

body,and bc back hcrc t n orro c cning

I havc xcd uP vid)my emPloycr for t
days

lca c; obviously,
undcr thc circumstanccs,hc c uldn t rchsc still,I had an idca hc l okcd
annoycd,and I said, ithout thinking: sorry,sir,but it sn tn1y fault,
v u

kn

ARcr ards it struck lnc I nccdn t havc said that I had no1^cason to
excusc myscl

it vas

Pr bably hc
ill

uP to hirn to cxPrcss his SyI

Pathy and so forth

so thc day aftcr t n1 rrov,vvhCn hc sccs rne in black

For the PrcsCnt,it s alrnost asif Mother vcrcn t rcally dcad,The funeral
xi

ill bri11git home tO I11C,put an ofEcial seal on it,s

to spcak
(Gilbc

1946:1-2)

TR^NsLATION` COM M UNITY` UTOPIA

489

v I got a tclcgrarn
Iaman(lied t day (Dr ycstcrday n1aybe,Id n t kn

om thc homc ~ other deccased Funcraltom rro /,Faithfull urs

That docsn t lucan anyd ng,A/Iaybc it 'as yestcrday,

The ld Pe Plc sh mc is at Iarengo,about ci8hty kilomctcrs from
Algicrs I ll take thc t
o cloCk l,us and gct thcrc in thc aRcrnoon

That vay I can bc thcre f r thc vigil and c mc back tom rr night I
askcd n1y boss for t o days o and thcrc xxras no vvay l c was going to
refusc n1e vith an cxcusc likc that But hc
cven sai(l,
sh uldn

It

vasn

t too haPPy ab utit I

s notl11y fault Hc didn t say anyt11ing 1 hcn I thought I

t havc said that Altcr a , I didn t havc anyt11in8t aP Iogizc

for Hc s the nc vho shoul(J have ffcred his c ndolenccs But hc Prob_
:,

t dcad ARer thc funcral,th ugh,the casc

it s al n st asif Maman wcrcn
will bc dosed,and cvcrytbing v ll havc a uorc omcial cl t it

ably v l day aRcr ton10rro v, hcn hc sces I rn in Ilaou1 ning For no

(Ward1988:3)
Thc Enghsh in bod1vcrsio11s is cast in a fairly c

quial rcgister,but ncc thcy arc

juxtaposcd,thc differcnccs bcgin to Pr

Gilbert translatcd icely,Hc ad(lcd

rds

li ratc

for clari cati n,cxPanding jc Pou1 ai veillcr

1

I shall bc able t kceP vigil

into I can spcnd thc night thcrc,kecping thc usual vigil bcside thc b

and soRcncd thc abruptncs:ofthc Frcnch phrasi11g,turnin

dy'

e rc

iscd

Ccla nc vcut rien dirc

Vhich lca cs thc lnattcr doubtfu1, And hc

C That does not lncan anything
)into

vcd his pr se`vith a for1uahty and Pohtcncss,rcndering n1aman as Mothcr,

cnd

Patl^c)n
m)

and Cc n cst Pas dC lua fautc

as cn
PloyCr/

fault, you kn0

v,

as sorry, sir, but it

s not

Ward,in sharP contrast,translatcd closcly I1c rcpr duccd

thc lcxical and syntactical Pecuharitics of thc Frcncb, dcParting Fron1 Gilbe1 t not
only l)y luaking choices likc

That doesn t1 can anything,

bricf, Prccisc sCntences

by adhcring to Camus s

It s not n1y fault As a

N1alnan and b ss, but als

rcsult, Ward endo ed his Pr se th a I;miharity and(lirectncss Whcrc Gill)ert

rcsorted to phrascs hke

vo(lays lcave

ha

), Homc

ft r Agcd

leill ds ,ancl I11ad n eason tl,cxCuse mysdr C cn

Js
v (lays off,
and
excuser
sh
mc
I
didn
old
PcoPlc
t
), Ward uscd

Po s()ns ( asilc dc

pas

deux j urs dc c ng

e anything to aPolo

t :0

ax

izc R r

Vard hin1sclf descril)cd thc(liffcrcncc bctxx ccn thc

crsions as dialecta he callcd Gilbcrt sa Britannic rcnderin8, and saxx his

own as iving thc text a morc A1erican

quality

Vard1988:v- i) And Vard

knexs that hc was dra ring a cultural diffcrcnce as vVcll,rclcasiL1g a litcrary I^cn aindcr

d1at leads d)c Enghsh-languagc readcr t

an Arncrican narrati c traditi n, to

Hc111ingway,Dos Passos,Faulkner,Cain (ibid).

()ilbcrt

s crsi n, c cn though frcc in Places, cstabhshcd a lcxicograPhical

cquivalcncc that dOcs in fact transnDit the disti1)ctivc Plot and characteri7ation of

Camus s novel 1 cncc, 11is translati n can als enablc Enghsh languagc rcaders
to PCrcCi C the Arncrican litcrary ori8ins f thc Frcnch tcxt cven
hcn thcy d n t
kn0 v its largcr Frcnch c

ilson
ntcxt Thc lcading Arncrican critic Edmund V

crsion for t1 e Nc" yorkcr d1c year it

as PubliShcd, ffcring

a relllarkablc account of his rcsP nSC

c k11cv that Can1us vas onc of thc Prin~
ciPal CxP nCnts in litcraturc of vhat is callcd thc Existcntiahst Phil S Phy/ but hc

ilnmcdiatcly addcd a confcssi n f ign rancc l havc read 'cry little f sartrc and
rcvie vcd Gilbcrt s

490

LA /RENCE VENUTI

;
I

:
k
tJ

:rJ t i

j1

ledgc Wllson hcaded straight1or 'hat was hn1ihar and cmphasizcd thc d mcstlc
rcfcrcncc in G bcrt s translation

Onc

fccls surc/ hc vr tc, that M.Can1us Inust

#W:f

Arnerican fr1ns to eXPl rc Europcan Phil SoPhical thcn es The abscncc f thc
brcign c ntcxt was suPPhcd by thc rcalisrn that has l ng dominatcd thc AmcHcan
narrati c traditi n,so that Carllus s main charactcr vas dismisscd as incrcdiblc;his
bchavi r is ncvcr exPlaincd or rnadc PlauSiblc (ibid.)

~i11thc unitcd statcs as vvcll as in many countrics v rldvcide Gilbert

s
ersion
undoubtcdly hclPcd thc n el t achieve this status f r En8hS1 ^languagc readcrs,

s at

jt

FFc c
r

:;:
r r
fn :
:
both Arncrican and Frcnch In this vav, Ward s crsi n con1Fnunicatcd an undcr~
standing of thc French tcxt that is a

ailablc to Frcnch rcadcrs This understanding

moti ated his(lccision,for examplc,to retain thc French

Maman in the oPCning
sentencc
In his n teb ks

Camus rccordcd thc obscr

ati n

that

thc curious

: \F i&i F L :t J

ll T;

i :F;i
s

l:

change thc naturc of D 1cursault s curi us fccling for h

/ard1988:vii)

Ward s writing rclcascd a rcm ndcr insc bc(l with Amc1 lcan and French refl:r
cnccs,and f r thc Enghsh-language rcadcr thc rcsult as truly(lcR rnilia1izing Not

only dkl Amcrican narrati c forms acquire a Ph s

Phical (lcnsity d)cy di(l not
:

l;f

1:

1:l l=t1
Fi:C;t
:
:
I1t

but aPPrcciativc n ticc that aPPearCd,aPPr priatcly cnough,in thc Ncl y rk r:

Thc cffcct of thc cl scr, sin
Plcr rcndcring is to makc N cursault sccm

T:iT ;: :l11s
l1

sion css

J:fJ l

;
:tc

hed nis1n as a Psycholo ical study

vho is br ught, through a

gratuitous, sun-dazzlcd act and its n1crciless social c nscqucnces, to a

raPP rt vith his (lcad mothcr and a rccognition of his fratcrnity vith

the gcntIc indiffcrcncc of thc

vorkl ~a PalPable huPro emcnt up n

Gnbcrt9s randcr PhrasC thc benign indiffcrencc of thc univcrsc

(Ne yo

198 119)

TRA,NsLATION` COM M UNITY` UTOPIA

491

Thc impr vclncnt, jud ng i m this an nymous reviewcr s rcsPonSc,invol cd

an incrcascd Plausibility, VVard gavc Camus

s charactcr thc psychological rcahsm

that Wils n found lacking in Gilbcrt, although for a latcr Amcrican rcadcrship,

ard s translati n
vas morc acccPtablc t his rcadcrs, Partly becausc thcy knc v
morc about Frcnch literaturc and Phil S Phy,but als bccausc f hisvriting: his
stylc was m rc c ocauvC fAmc1 lcan and French cultural rms and thcrcfc)rc morc

con1municativc of thc Frcnch tcxt.

Hctcrogcneous con nunities

Thc domcstic inscril)tion in translating constitutcs a unique comn1unicau c act,
indircct r ayward,It crcatcs a(lomcstic co 11nunity of intcrcst around
thc translatcd tcxt,an audicncc t
Vhom it is intc igiblc and vh Put it t arious

his sharcd intcrcst rnay ariSC SpontancOusly vhcn the translation is pubhshed,
uscs
attracting rcadcrs s n different cultural constitucncies that alrcady exist in thc

h
vc cr

translating languagc It may also bc h

uscd in an institution vhcrc the tI anslati n

is rnadc t Perf rn1differcnt functions,acadcn1ic or rehgi

co1 mcrcial

us,cultural r Pohtical,

or municiPal Any community that arises aroun(l a ttanslation is hr

fr m hom gencous in language,idcntity, rs cial p sition Its hctcr gcncity lnight

bcst be undcrsto d in terms of vchatlMary Louise Pratt calls a hnguistics of contact/

in
hich languagc-bascd c 1Inunitics arc sccn as dcccntcrcd acr ss hncs fs cial

(Pratt 1987 60) A translati n is a hnguistic zone of contact

bct
ccn thc f rcign and translating culturcs,but als
vithin thc lattcr,
diffcrcntiation

Thc intcrcsts that bind thc c 11nunity through a translati n arc not sirnPly
R)cuscd on thc f rcign tcxt,but rcHcctcd in thc d 1ncstic values,behe ,and rcPrc~

scntations that thc translat r inscribcs in it

And thesc interests arc furthcr

vays thc translation is uscd In thc case of foreign tcxts that

ha c achievcd canonical status in an institution, a translati
n bccomcs thc sitc of
dctcrn incd l)y thc

intcrpretive corllmunitics that rnay support or challcngc currcnt canons and intcr~
Pretati ns, Prcvaning standards and idcol gics(cf, Fish 1980and thc c1 iticisms in

Pratt 1986: 46 52) In the case f forcign tcxts that have achicvcd l ass circula_
tlon,a translation bcc mcs t11e sitc of uncxpccted grouPings,fostering colllll

unitics

f rcaders
vho
0uld thcr visc bc scParatcd by cultural cliffcrcnces and sOcial
(li si ns yct are now joined by a common hscination A tlanslation can answcr to
thc intcrcsts of a di crsc rangc of domcstic audienccs,so that the f

rn)s f rcccP~
translating traf cs in thc foreign,
in the intr ducti n of linguistic and cultural diffcrences, it is equally caPable f

tion lxill n tt)c enti1 cly con mensurablc.Bccause

crossin8or reinf rcing thc boundaries bct ccn don cstic audicnccs and thc hicr~
archics in
vhich thcy are P siti ncd Ifthc d mcstic inscriPtion includes Part of
thc sOcial r
lati n
a1

hist

rical co11tcxt in ,hich thc f

rci8n text Fi1 st cl

Cr cd,thCn

a trans-

can also crcatc a con munity that includcs f rci8n intClligibnitics and intcrcsts,

undcrstandin in c 1 n1 n vith anothcr culturc,anothcr t1 aditi n

Considcr the readcrshiPs that gathcr around a Poetry translation In 1958thc

Arncrican translat r Allcn
andclbaum PubhshCd d c nrst l) k lcngth Enghsh

crsi n ofthc m (lcrn Italian poct GiuscPPe un:arctti It was warml)wdc med
b)

Itahtl11 acadcmic sPecialiStS at Al

c1

ican uni ersitics, s n e

of wholn wcrc

492

LA /RENCE VENUTI

f,,P
ri c
ire ru
Giovanni Cccchctti, vrotc his re ic v in Itahan and c ncluded that Mandclbaun` s

translation d cs honor t Itahan studics in Amcrica and can be rcc

n11ucndcd to
anyonc who wishcs t hmiliarizc himsclf witll tllc work f nc fthe m or PoCts

tllcmscll cs Itallan nat cs Thc rex:icwcr llc)r tl c journal C

f ur ti1ne (CecchCtti 1959 268, rny translati n),ThC

ur suggests thc cxtcnt
f Cecchetti s estccn1for ungarctti sP Ctry, an asscrtion of universal aluc But
sincc hc vas revicvin in Itahan thc hrst En8hSh translation of d)at P
c uldn

etry,thc our

t bc uni crsal bccause it didn t et includc British and Alnerican rcadcrs

lacking Italian,Cccchcttiimagincd a c mmunity that was Pardy actual,Pr SSional,

and Partly Potcntial

Thc ungarctti Pr ect also aPPliCd a stanclard of accuracy consistcnt with thc
intcrPrctati n that prc ailed in thc Itahan acadcn1ic c

n11nunity,Mandclbaum main-

taincd a fairly strict lcxic graPhical cqui alcncc and cven imitatcd Jngarctti s syntax

and linc brcaks, He rcad ungaretti

cff rt t

s achic cmcnt, likc thc Itahan scholars, as an

bury thc cadavcr f htcrary Itahan by de cloping a sParc,PrCcisC Poctic

languagc clcvoid

f all

that was but ornament

(lMandelbaun 1958 xi) It

as in

that thc vicwcrs judgcd Mandelbaum s v Dlls su essftll, If nc is

TOtc Carlo
tcmPtcd to bscrvc that in many Places thc translation is too litcral,
tllc t ms

si

ecti n
ill sh

G hn , furthcr re

wisc and still retaln thc

Mandelbaun1 s

ch

v thatit

othcr-

vvould havc bccn impossiblc to d

allu vcncss of ungaretti s wor(ls (G lin 1959 76),

translati nvas thus the site fan acadcn1ic c lnlnunit s intcrcst

in Ungarctti s PoCtry, an An erican rcadcrshiP that nonetheless sharcd an Itahan

understanding of thc tcxt and in fact includcd Itahan nati

es In this contcxt the

translation ultirnatcly achicvcd canonical status In 1975,ahn st t Vo dCCades after

its6rst Pubhcation,it vas rcissucd in a rcviscd and cxPanded cdition from C rncll
uni ersit Press.

All thc samc, it is PossibIe t Pcrcci c an aPPcal t an thcr comn1unity in

N1andclbaun s translatl n,a do1 cstic rcadcrs11ip that is inconuncnsurablc

ith the

interests of thc Itahan acadcn ics and thc prcvailing interPrctation of Ungarctti

Whilc Mandclbaun adhcred cl scly to thc tcrsc fragmentation of Ungarcttrs Itahan

tcXts,hc also introduccd a P ctical rcgistcr,a noticcablc strain of Vict

rian PoCti^

cism,Manddbaum rcndcrcd m rirc dic )as pCrish,

buttclto
thr wn)as

an illusi n is cnou8hf r)'

cast, ti basta un illusi nc
you
nccd
but an
)aS
tr

CStCd

riPosat
rcposcd
illusi n/ sonno
slCCp )as Slun11)cr,
p
)as
can atch hcr I can gazc upon hcr (lMandclbauna 1958 7, 13,
(

( 1

guardarla

)aS

25, 37, 145).Hc usc(l syntactlcdl in

crsions

cre the results of litcral translating, calques

t

PoCtical archaisIus in Enghsh:

LonF n

Lontano l ntan
comc un c1cco
n1

hanno POrtato Pcr1uano

DisFdnr
Distantly chstantly

hkc a bhnd man

by thc hand thcy lcd mc,

'crc
somc

a(lclc(l,whilc thcrs

f thc ltahan Both kinds am untcd

TRANSLATION` COMMUNITY` UTOP1A

CoFon,bd

IJIa
E)

493

altri diluvi una c

mba asc

lt

Dovc
()f othcr dsI hear a d c

(MandClbaum195 35,53)
s mcumcs

thc pocticism dcviatcd m thc Othcrwisc simplc language of thc

contcxt,as in thc last six lincs of

Giugno

june

H PCrs il sonno
oscillo
al canto(l una strada

comc una lucci

la

Mi morir
qucsta nottcP
I ha

c lost slurnbcr

s va

at a street-corncr
hke a nre
XA/ill this night(lic

om

mc?
(MandClbaum195

On ther

39)

occasions the Poetical registcr s vclls vith a lush R manticisln,usually to

match a m rc cxPanSi c PoCtic linc in ungarctti Compare N1andclbaun1 s vcrsion

of the Virg ian sestina, Rccitativo di Pahnurn

vvith Tcnnyson s L ysscs Both

English texts werc writtcn in an Eli'al)cthan Pcntamctcr(ShakesPearCan,Marl

Pitched at an cPic height:
Pcr l uragano all

aPicc di furia

Vicin non intcsi farsi il s nno;

Olio h dilagante a slnal

lc d

n(lc,

APCrt camP a hbcH di Pacc,

Di cffusi nc in nita

il Hnto emblcma

Dalla nuca Prostrandon im rtale.

I could not,f r thc hurricanc at fur
sun11 it,sensc thc con1ing

An il

on f

that o crspread the ra

slun

bcr;

ing brcakcrs,

Ficld Pcn t thc f1eedon that is PcacC,

OfinHnitc Outpouring thc fcigncd cmblcm

Thrusting at thc naPc d
vndashed1nc ln

rta1,

(MandClbaum195 145)

ian)

494

LA /RENCE VENUTI
I cannot rcst
LiJ(

oI travc

I will drink

i:::to thc lccs:all umcs I ha

e e oyed

Gready,ha c suffercd grcady,b

th vith thosc

That lovcd mc,and al ne;on sh rc,and vhen

Through scudding driRs thc rainy Hyades
Vex tllc dim sca:Iam bcc mc a name j
(TCnnys n1972 562)

Vhat madc Lh1garetti s Poctry sccn so innovati e in Italy :as thc hard~cd ed
language,an1odcrnist PreciSi n that turncd a
ay fr0n the ornatc,rhet rical stylcs

dc cl
vritcrs
likc
Gabrielc

Annunzio Mandcll)aun1 s
crsion
Pcd by(lCcadcnt
rcinscribcd thcsc stylCs in ungarctti, rcstoring

hat thc translator hirnsc callcd

alth u8hn xx=transmogri cd into archaic Enghsh

thc cadavcr f htcrary Italian
)

P et1 iCs

In rclcasing this(lomcstic remaindcr,Mandclbaun1 s translati nn t only Positioncd Ungaretti in Enghsh-language P etic traditions, l)ut afshated hirn idl thc
don1inant trcnds in contcmporary Poetry translation

1950san ixturc of currcnt standard Enghsh

(lisc

For thc lhct is that during thc

vith poetical archaisn s constitutCd thc

ursc for translating Poetry h ored by lca(ling Amcrican translators Richrn

n(l

Lattirn rc s

1951 vcrsion f the fF1dd, vhich became thc most idclV read transla~

don in thc Unitcd statcs,clai1ned to ha e a ided any poetical dialcct f Enghs11

`c clo n0tl)avc a P ctic(lialcct/ and thc languagc of sPcnscr

bccausc in 1951,

r tlac Klllg JameS Version cmc(hnaPpmP"ate to H m s Pl nncsF(Lc tdm rc

as whcn1 l crs

battle,
his bcl vcd son/

1951 55) Yct1 attimore s text is dottcd with Vict ian poctlosms
1

in
inter sPate/ sol c sP kC,vauntin8, hC Strklcs int

that accurscd night (il)id

125, 131, 279, 438) J hn
Dante s
rn ,which
n

ciardi

s 1954
crsion of

hr ovcr%ur dccades haq bccn c ntinuously

a ailablc h a

ass-n1arkct paPcrback,ahncd f r s mcthing likc idiomatic Enghs11 to

anti_rhetorical character of thc Ita an; sParSc,dircct,and idi matic/

Dantc s langua

sCckS

C okC

vr tc

thc

Ciardi,

t0a oid clcgancc simPly for thc sakc of elcgancc (C)iardi

1954: ix~x) YCt this l)arad xical undcrstanding of Dantc s Itahan als (lcscribcs
c

Ciardi s tcxt,
hiCh,alth u h mOStly in a Plain rcgister of currcnt usagc,is strc

ith poctical v rds and Phrascs; drCar/

PitCOus/

thy/ ane
it sccmcd to scorn alll)ause,
bitc

hiS w lly joxxls

crucciare don t bc distrcsscd

PrcSSed/

non

ti

flccrs/

),

bcsct

Perils,

vn

s0rCly

back)

ur

(ibid

28, 30, 36, 38,

sPlCCn

(f

39,43,44,45)
Mandelbaum s vcrsion bri(lgc(l thc cultural gap bctwecn ungarctu s actual
Itahan rcadcrshiP and hiS Potcntial Arnerican audiencc Translating a modcrn
Itahan P ct i11to thc discoursc that don inated Amcrican P Ctry translation :as c tcti

el)=a canoni'ing gesturc,a Poctic ay of linking hi1n~for Amc1 ican rcadcrs

luentlon thc ech cs f Tennyson,

to canonical Pocts hkC H mcr and Dantc(not t

s1akcsPcarC,Marlowc) Yct this domcstic inscHPtion dCvicltcd iom LI11gcaretu

significancc in thc Itahan PoCtic tradition, thc vic v, as Mandelbau1n Put it, that

rnamcnt (N1andclbaun 1958:xi),Thc rnatc

Enghsh crsi n
vas addrcssing anod1cr audicncc, distinctly Arncrican, Poctry
rcadcrs fan1ihar vith British and An1crican PoCtic traditiOns as c as rcccnt translati ns that vcrc imn1cnscly PoPular
tIngarctti purgcd thc languagc of a

TRA NsLATION` COM M UNITY` UTOPIA

495

Indced, NlIandclbaun1 s translati n(liscourse vas so fan1ihar as to be invisible

G rman,an

to thc re icwcr for P@cr,f magazlne,Nc(lO

Pubhshed his Hrst c llcction of Poems in thc samc ycar

Amchcan Poet wh
C) Gorman f und

vhilc qu ting and c n)mcntin8on thC t1 ansl ion as ifit werc thc Italian tcxt(O G rman1959a 330)
Vhat O Gorman hkcd
ab ut(Mandclbauln s)Ungarctti was thc hct that it us Poctica hc Pra`cd thc
Itahan P ct r writlng ofa w dd transformcd into poctry and Prod mcd thc
ungaretti s Poetry truly rnagni cent,

i c

as his nest P cm (ibid 331) Thc P emsin O G rman s Hrst book

thisjudgmcnt Thcy includcd An Art f Poetry/ whcrc he vrotc
Poctry
l)cgins whcrc rheto0cd c
(O G rman1959b 26)
Recir

rc cctcd

ll11ncnsurable Even though

vrittcn in Enghsh, the translation :as intclligiblc to cach of thcn in different

hnguistlc and cultural ter 1s Thc Itahan acadcmic c n 1 unity also(hd n t rcc g
A/landcll)au 1 s rcadcrshiPs vcre fundan1cntally inc

nize the VictO11an Pocucism For thcm,howc cr,this styliStic%aturc was in isiblc
l)ccausc Enghsh as n t their nativc languagc and bccausc,as forcign-languagc acad~
clllics,they vere1n st conccrncd vith thc rclation bct
een thc Enghsh vcrsion and
thc Itahan tcxt:lexic graPhical cqui alcncc,Cccchctti noticcd onc of Mandclbaun1

P ctical turns,his rcn(lcring of smcmom (`ol Sc ne s

with d)e arch sm disrcmcmbcr

memo

to rgct

51;cf,O D) Yct thiS ch0cc was sccn as

aPPropriatc to the rarc and suggcstivc Havor f thc Itahan and indicativc of thc
translator s Poetlc Scnsibility

(il)i(l

(Cccchctti1959 267)

Thc f`ct that in English this sensil,ihty n1ight bc alicn t

ungarctti s rnodernist

Poetics seems to ha c l)ccn rccognized~ in Print only l)y a British rcadcr,intcrcstingly cnough,A rc iewer f r thc Lond n mes, vho agrccd vith Cecchetti that
ungaretti vas one ofthc rnost distinguishcd P
translatcs :ith a quitc exccPtional inscnsiti

cts ah c fClt that N1r,N

andelbaun

(TJ,c Tjn,cs1958: 13C),Thcrc can

bc n doubt d1at thc rcvic

cr had Mandcll)aun s PocticiSms in rllind, since he

d crib, tllc very dosc French version that Jcan

PKkrrC(lt()rcc mmend a

Lescurc ptll)lishcd in1953(whCrc D alth diltlxl una col ml)a ascok was tur1 cd
into j ocoutc unc colol bc
cnuc(l aut1 cs(l lugcs (LCscurc 1953: 159)), Only a
nati c readcr f Enghsh Poctry
h also kne the Itahan tcxts and thcir position
in thc Itahan poctic tradition
as able to Perceive the Enghsh-languagc rcmai11der
in Mandclbaum s crsi( 11
Thc rcadcrships that gathercd ar und this Poetry translati n
erc liInitcd,ProFcssi nallyr

ity

institutk)nally dchncd, and detcrn1incd by their cultural kn0 vlcdge,

'hcthcr()f the forci n langua c and litcraturc Or thc litcrary traditions in thc trans

lating langua e Thc translati nl)ccame the focus of divcrgcnt communitics,R)rcign

and(lomestic,scholarly and litcrary And in its ability to suPP rt their linguistic and
cultural (lif{ rcnces, to l)c intc igil)lc and intcrcsting tO thclll in thcir

thc translation f stercd its o vn

community, onc that

vas

vn tcrms,

jmdJiz
c/ in Benedict

Anderson s scnsc thc men11)ers

I ne er kn
n1ost of their fello mcmbcrs,
`vin thc n inds of cach li cs thc imagc of thcir
mcct thclnl, r cvcn hear ofthem, yct
comn union (Andcrs n1991 6) In thC casc Of a translati n,this in agc is(lcri cd
from thc 1 cprcscntation of the foreign tcxt constructcd by the translator, a com-

munication don1cstically inscril)cd T translate is to in cnt f r thc f rcign tcxt nc

:a
rcadcrshiPs vho arc a
c that thcir intcrcst in thc translation is sha1 cd by other
rcadcrs,f rcign and don1cstic- c cn vhcn th sc intcrcsts arc incon 111cnsurablc

496

LA /RENCE

ENUTI

Thc imagincd con11nunitics that concerncd Anders nvcrc natlonahstic,bascd

n the sensc of bclonging to a Particular nation Translations ha e und ubtcdly
f rmed such c mmunitics by ilnPorting forcign idcas that stirnulated the risc
f
largc-scalc political ln cments at homc.At thc turn of the tvvcnticth ccntury,the
Chincsc translat r Yan Fu chosc v rks0n cv lutionary thcory by T,H,Huxley and
Hcrbert Spenccr Precisely to build a national Chnese culturc Hc translatcd thc
Wcstcrn conccPts of aggrcssion emb died in s cial Dar :inisln to forn1an ag8res~
si e Chncsc i(lcntity that would withstand Vestern colonial Pr cc ,n tably
British(schwaz 1964; Puscy 1983).Hu slllh, a contcmp rary obscrvcr,latcr
rccalled the irnPact

IIuxlcy s

:ersion:
vofur
n
nd rJlics in Yan Fu s
aRcr

China s frcqucnt Inilitary rcvcrsals,Particularly aftcr dlC hurllihation

yearS,thC sl gan Sur i al of the Fittcst (ht., suPcrior

tlle nt survive
1964

)becamc a kind f
259,n. 14)

clari n call

fthe B xcr

ictorious,inferi r dcfeatcd,

(tranSlated and qu tcd in sch vartz

Thc irnagincd con11nunitics fostcrcd by translation Pr ducC Cffccts that arc

r examPlc,thC rnass audiencc that gathers ar und a translatcd bcstscller Bccausc of its shccr sizc, this
con1111unity is an cnscmblc of thc1n st divcrsc domcstic constitucncics,desncd by
C0 11nCrCial,as vcll as cultural and Pohtical Considcr,f

thcir sPeci c intcrcsts in thc f rcign text, yct a varc of belonging to a collccti c

movcment,a national markct ra%reign litcrary fasonau n Thcse constitucncicsvill ine itably rcad thc translation diffcrcntly,and in sOme cases the differences

will be incommcnsurablc Ycttl c gret tcst Communication gap here may be bctween
n
thc f rcign and domcstic cultures Thc domcstic inscriPtion in thc translati
cxtends thc aPPeal fthe f reign tcxt to a mass audience in another culture But
vvidcning thc domcstic rangc ofthat apPcal rneans that thc inscriPtion cannot include

much ofthe f reign context.A translatcd bcstsellcr risks rcducing the foreign text
t0vhat d mestic constituencies ha e in co unon,a(lialcct,a cultural discourse,an
idc l gy

s Enghsh vcrsi n of

This can bc sccn in thc rcccPtion that grcctcd Ircnc Ash

: l

risresse(1955), Fran

oisc sagan s bcstsclling n vc1, In France, thc Frcnch

vork of art: it
tcxt had bccn acclai1ncd as an acc mPhshcd
von thc Prix dcs
Critiqucs and sold200,000coPics, In England and the united statcs, thc translarablc c
111 Cnts on its st lc and like visc sta cd on the bcstscllcr lists
tion(lrc v fa

r man months But no rc ic vcr failcd t aband n c nsidcrati ns of acsthctic

rm f rm rc functional standards, cxPrCssing amazcmcnt at thc youthful agc of
thc auth r(19)and distastc for thc am rality ofits thcmc:a17year ld girlschcmcs
t
PrC Cnt hcrvido vcd fathcr r l11remarrying,so that he can c ntinuc to cngagc
f
f

in a succession of afFairs, Thc Ch1cdJ

ribun
as tyPica I adn`ired thc craRs~
manshiP,but I was rePellCd by thc carnality
(H s195 6).
Ths gcncral rcsPonse varicd acc
cncy addrcsscd by thc rc

ic

rding to the
alues f thc particular constitu_

vcr,Thc Cathohc veekly Comm

n ccz`sternly Pron

unccd

the novcl ch dish and tircs mc in its singlc rllindcd dcdicati n to(lccadence (Nagid
r rc rrcd simPly to the tl er s
195 164),whcrc tl c soPhi icatcd Nc yo
hcdonistic in1agc/

subtly Suggcsjng that at 40 hc dcscr es

Pity

(Clill 1955

114 15),ln P st sCcond VV dd XArar America,whcrc the Patliarchal hmily assumCd

f re the badge of fan1ily lllan

nc v importance and husbands,csPccially fathcrs,

as a sign of virility and Patri tisn (May 1988 98),sagan s plcasure-sccking fathcr

TRA

sLATION` COM M UNITY` UTOPIA

497

and daughtcr` crc ccrtain to make her n cl an objcct of b th m ral Panic and
tltillation,Thc rc icwcr br thc Nc srdFcs,,, n nd NdFion was uniquc in trying to
undcrstand it in distincti cly Frcnch tcrms, describing thc youthful hcr inc as

a chnd f the bcboP,the night clubs,thc cxistcntialist caf s/ comParing hcr and hcr
htl

t
M Camkls sam ml Ou i(lcr (Raymond195 727-8),
Ash

n
clto

s Enghsh vcrsi n
vas of c ursc thc dccisivc fact r that cnablcd Sagan
suPP rt a spectrun)of Vcry differcnt rcsPonSCs in Anglo-Arncrican culturcs,

Thc translati n vas

itvas

in

cast in the m

mediatcly intclligible to a vidc Enghsh-languagc rcadcrshiP

st fan iliar dialect

f currcnt Enghsh, thc standard, but it also

containcd sOmc li ely colloquialisms that1natched sin1ilar formsin thc French tcxt

Ash mndcKd le d cr dcs salauds CtllC la

f tlac dut )as thC m st awhl

cad/ l upo
failcd )as
unkcd/ and cc fut la Hn that vvas thc cnd )aS d ings
ctalnc to a hca(l (Sagan1954:32,34,45;Ash1955:25,27,35),Shc ailncd1or a
(

high clcgrcc of ucncy by translating frecly, making dclctions and additi

ns to thc

Frcnch to crcatc lnorc PrcciSc for1nulations in Enghsh

Au caf ,Elsa sc lc a et,arrivoe la p rte,sc retourna vcrs nous(l un
air langourcux,tr s insPir , cC qu il1nc scmbla,du cin maam ricain
ct n cttant dans s

n intonation dix ans dc galanteric frangaisc:

/ous

enez,Raym nd?
(After c ffee, Elsa st

od uP and, on reaching the door, turncd back

towards us with a langu rous air,vcry insPircd~S it sccmcd to n

c~

by American cincma, and in esting her t nC ith tcn ycars f French

Arc you coming,Raymond?

flirtation

( gan195

38,my anslati n)

ARcr coffcc, Elsa aIkcd cr t thc clOor,turned ar und, and struck

a langu

r us,

vas tcn ycars of Frcnch

mo ie_star posc, In her icc

coquetry:

Are you c ming,Raymond?

(Ash195 30)
Hcrc thc translat r cut do
nf rty vords f Frcnch to tvvcnty

of tl

eP ptllar m oc st pos

( r u

ninc in Enghsb,Thc

choma am&kain

is s uPt

matk

of thc drivc t
vard readabilit

By incrcasing thc rcadabihty of thc Enghsh tcxt, such frced

ms cndo
cd thc

narrativc vith crisimihtudc,Producing thc illusi n f transParcncy that pcrn1ittcd

thc Enghsh-languagc rcader t takc thc translati n for thc f rci8n tcxt (
cnuti
1995 12),ThC rc ic er 0r thc Hr`dnFic,imPrCSsCd that the novcl has such a sohd
r f rcality ab ut it, commcntcd on Ash s writing as ifit wc1 c Sagan s: simPle,
crystallinc,and c ncisc,hcr PrOsC flo vs al ng s viRly,crcating sccne and charactcr
with striking imlncdiacy and assurance (Rolo1955 84,85)
Ash s freedoms rnay ha c bccn inisible,but they ine itably rclcascd a d mestic
rclnaindcr, textual cffccts that varicd according to the sPccinc Passagc
hcrc they
occurrcd,but that verc gcncrally cngaging,cvcn Provocati

c The revievvcr for thc

Nc sFdresmdn dnd Ndrion was also uniquc in notlon8hcr f1 Ccd 1s( shC has not

498

LA /RENCE VENUTI

bcen afraid t ParC and chP thc tcxt to suit thc Enghsh readcr

),and hc discussed

rl111I

W :

toncs of the Frcnch

il avait Pour cllC dcs rc

qu

:ards, (lcs gestcs qui s adrcssaicnt la femn1c

on ne conna t Pas ct quc l on(l sirc c nnaitrc~dans lc Plaisir

( r hCr hc had lo

[ancl]gcsttlKS tllcat are add

whm onc docs n t bow yct desircs t

kn w~in

sscd t

the
oman

pleasurc)

(sagan 1954: 378,1uy translati n)

I noticcd that his cvery look and gcsturc bctrayed a sccret dcsire f

a woman whom he hacl n tP ssesscd and wh m hc longcd t

r hcr,
enj

(ASh1955:29)
Ash

s transladon,h
c er cc in places,maintaIncd a sumcient dcgrcc of lcxic

graPhical cqui alcncc to communicatc thc basic narrati c clen cnts

f the Frcnch

tcxt Yet the addij n Of vords likc

l)ctraycd and sccret in this PassagC Sh

s
that she madc thc narrativc availablc t an Enghsh languagc audicncc
ith rathcr
n its Frcnch c untcrPart, a morahty that xx uld restrict
scxuahty to marriagc or othcr sc conccal it This is a rathcr dd cffcct in a novcl

difFcrcnt n oral valucs fr

:here a fathcr docs not conCeal his scxual pron1iscuity from his adolcsccnt dau
Ash inscribcd Sa

:an

S no cl :ith a domcstic intc

htCr

::ibility and intcrcst,addrcssin{::

a con11nunity that sharcd littlc fthc f reign contcxt vhcre thc n vel rst cmergcd,

The utoPian di1mension in translation

Thc c mn unitics f stcrcd by translating arc initially potcntial,signallcd in thc tcxt,

lT{ltI

c c

f
cultural c

l Ft t:

JnI;t

nstitucncics amonghich thc translati n vill circulate T engagc thcsc

constitucncies,ho vc cr,the translat r involcs thc forci n tcxt in an asyn1n ctrical

act of co1 rnunication,
ci8hted idC l gically to
ards thc translating culturc
Translatin

is al

ays ide l gical becausc it rclcases a clomcstic ren

tion of alues,bchefs,and rePrcscntations linkcd t

Positi ns in the
Pr vides an idc
f

hist

aindcr,an inscriP_

rical n1on1cnts and social

rccciving culturc, In scrving don cstic intcrcsts, a translation

l gical

res luti n for thc linguistic and cultural diffcrenccs(

f thc

rcign tcxt
Yct translating is als

ut pian

Thc d mcstic inscription is lnadc ith the cry

=ith thc anticiPation

intcnti n to c 1nunicatc t11c forcign tcxt,and so it is hlled

that a c 11nunity

ill bc crcatcd ar und that text__although in translation In thc

rcmaindcr lics thc hopc that thc translation ill estabhsh a(l mcstic readcrship,
an ima8incd coI munity that shaI cs an intcrcst in thc f rcign, Possibly a markct
fr n1 the Pubhs11er s P int
f ic And it is nly thr ugh thc rcmaindcr,
vhcn
inscribcd ith Part f thc f rcign context, that thc translation can cstabhsh a

TRANsLATION` COMMUNITY` UTOPIA

499

Co 11n0n undcrstanding bctvvcen d 1ncstic and foreign rcadcrs In suPPlying an idcological res luti n,a translation projccts a utoPian comn unity thatis n t yet reah7cd,

Bchind this linc of thinking lics Ernst Bl

ch s the

ry ofthc ut Pian functi n of

culture, although revised t ht an aPPhcat1 n to translati n Bl ch s is a AIarxist

ut

Pia Hc sa v cultural f rms and Practiccs rclcasing a

excccds thc idc

gies of thc d n1inant classcs,

surPlus

thc status

that n t only

quo/ but anticipatcs a

future conscnsus/ a classlcss s CiCty,usually by transforming thc cultural heritagc

f a Pardcular class,whcthcr dominant

r dominatc(l(Bl ch1988 46~50),

I construc Bloch s ut Pian surPlus aS thC d mcstic remainder inscribcd in

thc forcign tcxt durin thC translati n ProcCSs Translating rclcascs a surplus of

mca ngs whtll Kkr to domc c cukurd tra dons thrc,ugh de atlons
currcnt standard dialcct r othcr vise standardizcd languagcs
f

r cxamPlc, or c lloquiahsms

thr u h

m the

archaisms,

ImPhcit in any translation is thc hoPc for a

conscnsus,a communication and recognition ofthc f reign text throu8h a domcstic

inscription,
Yct the inscriPti n can nc er bc sO Cmprchcnsivc, sO total in rclation to

domcstic c nstituencies,as to Crcatc a con11nunity f intcrcst vithout cxclusion or

hierarchy It is unhkely that a f rcign tcxt in translati n v l bc intclligiblc or intcr~

esting (or b th Sirnultane usIy) to C Cry rcadCrshiP in thC rccciving situation

And the asymmCtry between thc brcign and d mestic cultures PersistS, even

vhen thc f reign contcxt is Partly inscribcd in thc translati n utopias arc bascd n
ide l gies,

Bloch argued, on intcrcstcd rePresentations of social di

isi

ns, rcPrc-

sentations that take sides in th sc(livisi ns In thc casc f translating,thc interests

are incradicably domcstic, al vays the intcrcsts of certain domcstic constitucncics

ovcr othcrs
arious sOcial grouPs at any hiSt rical In ment
are non-Contcmporanc us or non-synchr nous in thcir cultural and idc logical

rcmnant of carhcr tirllcs in the prcscnt

dcvcl Pment,
vith somc containing a
(Bloch1991 108) Ctllturd orms ancl Practk6aK hctcr gcneous,comPo d f
Bl ch

also Pointcd out that thc

difftDrcnt clcments with dlll:erent tcmPoralitiCs and aliatcd with dif%rcnt groups
In language,thc dialccts and disc

urses,registcrs and stylcs that cocxist in a Particu~

lar Pcri d

can bc ghmpscd in the rcmainder relcascd by c ery co 11nuniCati c act,

vithin
The remaindcr is a (liachrony~vvithin~symchr ny that stagcs thc rcturn
language fthe cntradictions and strugglcs that rnakc uP thC s cial;it is the Persistcncc ithin language of Past contradicti ns and strugglcs, and thc anticipation f
httlrc Ones (Lecerdc199 182,215).HcncC,dlc domcstic lnscr tion in any
translation is wht t Bl ch calls an antlciPat ry illtlmination

(rsch n),a way f

irnagining a f ture reconciliati n of hnguistic and cultural dircrenccs,

VhCthcr th sc

that cxist among domestic groups or those that di idc the f rcign and d mcstic
culturcs,

In
andelbaun1 s crsion of ungarctti s Poetry, dlc ut Pian surPlus is thC
Vict han

P Cticism, This Enghsh languagc rcmaindcr didn t just cxcccd thC

con munication of thc Itahan tcxts;it als

ran countcr to thc rnodcrnist cxPCrirncnt

they culti atcd in thc c ntcxt of Italian P ctic traditi ns

During thc 19,0s,

mmunio f

hte qt h
Ungarctti by rcc nciling the diRtrcnccs bct vccn t vo readcrships, Itahan and
Arncrican, scholarly and litcrary. Today,
vc n ay bc morc inchncd to n ticc,not

h wcv ,Mandelbaum

sP etic m Pr ected an cal

LA /RENCE VENUTI

500

the idcal, but thc ide logies oF this con1111unity: NIandclbauIn

as ltl1nctrical

s translati

nvas an

act f con11nunication dlat at ncc ad1ittcd and excluded thc Itahan

context, vhilc suPporting incon1mcnsurablc responses among American constitucncics Yct thc idcol gical forcc f thc translati n madc it utoPian in its o n tiI1)c,
f thc f rcign tcxt through a
PCR of c 11nunicating thc forcign signiHcancc

domcstic inscriPti n And this ut Pian ProjCction c cntually Pr duccd rcal cffccts,

The Arneri(lan readcrshiP latCnt in Mandc )aum s l) ctical rcn`aindcr

eflccted a
d n)inant

tcndcncy in Arncrican poctry translation, hcIPing his vcrsion aCquirc

cultural auth rit in and out f thc acadcm

can1ofa co1rnon undcrstanding bet

ccn
f reign a1ld domcstic culturcs n1ay in
ol c litcrary tcxts,
hcthcr chtc or rnass But
TranslatiI1g that harb rs thc utopian d

usua y it takCs rnuch rn rc1nundanc f rms,scr ing technical r pragmatic Purposcs

Consider con11nunity or liaisOn intcrpreting,thc oral,t

vo~ Vay translath1

done for

rcfugccs and ilnllligrants vho lnust dcal xsith thc s cial agcncics and institutions of
thc h st c untry Co11nunity intcrpretcrs perforn)in a .ariety of lcgal, mcdical,

and cducational situations, including requcsts for P

anccs,hospital adn1issions, and apphcatio11s for

htical asylun court aPPcar^

:cllarc, C dcs of cthics, `vbethcr

formulated by Pr fcssi nal ass ciations or by thc agencics and institutions the1 1

vhich allov f r the

scl cs, tcnd to insist that interPrCtCrs be
Pancs f glass

commu cation
rcscntation

of i(k ,oncc again,wit11oLlt m dl mti n,a ustmcnt r misrcl)

(schwCda Nich

ls

n 1994: 82; sce also Gendlc, Ozolins and

Vasilakakos 1996) But such codes d

t take int acc unt the cultural and Poht-

ical hicrarchics in thc intcrPretir1:situation,thc fact that~in thc v rds f a Britis11

intcrPreting lnanua ~ thc chentis part ofa po verlcss cthnic1nin rity grouP vh sC

nceds and slishes arc oRen ignorcd r rcgarded as n t legitirnatc by thc m Ity
1

group (shackman 1984

glass

18; scc also Sanders 1992) And fc ursc thc

panc of

analogy rePrcssCs thc d n)cstic inscriPtion in any translath1:,thC rcmaindcr

that Prc ents thc intcrPrcting fr m bciI1g transparcnt conu11unication c

cn vvhcn

thc intcrpretcr is lilnitcd to cxact rcndcrings of foreign vvords

In Prat

ticc,many community intcrP

tcS

qccm to rccog1ize tl

in thc interPrcting situation and make an cffort to c

arious stratcgics(WadCnsl

1998

mPcnsatC f

c ylumctrics
cn1through

r tl

36) Robert Barsky s study of reftlgce hearings

in Canada dcn10nstratcs that thc intcrPretCr can Put thC refugcc on a cqual f

oting

ith thc adjudicating body only l)y rclcasing a distincti cly don)estic rcllaaindcr,Thc

rcign~languagc tcstilnony must l C inscribcd

ith Canadian aIucs, behcs, and

rcpresentations,Producing tcxtual effc

cts that vork

nly in Enghsh or French Lcgal

aluc hncar, transParcnt discoursc, but thc cxPcriCnccs that rcfugccs

n)ust(lcscribe~cxilc, Hnancial hardshiP, imPris nmcnt, torturc- arc morc than
hkely to shakc their cxPrcssi c ab ities, c en in thcir
vn languagcs
Rcstricting
institutions

the interPrCtCr s rolc t rendcri11g an

anccs-

accu1 atc

transIation f thc reRlgcc s uttcr~

vhich may c ntain hcsitations,gra nnatical crr rs and ari us infehcities

~me bly

iCoP az tllc d mallt s chanCcs f obt ng rcfttgcc at ,irrc

(Barsky 1996: 52) Siru arly,thc interPrctcr
sPCctivC of thc vahdity of thc clainl
must reconc c the cultural diffcrcnces bct ,ccn Canada and thc rcfugcC s country
by adding information about thc forcign contcxt,historical,gcograPhical,P hucal,
or sociological dctails that lnay bC n1ittcd in tcstirnony and unkn
n to Canadian
judgcs and la vycrs, Insisting uPon an intcrpretation lirnitcd cxclusivcly to vords

TR NsLATION` COMMUNITY` UTOPIA

501

hich could bc csscntial to thc refugee

uttcrcd c acuatcs thc cultural data

s clain

(Barsky 1994 49).

idcs a tclling cxamplc of a Pakstani clairnant 'ho sPoke Frcnch

Barksy pr
during the hearing,aPParently in an cff

rt t

lcnd vcight to his casc vith thc Quobcc

auth rities But his Frcnch vvas vcak,and his clailn vvas previously denicd bccausc

F intcrPreting Problcms, as hc tricd t cxplain:

M i dcmandcr,rn i dcmandcr Madamc,s il v us Plait,cctte translation

lui Parlc frangais

ous dcmandcr, Parlc frangais Parcc qu elle n1 a
v us qu est ce qu cllc a dit D oi compris, D adamc n a dit,
dosol M nsicur,scul anglais
c mPris,

(LltCrally Mc k,mc ask Madame,plcasc tlais anslauon cak t him

Frcnch You ask,spcak French Becausc shc undcrst d lnc,you that is

vhat she said A/Ic understand N ada 1 said to mc, s rry sir, nly

Enghsh,)
(BarSky1996:53,his translad n)

Thc d mal t was tcsnng

witl

a Pahani hterPK r who"ndcrcd thc br ken

French intO intelligiblc and con1PClling Enghsh:

Hc has a corl Plaint vvith thc interPreter thCre He sPeaks bctter Frcnch
than Enghsh,but the intcrprctcr vas intcrprcting from urdu t Enghsh

Hc is not too good in Enghsh,bcttcr in Frcnch, vhich hc could under~

stand An intcrPrctCr vas ProvidCd t interPret the hearing into Enghsh,

vas having a hard tiFne cxprcssing

vhich hc did n t agrcc to. so hc
himsclf r undcrstanding the CPO, lawyCrS,hin1sclf, and thc inter~
PrCtCr, Thcrc is nO satisfacti n in thc hcaring And that is One reasOn

vh Il st thc casc
VX/hcn cFfcctivc, c

nnunity intCrprcting Pro idcs a c n Phcated ide

res luti n for the linguistic and cultural diFcrcnccs of thc rcfugcc

l gical

s or imlnigrant

spccch, Thc interPreting inevitably communicates the foreign text in domcstic

tcrms, in thc terms of thc h st c untry, but thc d mcstic inscriPtion als nccds
to includc a signiHcant Part of the f reign context that givcs mcaning to tllc claim
This s rt f intcrprcting, although sccn1ingly partial t thc chcnt, is not in fact
ideol gically onc-sidcd it ser cs both f rcign and domcstic intcrcsts Thc idcol

fthe rcs lution is fundamentall

gy

dem cratic insofar as thc airll is to overcomc thc

asyn1mctrics that cxist bct vccn thc chcnt and the rePrcscntau cs fthc s cial agcncy

ithin and outsidc of thc intcrPrcting situation According to thc British manual,

ProfcsSi nal and chcnt, vvith cry diffcrcnt

backgr unds and PCrccPtions and in an uncqual rclationship of Po /er and kno v~
thc c 1rnunity interPrCtCr pcrn1its

ledgc,to communicate to thcir mlltual satishcti

P rtant rcquircment for this rnutual satisfacd

(Shackman198 18)An im~

n,clcarly,is thc idca that a c nscnsus

as to thc vahdity of the clairn, shared by the tvv PartiCS,has cmcrged in rational

communication Yctthe c n11nunication can be seen as rational onl

vhen the intcr~

prctcr s inter cnes as to cnablc both thc chcnt to participate hlly and thc agcncy

rcprcscntatives to arri c at an informcd undcrstanding of thc clai1n

502

LAx/yRENCE

ENUTI

Comn unity intcrPreting that takes an inter cntionist aPPr ach thus PrcsuPP sCs
11 JtlrgCn Habcrmas calls an ideal sPccd1 tuation, distinguis11cd by con(lid ns

that arc normally counterfactual bccausc ilYlPr bablc :d cy include PcnnCsS to

thC Pubhc,inclusivcncss,equal rights to Participation,irnmunization against extcrnal
or intcrnal c mPulsion, as
un(lcrsta 1ding(d1

vcll as thc particiPants oricntation to

is,the nccrc cxPrCssi n of utteranccs)

`ard rcaching
367

(Habcrmas199

In PrCSuPPosing such conditions, the con1rnunity interPrCtCr vorks ultirnately t

f

stcr a domcstic colnmunity that is rcccPti c to forcign constitucncics,but that is

not ct reahzcd~ r at lcast its rcahzati n vill

t bc advanccd until thc chcnt is

givcn pohtical asylu1n, duc Pr cCss, lucdiCal care, or clfare l)cnc ts, as thc case
may bc, E en thcn, f coursc, the rcccPti C domcstic comluunity is PriFnarily a
Pian Prqccti n that d cs n t din natc thc social hicrarchics in which thc rchgec
or in11uigrant is actually positioncd Still, it docs cxPrcSs the hoPe that linguistic
and cultural differenccs xsill not result in thc exclusi n of forcign constituencics
ut

m thc d n estic sccnc,Transladng n1ight be modvatcd by much m

al)le things

rc question~

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alain(1934)Pr Pos Jc irF

ru c,Paris Gonthicr

Allaln,MF (1983)Tfle OFh

n Ccllar rsdhons
VVal(lrnan,L nd n Bodley Hcad

Amos,FR(1920)

dr,T/` es

llirh G

hdm Grccnc,tl m1s G

on,New York:C lumbia Univcr

TrdnsF

ty

Prcss.

Andelson,B(1991)JillgJincd c^o muni

sj Rg cchor,s oIa rllc O n cnd sP dd gf
N rion fjsm,revised cd ion,L ndon and N(:w York:Vcrs
Al)d s n,D (1983)Pound

d`c nri;
C

n EJirion o/

Fhc ns`dh ns,Norcs,dnd

ss s,Princct n,NJ Princeton unhcrsity Press,

Andr s,B,,and P Lekbvrc(1979) MacbCth, Tho rc de la Manuhcturc, u
11:80-8
Andrew,D (1980) S und il`Francc the O" ns f a Native sd10oI, 1 fc Frcnch
srud cs60:94-114,
Armhcim,R (1997)FI m ss9 nd c"ricism,MadisOn, V univcrsity of Wiscol1sin
Prcss

Arrojo,R (1998) ThC Re 'ision

of the Traditi

nal Gap bctwccl)Thcory and

Practicc and thc EmP

vCrment of Translation in P stlnodcrn Ti1ncs, Th
Tr n dror4

Asad, T

(1986)

25-48

Thc ConcePt of Cultul l

Translati

n in Blltlsh social

AnthroP logy, in J Cliff rd and G E NIarcus(eds) inJ C fru ;Tflc P crics

nd PtD ri6 rJ,n IdP ,BerkClCy and Los Angclc,s uni crsi f cdihr a
i

Press,PP 141-64

Ascheid,A,(1997) sPCaking Tongucs Voicc Dubbing in thc Cinc1ua as Cukural

VCn iloq sm,

TJ,

re

iJhr Tr P40(Fall)

3 -41

Ash,I,(trans)(1955)F sagan,Bon`@ur rfsrcssc,Ncw York:Dutton

504

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Augustine (1958)On c IIsr1dn

D
rrinc,trans,D

V,Roberts n Jr,IndianaPoliS

B bbs-Mcrrill

,J (1977/1993) CamP and Gay sensibility, in D Bcr8man(Cd)CdmP

nd Homoscxucz/i ,Amhcrst:umvcrsity f Massachusetts Prcss,

Babusci

Gr untfxd;s
Pp

19^38

Bacardi,M,J,Fontcuberta,and F Parccrisas(cds)(1998)Ccnr dn
cdr Fa

Fs9F~J99C,l;"nFo vi ,vk and Ba

Bakcr,M,(1992)rn Orhcr

orJ~x

dc rrdd

cci

dona:Eumo

Co1 book n rdns`dF n,London

and Nc

Y rk

R udcdgc,

(1993) Corpus Linguistics and Translati

ns

ImPhcauons and Apphcations,

h M Bakcr,G,Francis,and E Tog mB nelh lcds) e dnd%chn Fo JIa

Honour Jo ns cFdIr,Am crdam:BcnlamhS,pP 233-50

(1995) Corpora in Translation udics:An O er cw

for Futurc Rcscarch, ~ er7: 223-43.

and s me Suggcstions

(1996)
Linguisdcs and Cultural studics C mPlCmentary or C mPeung
ParadigmsP in A Laucr,H,Gcrzymisch-Arbogast,J Haller and E Stcincr

(edS)t/bcrscFzun s sscnsch im(Jn,brutJ,,T h ell Narr,PP %19

(1997) C rPuS bascd Translauon studics The Challengcs that Lic Ahcad,

in H.Somers(cd)

, sP nd r nsF onj sru cs m L nfu e n n

nf in H nour u nc s Am Crdam Be amins,PP 175^86
(Cd)(1998) n d
Pc ol Tr nsF n sFudics,Lond n and Ncw Y rk
c

J,n

R udcdgc

(2000)

T
vards a Mcthod

Translauon`

Bakhtin,M(1982) PrjncIPe
Balibar,R(1985)

gy for Invcstigating thc Stylc of a Litcrary

eF12: 241-66,

JnsFirLIF

Ballal d,M (1992)De Cic

dld q iqu ;sui

on du~fr nf s,Pa

n a BeIlJ min

ch s du C rcfe de Bd n,PaHs:Scuil
s

Prcsscs Ulll crsitaires dc Francc

rr duc curs,FrczduC on

F c

ons,ullc:

Prcsscs Uni crsitaires de Lillc

Bally,C (194+l

nf is ,2nd edition,Bcrn:
sri ue
Franckc
Barrctt,R,(1995) SuPCrm dds ofthe V dd,unite!P litical Ec nomy and thc
Languagc of Pcrbrmance among A ican Amcrican Drag Quccns, in W LeaP
(C
ond fhe dv nd Le con; urhcnh %rIl, jn on,dnd PProPh Fion in
)Bf
esbidnnd G nJuq's, Luxembourg: G rdon and Breach,PP 207~26

inJu r qu JJn FdF cr finJ

(1997) ThC Hmo genius SPecch C mmunity,

(e )QLIeer PJ,rdse

drlJu

Oxf rd uni crsit Prcss

Bal y,RF(199+lc^ons

R ee

ruC

ff d I,f,Amste1

(1996)

Hcarings,

h A Livia and K,Hall

Gendcr nd s AtJdrI ,Ncw Y

tllld L

ndon

d Pr@duc CC r cr Discovrs rJ nd rhc c^on vcn on

dam:Be amins,

ThC InterPrctCr as Intcrcukural Agent in Convcntlon Rcftlgce

rJ,c Tr nsF

ror2:45-64

Bassnctt,S (1980) runsF rion srudjcs,London and Nc vY rk

R uded e;rcviscd

cdition, 1991,

Bassnctt,S and A Lcfcvcre(cdS)(1990)TI nsldrion,HisFo nd cu`ru ,Lond n

Pinter

Bassnctt,S and H.Trivc(li(cdS)(1998)P

New Y rk;Roudedge,

src F ni F

rr nsFdr1on rJac

~/,L ndon and

BIBLIOGRAPHY

505

demrd /drion,London:Oxbrd u c i Press.

Batcs,E s (1936)
Baumhaucr, 0,A,(1986) Djc SoPhisric cR cr ri1~ inc Tf o/1c sPrdc Fich r
n,stuttgart;Mctzler

oil,munikdF1

Bccrb hm,M
Bcll c,H

(1903) TranSlati n f

(1931)on TI

(1931a) On
BCl

PlayS, s rurd Re ic

nsFcFi n,Oxford:Oxbrd

Translati n, Boo mdn74:

lamin,A(1989) ldnsF Fion

dIad Fhc NdruF

uni

32-39, 179-85
gfPhiF

Bcnjamin,W (1923) DiC Au abC der ube

schrJq

P/,London

Roudcdgc.
Schwcppcnhiuser(cds)Gcsdmm Frc

(Lond n)96:75-6,

crsity Prcss,

etzung,

alld New Yc,rk

hRT dcmann and H

,F1 anksu :suh1 kamp,1980.

(1968) ThC Task f thc Translator, in fumin rions,cd.H Arendt,tl ans

Harry Zohn,Ncw York Schockcn,pP 69-82

/IsF P cFics in rde , Tcl Aviv
DePartlllcnt of P ctics and Comparati e Litcraturc,university of Tcl Aviv

Bcn-Porat, Z, and B. Hrusho ski (1974) srrucrur

Ben-shahar,R (1983) Dial guc Stylc in the Hcbrcw Play,both Original and
m Enghsh and Frcnch, 1948 1975/

Translatcd fr

Uni crsity of Tcl A i

unPubhShed dissertation,
Bcrgcr n,L (1980)Dic ionndi dc d fdn u

qu b&ois

,Montrcal:VLB

m thc Polnt of Vkw

:Cr tr m,M(1989) C mmunication and Translati nf1

Brain Function/ unPub1iShCd manuscriPt

Bcnuan,A (1984)
0Pr u/e

dc`

r;CuFrur
JFr n

cr rIddutrion tfdns` H`Fcm Jnc

romdn-

ue, Paris: Galhmard,

ri
i

(1985) La Tladudi n comme oPrcu C dC

trangcr, xre 67-81

(1985a) La Traduction ct la lcttrc, ul aubcrgc du l intain, in

s Tou
B bc :

sscl s

sur fd rr

dc

ducrion, Mauvczin: Trans-EuroP RCPrcss; Paris scuil,

1999

(1992)%c x ricncc

C Forci n

6 ru nd rrdnsFdrJ n n RomdnFic G rj,,

v,

trans s Hcy acrt,All,any,r`Y:state Univcrsity of Ncw York Press

(1995)P

Bcrman, R

unc irique dcs F

(1978)

P StP ning

Contrasti c Styhstics/

duc ions;yohn

w,Paos Gallim

Lcxical Rcpc on and thc Likc

A Study in

BdFsf,dnur~s^lljf,,usJliF 1:2

Bhabha,H,(1994)% Loc on gf C^LI ru ,London and New Y rk:Routlcdgc

d rn
fuq c
Bl k,G A (1936) Jamcs Thomson:His Tmnsladon f Hone,
Rel'k 31:48-54
Blamch t,M (1988)rJa t/Iadvow bF C mmuni ,trans,P,J ris,Barrytown,Ncw
J/r

York:Station Hill Prcss,

(1997) Translat g (1971),in Fricn iP,trans E R ttcnbcrg,stanhrd,
Cahf rnia: Stanf rd uni crsit Prcss,

Blocll,E.(1988)rJle IJr Piczi FuncFiorl qrF dIad i dF r j sCF cF d ssd ,Cd alld
tmns J Z CS and F,MccHcnburg,Cambrdge,Massachusctts:MIT Pr s,
(1991)Hc ri r
fO imes,tlalns N Pl cc and s Pl ce,Oxbrc P lio

Blum~Kulka,S (1981) ThC Study of Translation in Vicw of Ncw Dc cloPmcn

in Discoursc Analysis,

Pocrics roddI/2 4,

(1983) ThC Dynamics of PcJlitical Intc"icws,

Bo th,M(1983)CdmP,L nd n

Borges,J,L,(1936)Hisr

Xr3 2,

Qu tct

rcrniddd,Buenos Aircs:Viau y Zona.

ri dc F
(1999)sdccFed N n~ficrions,cd E Veinbcrger,Ncw York Vikng Pcnguin

506

BIBLIOG RAPHY

B ry,J,L

(1969)

Pc dcs

zabr6,Paos:Gallin ar(1.

Bower,A,(trans.)(1953)A,Camus,

Jlc R b F,L nd n Hamish Hamilton

Brecht,B,(1975) d Bonnc me d se chou n,trans J,stcrn,Pa s:L Archc.

(1976) LC BuctimPr mPtu u la n ssc chc'lcs ProPri taires dc bungalow,

ahrF:

~a

Sch l,

unPubhShcd manuscriPt,

Brenncnstuhl,W,(1975)FfdndFuP

s h 0rie und J fdndFunJsF ikj ciruIafcn zur

nr ickFun cin r chdd u rcn H ndf1IrlJsF i ,Kr nbcrg Athcn um

Bllosct, A,(1990) soci c FJquc dc J

rI ducri n;

b Fr cF dFF rirJ 1` bec

rF968_F98 ,Lon:uC0 Lc Pr ambtlle

(19%) s ocm u ns o J,edrrc dnd HFr m QucbcG F96s 9ss,
trans Rosahnd Gill and Rogcr Gann n, Toront univcr ty of Tor nt

Prcss
B1 lst

w,E K (cd and trans)(1977)

Br ch,H,(1966)Cr crion Fir d rc

on Chek r s Pk s,NCw

cF c nndissdnc

York:No n

, ans A Kohn,Paris:Gallin ard

Brocrman,I (1984) Dic Tex c Vitz im P rtu csiSchen, Univcrsity of

Hcidclbcrg,unpubhshed disscrtation,

Browcr,R,led)(1959)On TrdnsFd ion,Caml,r gc,MA:H du vcrsity Prcss

Br wn,P,,and S Lcx lnsOn(1987)P Fifcncss s mc tJr,ive
Fs in nJudfc L/bdJc,
Cambodgc:Cambri(lgc university Press.

Bru atl,C(1955)P

FiFe FfIsFoi

de F

Fd uc nfdis ,J,Paris:Armalad Colin,

Buber,M,and F,R senzwcig(1994)scr

Pru dnd rrdnsFdri

vith E F x, Blo n1ington: Indiana IJnivcrsity Prcss

n,trans L Roscnwald

Burton,D, (1980)Di
pJu dnd Discoursc, Lond n Routlcdgc and Kegan Paul

Busch,W. (1987) E)iC Kunst und dcr Wandcl ihrer Funktion, Zur Einfohrung in
dic Thcmcnstcllung, in W.Busch and P.schrll k(cds)KunsF D1eC sc ic r
Fun
nen,Weinhchn and Bcrhn: Bcltz
Butlcr,J,(1990)Gcnd rI ubJ ;F min^m dnd Fhe sub
Ncw Y rk:R utlcdgc
iJ,r r

Calzada P

rcz, M (1997)

c8i n gffdcnF

9r,London and

Transidv y in Translatlng the IntcrdcPendcncC

Tcxturc and C ntcxt/ Hcri t Watt university,unPubhshed disscrtation

(2001) A Thrcc~way Mcthodology lor DcscHpti c-ExPlanatory Translad n

sttldIcs,

Td Cr13(2):203-39

Caminda(lc,M,and A Pym(1995)res f
de r ccnserl,cnr Il,ondi

ons n rrdducFi n er inFcrPr onj ss i

,Paris Soci to Fran aise des Traductcurs

CamPbCll,G (1789)TF,cF

ur G c`s,L ndon

Strahan and Cadcll,v l,1

Camus,A.(1942)L 0r,diaf ,Paris:Galhmard,

(1951)
H n,mc RcvoFF

,his:Galhmald

Am ed
(1953) l,e RcbcF,tra A Bower,L n(l n Hamisll Hamilton,
(1953a)D r/lrensch1nd r Rcv c,tI ans,J,stl dler,Hamburg Rowohlt
(1951al Hcdd I,,Hczmorcd,tlans Z,Arad,Td Aviv

Camus,R,(1981)

ic

s,Paris:P,O,L

(1982)NoF s HchFicnncs,Paris:P,O,L,

(1988)

icks( dition d

nitivc),PariS;P.O.L

Cary,E (cd,)(1959) Notre enqu te,

B b

`5:61-106

BIBLIOGRAPHY

507

Catbr(l,J,C(1965)H inf c TJlco o/TrdnsFdrio,a n ssqy in PPJi d Lin sFics

L nd n Ox rd univcrsit Prcss
Cecchc tj,G (1959)RC iCw of Manclclbaum(1958),C mP drive ir drtI,e11
262-8
Chambcr n,L (1988) Gcndcr and thc RIctal)11 rics of Translad n, JI,s13
454-72
isr

Chambcrla11d,P(1969)

c/, /hLJr`c,M

n cal: diti ns Pctl o Pri

lla1 d(cds)(1995)"n
Pc d of Trdns c i n CJ11n se~
c
nJF1sh/ nJf1sJa Chincse, Hong Kong; Thc Chincsc Univcrsity of I ong K ng

Chall,s W tll1dD P
Press
Chcl ho

,A (1967)

t`

Ga in1ard

res,Paris

(1983)unc`e ,lJ , ans,M.Trcml,l"and K.Y 0shcvska ,M lltrcal:

Lcmcac

(1984) Ii

(nd)

scsr9,in zh'nno/e,R ss J Ppl

LcS tr is scFurs

cs

,Pl y,M Scow

trans R Lalondc,Nati nal

ThcatI c

P o

csCCnC

school,unPub^

lishcd luanuscriPt

Chc erman,A (cd)(1989)Rmd

Lcctura Ab

nfs in TI dnsF nTJ,eory,Hdsinki:Oy

(1997) mcs Trdns`cri n; Flc

Am erdam:Bclllamhs

ch tz,E(1991)rJle P Fi6gf

mPcsr r

TtzIz

mPc

sPrc d

dfIs

d ds

Fhn

in TI dns` on rf,

,| r nsF Fion dnd Co nj' rion

fr m

rJ,e

n,NCW York an ]L nd 11:Ox rd Univcrsity Prcss,

Ciardi,J,(tl ans)(195+l D Alighich,%c in ,NCw York Mcntor

cnhonC,DC m mcK OidrC,rum,%Picd,tra11sHM
Ciccro,MT(1949)Dc in

Hubcll,Cambridgc,MA:Ha1 'ard uni

crsit Prcss,

Coopcr,` A(1928) Tmnsladng Goctllt s Pocms, oLIrndF

Phi`ob I

gf

nJnsh nd GeiIl,d,,iC

27:470^85

COlDdalld,R(1 1)RhcF c,HcrmcncuFics, nd dnsJd o,l

rhc I
1dd
'1

7c

Hcddcmt

diFions dnd 0rn cuFdr TcxFs,Cambridgc:CambHclgc uni crsity Prcss,

Cotronco,R (1995) Sosdcnc Tabuccbi, sPrCsso,2JunC,PP 104^8

Ti

Cox,L,and R Fay(1994) Gaysl)cak,the Linguisdc Fhnge Bona Polah,CalnP,

QuCersl,e and Bc lld, in s White(ed)TJ,e d ms rhc o,G cn`
t/,b ln j1'es,Aldersh

t:A1 c11a

Crcag11,P,(tranS)(1995)DccFd

Crccd,B,(1998) Film

c nd

cs Pc cjrd

4 csF1,,,ony,Lonclon Harvill

Psychoa11alFis, in J Hilland P Gibs n(cds) f,c( rd

GtIidc r fi`m srud1cs, Oxford: (DxRDrd university Press,pp 77-90

CriSP,Q (1968) flc Nd cd C1v scry nr,London Capc,
Cronin, (1996) rdnsFdrinf Jdnt/: 7 dnsf rion, dnJud s, cu/Furcs, Cork: C rk
rt

uni

crsit

Prcss,

- (2000) crpss Fhc ines; rc;`e`, dn 1Jcz c, TrcIns`

n, Cork: C rk uni ersity

Prcss

rdns Fio dnd G obdf zdrion, L ndon and Nc rk R udcdgc

(2OO3)

Abhncc tlR,NP(1 2) cr cs

Prl lcccs

ucs,cd R Ztll cr,Paos

M d

Di(licr

Danan,M (1991) Dubbing as an ExPrcssion of Nationalism,

(1999) H llywood

lrc,rc3 6o6-14,
s Hcgcmo cs atc cS:OvCrcomhg French Nati nal-

ism with thc Ad cnt of sound, in A Higson and R Maltby(cds)

',,,

uroPc

508

BIBL1oGRAPHY
CincnkI, Commcrcc dnJ Cu`r1`rd` cl,dnJc F92tl- r939,Exctcr

cind Fi`m'4n2cricd

Uni crsity F

ExCtcr Prcss,PP 225^48

Daniell,D,(2o03) Bib/e
Das ldsOn,D (198+l Jrl

en,CT:Yalc univcrsity Prcss

`ish,NCw
Ha
ui
s inFo rurh dnd JIaF ?rerdrion,Ox rd and Ncw Y
in n

rk

Oxf rd univcrsit Prcss

Da`is,K(2001) JnsI h n

dnd D nsFruchon,Mtalld1cstcr St Jcr mc

of systcm`Its T11c rcdcal ImP ltancc and its

Dc Gccst,D (1992) Thc Noti n

Mcth dolo:ical Imphcations f r a Functionahst Translation 1 heory/ in H

Kittcl(ed)Gcschichr ,0 Fc,,a,rir r l Is he
rcns`dr1ons,Berhn Schn1idt,PP 32^45

Dclabastita,D (1989)
Translatl n as E

T1 anslati

l/b cF7unJ/FfIsro

n and Mass Communicati

idcnce f Cultural Dynarnics,

Dc Lindc,Z,and N,Kay(1999)r/,

De Man, P (1986)

Translator in Jlc

Condusi

es,0 rcms,tireId9

F m an(l TV
B'bd35(4):193-218
11

semio 6gfsub ir n ,Manchestcr Jer

ns

Valtcr Bcnjami11
;

Rcsisr ncc Fo rJ,co9

R/IlnncaPohs

mc

s
The Task of thc

univc1 sity of N/Iinncsota

Prcss

Dcnham,J(cd,and trans,)(1656) h

srrucrion gf Fr , n Bsq uPon FJle sec nd

s nos

Frcn in Fhc d 636,London HumPhrcy Mosc19

Dcrrida,J (1979) Li i11g On/Bordcr Lincs, tra 1s J Hulbert,in D consr,ucrjo
Boo of I1 j

dnd Criricism,Ncw York

Conunuun1,PP 75-176
J Graham,inJ Gra11am(ed)Deren cc

(1985) Dcs Tou dc Babcl, ans

in r nsfd ion,Ithaca,New York C n ell univcrsity Prcss,PP 165^248

(1985a)
rhc Orh Oro8io P ,Tr ny rcn cc,Trdnsrdri ,trt.rls,

P, Kamuf,Ne vY rk;

(1999)

I dtJt rion irF rdire

sch ckcn.

Qu cst ce qu unc traductl n rclc `antc

r tI

Fcs f99 ,ArlCs

(2001) Vhat Is a Rclcvant

27: 174~200,

in QLIinzi s=1ssis6dc`

Actcs sud,lDP2 48

TranslationP

trans L Vcnuti, ChricdF Jnqui9

Dc s nt Exup ry,A,(1946) PcFiF

- (1962) iFrfe

Princc,

P ntt,,Pa1 ls Gallimard
ans, bods,Harm(,ll(lswo h:Peng n

Diclucrt, B (1996) Gr h m(9 cne s rhn s dnd Fhc F93tls,Montreal and Buffal
McGill-QucCn s univ
ty Press

Drydcn,J (1680) Prc cc to O s EF1srf s, in E,N,Hookcr and H,T

Swedenkrg, (ed9 l/l/orks fJohn D dcn d I,Bt, d tllnd Ll s
d

Angclcs univcrsity of Cahf rnia Prcss, 1956,

Dut)ois,J,(1978)[

ur1on dc`d Jr ru ,Paris Fcr )and Nat1 an

'ns
Duv t,T(1969)JrlreFdiF de s ur,Pa s:L E ti ns dc Min t
(1973)Pdl/s ed fdnrdi c,Paris Lcs Ediuons dc Minuit
f

(1974) B n sexcusrr ,Paris:Les Editi ns dc RIinuit

(198 L u`r sm n,Pa L~ E d
le Mh

Dycr, R (1977)

It

s BCing so CamP as KCCps us Goin

BodJ PofiFic 10

l1-13

Ebcl,J.G(1969) Translation

and Cultural Nati nalism in the Rcign of Elizabcth,

urn
o/ h HisFo
Jtfdds30 593602,

Edn)ondson,W(1981)sP kcn Discoursc; .1r de`y :1n us,Londoll

Edwards,0,(195o Cynala,
Imes
ond@n,JLllxr11,P13,
o/

Longmcall

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Esslnann,H,and A P, Frank(1991)

509

Translation Anthol gics: An Invitadon to

65^90
Evcn Zohar,I,(1975) D isi ns in Translatin8P etry,
thc Curi us and a Casc study, 7cr3

H s ur2

3245

lHebrewl

(1990)P

,sJsFcm& s,Pocrics%d

Fairclough,N.(1992)D

,CambHdgc Polity
Fang,A,(1953) s luc RcHcctlons n thc Di cuky f Translad n, in A.F,Wright
scouIse dnd soc1dF Ch

univcrsity of Chicago Prcss, PP

(Cd) sr1 dics in C incsc TFlOLJf r, Chicago

263-85;rcPrintcd in Browcr(1959),pP 111-33

Fawcctt,P (1996) Tmndathg Film, hG T,H
"s(cd,)On TI
cr ru dnd FiFm,Amstcrclam RodoPi

nsF rinJ ench

(1997)Truns/d n dnd L IaJudfc;LinJu ric hc cs F 1ncd,Mancllestcr:St

Jcr rnc

rc,C (1981) IdCal Rcads alld Real Rcad s, Pr cccdin s gf rhe32nd

Gco eron Round dbFe on I nJ J nd IinJu sFJcs, washington, E)C:

Fillm

Gcorgctown Uni crsity Prcss

,s(1980)

rJacr

xr in his dssPj TFle Hu horJ ffnreIPre

Cambridgc,MA Harvard Uni crsity Prcss

Fitts,D (cd,and trans)(1956)P ems fr rl,rhc

c^ommLJz,1h s,

York Ncw

G c Hnr oFo ,NCw

Dircctions

(1959) ThC PoCdc Nuancc, in R,Brower(ed)On rr

MA:Har ard

n,CambHdgc,

nsF

Uni crsi Press,PP 32-47

Florcs,s,(trans)(1975)T DuvClt,srrdn cL nJsccPc,NCw York:Gr vc

F rstcr,L(1958) Translation An Intr ducti n, h smith,HsPecrs of Tr nsFdrion;
sFudi

s1n Commun1cdr1on2,London Scckcr and Warburg,PP 1-28

s gncnt, ss,29Aug t,p,21,
inJ isFic Crir1c1sm, Oxford: Oxford Univcrsity Press; 2nd

Foucault,M,(196+l LCs Mots q

Fowlcr, R,(1986)
cditi n,

1996,

(1996)
On

in C

Critical Linguistics,

Caldas Coulthard and M.

cd Di ourse n
ices;Rc dinfs in cri
C tllthard(cds) xrs4nd Pr
,sis,Lond n

F1

and Ncxlr Y rk:Routlcdgc

ancc,P(ed)(200
ot G dc
Ox rd uni cr t Prcss

rd rc

IlJ sh

dns rIOn,Ox

tl:

Frascr, (1993) Public Account Using Vcrbal Pr t c ls to Invcstigatc

Community Translation/
n uis ics 14 32543,
PP` d
(1996) The Translat r Invcstigatcd: Lcarning om Translati n Pr cess
Analysis, fl r ns` ror2

65-79

Frawlcy, V,(1984) Pr lC8 men n to a Thc ry of Translati

(Cd)

n,

in V.Frawlcy

n ion; ircrd~
, in uisric, nd Phifoso`hicdf PcrsPccr1v
i

universky f Dclawarc Prcss,pp 159-75

F ,J H (182Ol RCvicw J T Mitchell s AristoPhanCs,Q
r

s, NcWark;
Rc ic

474-505,
Ftllhami F.(1977)`9asu K r,,crdmdn~G kid

shJ dshi o To

Sho ting

CNCwS Cam aman

thc Turbulcnt Hist ry ofthc sh Dvva Era ),T ky :Chtlt k ronsha

Gais ct Lesbicnnes Branchos(1995) H to say F in Frcnch/ Wcbsitc http //

www flance qrd org/ rd/texts/wor

Gambicr,Y(199+l

lltml

dnJuq e Trdn~xlcr dnd o sud`Commun

Turku:uni crsity of Turku

drJOn

B mP /,

510

B18LIOGRAPHY
(cd)(1996)Lcs Frdn
d

r s
f s ucs d ns Fcs
Ascq:Presscs LInivcrsitaircs du sePtentrion

Gal lt,A

n,

ds du su ,V kncu

(1987) Litcrahschcs LIbcrsctze11in dcn FremdsPrachCnPhilol

Pc

r1

`crlacher
(cd) P
Nlunich
IudiciuIl,,PP
551^~6

cn 1Ir,c/ k

hrc inrCrk1 Frurc

gicn,

i11

er Orm nisr k,

(1989) M
81ichk0ten und Grcn7cn cincr pragmatischen 0bcrsctzungs
thc rie, TE,C @,,TEX
c

Garncau,M,(1973)

4: 1-59

4niI,ldJ um in,M ntrcal:Fod ration dcs co

ratl cs tu(h~

antcs.

(1974)L
c;1Mol1trcal:L
in,
Gar

Aumrc

P L (cd and trans,) (1955) '1 Pr

f c scJ,o

ruCF1Irc tIz,d stI c,

ashington,DC

srPleF csj ircr ,`

(Jr,r on

` Rc
Washington Ll11guistic
Club
Gasch ,R (1988) saturninc Vision and d)c Qucsti n f Di :rcncc:Rc ccti ns on

Valtcr Be amh s Theory of Languagc, h R Nac c(ed)BcrlJ min GFo1 nd;

R ddiI,fs.2jF^ . fr r Be dm1n,DCt t W nC a un =crsity p1 css
s

Gcnct,J (1948)NoF

Ddmc dcs F` urs,Pa1 is

Gentilc,A,u Oz lins,and M,V

Mclb urne

pVIclb

urne univc1

Arbal te

ilakak s(1996)Li ison nr ?Ic,rmf

4H ndb@ok,

Prcss
lri n rhcorlcs, London and Nc ' Y rk:
Gcntzlcr, E (1993) Conr illPord TIdn
R utledgc;

sit

2nd cdition, Clcvcdon:Rlultilingual Mattcrs, 2000,

Genu n,J C (1972)D

uidi, Juid1,hd/

hd ,su

v1dc,si`cs sdnsoucis J C

stDucicnr, ces s nsoucjs-c1s

n souCiC'onr-i s2Bicn PdrFcr, c csr sc r sPccrer

M ntrca

Len1 ac

Gerc)w,A A (1996)hVriung a Pure Cincma:Articulations f Eady JaPancsc

1Jniversity of I vva,unPubhshCd(hsscrtation
Ger`ymisch_Arb gast,I1.(1987)zur /,cn, -Rh n2 ~Gfi dcrunJ n
Filn

crI unischcn

l11rr~

rcxren Dne cxcm`Fcrischc Hnd c,Tuh cn

Na
Gilbcrt,S,(tranS,)(1946)A,Camus,Tflc sFr nJ ,Ncw Y rk:Al cd Kn Pf,
Gill,B (1955) Thc uscs fL e, i,5March,PP 114~15
sc

Glinz,H (1973)Tc
r nd 'sc und krsrchcn h ohc ,FIankhlt;Atl cn um
Got,al d,H,(1976)
i n rJ n FinJu^rjtltJc,Pahs
FlammaH n
G bin,P(1978) e fou s s doubFcs,Montra PKsscs(lc ru cite dc Montr
G dard,

B,(1986) Translat s Prc cc, in N Br ssard, o c's,

r

M ntrcal

Gucrn1ca

Gocthe,J W V (1819)1 sr0srJic Dj, n,ed H Birus,F1

ankfu :Dcu chc1

Klassikcr,1994
G fIinan,E, (1976) RCPhCs and RcSP nscs, nJu ci socje9

Gollno,C(195

Rt

xl

of Manddbaum(1958),

d/,dn QLI

257-313

Gol br wicz,W,(1976)rdns Hrf nriq1 ,trans,C JclCnski and G.serrcau,Paris

Dcn 1,

Gomery, D (1980)

s ugglc and Holywood ImPcrialism: Eur Pe

) Jc Frcnc srudics60 80-93,
G (lspccd,E,J,(1945)P' bF ms c Tt,srJmenr Ti nddFjpn,Ch go:L1niv ty
Ec n mic

Convcrts t soundr

f Chicago P1

c ss,

Gmllam,J (c(1 ) (1985)Dzrencc in TI

Uni crsit Press

Grccn,J(1974)ycunessc,Pa

Pl n

nsFd on,

Ithaca, Ncw York: C mcl

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Grccnc,T(1982)Tl,c hFin rrJ ir rion

Havcn,CT:Yalc uni crsit Press
Ji

Grcssct,M (1983) Dc

Go ,H,P(1975) L gic
cnd scm

ug

J9dncd s

ai1

,Ncw

c;la t1 aducti n

rtfJcs

dm Ficd ncs

18

and convcrsauon, inP c lc and J Morgan(c ) /nr x

cFs,New Y k:A (lc,mic PKss

n cs3;b^Pecch

Gr , e,EU(1

nkrjon

dnd D c c9 in Rcn s nce Pocr

la traducti n dc la m taPhorc litt

comme n1ot.lphorc dc l crit11

(N vCmbcr),

511

6)
r rc xrc,

xF und KommLjIlik

Gutt, E_A.(1991) Trdn,F

rIOn

c l,f srkhc3fJhrunJ

Kohlha111n1cr

stuttgart

on nd

Rc`c9dnc Cqfn1r or dnd C nrcxr, Oxhrd:

Blackwcll;2nd cdid n,Manchcstc1 :St JCr mc,20O0

Habcrm ,J,(1998)On r

e Prq

Fit~xo/

C mi,,uni

ion,cd

M cookc,Caml)r

gc,

Massachusctts:MlT Prcss
Ha i(lay, 1.(1985) n fnrr d crion Fo Func rion
,,am r,London:E Arnokl,
Halhday, 1 and R, Hasan(1976)c /DcsJ n in`Gr
IaJFisf ,L ndon:Longman
Htal)tsch,I (1972) Zur sc1nanuschcn st1 ategie der Werbung,
chcn Zc

Harras, G.(1978)

omI,,uni dFi c FfdndFunfs onzcPrc, od rf ine Mric t,ir,

nduI,Jsd1s n zus mmeiah n

T bingen

Nicmcycr

Hal ris,B(1990) N rms in Intcrprctati

(Cc1.)(1997)Trdns/cIF

Har ey,

sPr cb in,r chnis~

rdfrcr42;93-112

nd

'u erk`Jren,

n,

JnrcrPrrjn

Td c

xemP/dr sh dn TJ,c F FCXrCn,

2:115^19

ho Fs,Am

cr(lam:Bc amhs

CV ur'`J,f re,,,c,9rV.1mcr c n( qI

(2003

in FrcncJ,

ns` Fi n,
I

Manchcstcr: Jc mC
'z,

Hascl ,O,W,(1969) or,,muni Fi n,Bcrlin:C lloquium Verlag

Hass,V P (1955 RCvkw of A (1955),ChicqJ sundq ibune,24APr

P 6
Hatim,B(1997)Com` unic ion dcross C res:Tr nsF n%c 0dnd C n rdsFi c xF
I

`f

inJuisrjcs,Exetcr
Ini ersity of Exctcr
Prcss,

~(1998) Translati n

Quality Asscssmcnt:sctjng aRd MJntai11i11g a Trend,

91-100,

hc r nsFdr r4

(2001)%dc

nd Res dIc Jlii,f Trdnsf

ion,London:L'

Hatim,B an(",M 0n(1990l Disc u c nd

T,dnsf ror sC mi,,un cdror,London

C,(1931)
T kii ni Kan suru Has11irigaki ( A

(1997) hc

Hayashi

s s5(10NIay)

ngman,

rflc rr ns`dF r,L nd n:L

ngman

and Ncw York:Routledge

Quick N tc On thc TalkJc ),

39

Heideggcr,M (1968)
sri ns ,Pahs Galhm d
(1975) dr Gr kJliIlkin ,cd,and tl alns.D,F.K
Ncw York:HarPcr and Row

ll al

dF.A,CaPtlz

Hcin l(l,E.,G,Keuchcn,and U schultz(1987)BJchcr nd BJchermcher;V s,l, n

on
rFdJ
l
isscn

so

Jr

,Hcidclbcrg:Dcckcr and Muller

Hcmingway,E(1938)TJle sh &o,i s rnesr H m1nfwq/,NCw York:s hcrs

Hcrding,K (1987) Rcalismus, inV,Busd1and P schn1 k(Cds) nsr;Djc
Gesch cflr
flrcr Fun nen,
/cinhci1n and Berhn Beltz,PP 674^713
Hcrmans,T,(c(l)(1985)TJle J dmPu dri n iFcr rur ;sru cs1n er
~/rrdns dri n,
i

Lond n Cr m

Hclm

512

BIBLIOGRAPHY

(1991) Translati nal Nonms and C ltect Translations, in K

an
Zwa1 tand T,Namjkcl)s(1991),PP 155-69.
-

(1995) Toury s EmPiricism Vcrsi()n0ne,

(1999)

ns`d on

in,

Jlc Tr nsF FOr1:215-23

dnd

ms;Dcsc P v

Fcm-oh

xP/dIzled,Manchcstcr StJCmme
Hjort, A,
(1990)
TranSlajon and d1c C nscqucnccs
S Bassnctt and A Lckvcrc (eds) T,dns/

Lcu en-

Fi n,

nF

PPr dchcs

of scePticislu,

in

Ffisro0 dnd C1j`r1Jr , Lond n

Pintcr,PP 38^45
Holly, rT rans,)(1900)B Cad c,nC,The B k rhc

C our

cr,cd W Rde h,

Ncw York AMs Prcss,1967,

Hocqucnghcm,G (1972)[ DJsir Jfomos ,Pahs:Editions uni

Holmcs,Js.(1988)Tr nsFdrcJ/PdPc n iF d0Trdn5
1

A 11stcrdarn

H lz

:crsitaircs

"on dnJ Tr

R d Pi

M t h,J,(198+l Trdns`

rohscJlcs Ff nde`n

fF,c rj

ns
rjon

srudj

s,

und cth dc,Helsink

suomalainen Ticdcakaten1ia,
- (1985) s ukturwandd
O,cIxJrFdrcn9

in dcn Translations Berukn, uhFd JJnFtIJ

//t bi e1In,s

30-5

(1988) Funkti nsk nstanz:cinc Fiktion7 unpubhshed manuscriPt

,H J stdlbrink,and H J ermccr(1986) Ein Fach und nc ZcitschriR,
E on EXr1:

1~1o
Hn ,H,and P Kussmaul(1982)srrdr

ic d r/bc cF'unJ,Tubingen

Narr

Horguelin,P (cd)(1981) nr oF ic dc ld n ni dc F dui ,Montrcal:Lingt1att,ch

Housc,J,(1977) AM dCl R Assessing T1 anslati n Quality, cr 22"039
l

(1977/81)H/lr d
/or Tr nsFdrit,nQ HsscSsmCnr,T bingcn

Housc,J an(ls Blum~Kulka(cdS)(1996) nrh,aJudF nd

DiscOLlrsc dnd Cofni

1c

n in Trt,ns`

Fi n

cInd sccond

Narr

fnr rcuFru JC Imi,aun1cdrion;

dnfu

ctluisirion sFudi s,

Tibingcn Narr

Howard, R,(trans) (1996)R Camus, TIicks(1981), NC =York an I

London

ScrPent s Tail

Hr ho i,B.(1971) ThC M rs msf Hebrew Rhymc m thc Piyut to

thc Prescnt Day(500AD-1970) An Essay on Basic Conccpts, ffds! uF2
tt

721-49 IHebrCw]
Huds n,A (c(l)(1978)scfccrions~from
Ct

Pf s

rinJs,Cal11b0d~ge

lubndgc U111verslty Prcss

Htltcheon,L,(1985)

T/,c

Ncw York Mcthucn

9gfP

ro 9JF,c dch nJs gf T

r F

Hutchins,J,and H somcrs(1992) nFIt,Jucrion

lFdchjn

CenFu9' rr Forms,

Tr rion,Lon(lon

Acadcmic Prcss.

vasaki,A (1930)

(FCbruary)
Izre

,kii to NIusankaikykl( Talkics and thc Pr

letariat

),shjs593

71-207

cl,s (1994) Did AdaPaIndccd L se His Chancc R)r Eternal L P:A Rationale
r Translatlng Ancicnt Tcxts int a RIodern Languagc, d
r6: 15-41.

N,B Hcnry(ed,)Th
JackSOn,J (1960) structtlrd Charactc Hsucs fN rms, in

ndm cs

c,frIlsrrucrIOndF(lr uP

ooPh@F ic F'4sPecFs

dchIZlJ cnd[cd'n1nJ,

Chicago:university of Chicag Prcss,pp 136-63

Jacobs,C (1975) The

N onstrosity of Translau n,

/l/rLN9o;755-66

BIBLIOG RAPHY

513

Jacobs,G (1996) Lesbian and Gay Malc Languagc Usc:A CHtical Re iew ofthc
mcric n sP ccf171:49-71
Litcraturc/
inft e,
Linguistics and Pocticsr in T scbe k(ed)s9 c1n
bS
n,R
(1969)
Jak

Can11)1 idgc, 1A N T

Press,PP 350^77
nsoo N rr vc s sood`00 9bo C ,Ithaca,

cdF t/I,

Jclll1csoll,F,(1981)rf,eP
Nc vY rk:C rncll uni ersit
FIr

JCr

mc(1980l 1b

dc oPFim

inr

ess

P1

nJI lEPisruF

59,,cd G J M Brlrtchll

Lugundi Batav run BHll,

Jowett,B,Crans,)(1891) PrC%cC,

in TJle DIdFq u s ofPFdr

,2nd edition,Oxf

d:

Oxll()rd u ersit Prcss,

Kamijima K (1995)JImd
Pandora

u shi d enin r(hiddiki(

DiC Biologischc C

KasPar, R (1983)

ogmPhy f a Subtnlcr),T ky

undlagcn dcr e luu nircn Erkc11nt11is-

in K Lorcnz and F R1~ Vukctits(cds)Dic r Ft`ritD,2d s D n ns,

N1unich and Zurich PiPCr,PP 125^45
KClly,J N D (1975) r n2c;Ffis i/0,Il jril,Js, nd cnrrove ies,Ncw York Harpcr
thc

ic,

and I

ovv

Kclly,LG(1979)TJ,c

ue J,lreIPFerc

HIsro9 gf TrdnsF rion rhc,

nd c ce in

FJ,e ll1sF,(Dxf rd:Black vcll

Kcnny,D(1998) Creatures of HabitP

hat Translat rs Usually Do with W
s Lclxiosa(cd)rJ,cc rPus Bdscd`1PProdch,lrcF 43(4 515-23

(2001) cx^dnd Crcdrii,`in Trd ldr on,Manches r:st Jcr mc

Ki(ld,J (1997)Guid
csJ%r TrdnsFdrcrJ,rc iscd b)J D laege,Paris
r

Perbrmi11

Ki11g, T (1994)
Pl udi
Y rk

Ki d,H

rds,

uNEscO

Akimbo : QuCCr Pride and EPistcm l gical

in M Mcycr(ed)TJ,cP hr cs nd Pocr cs ofCdm`,L ndon and Ncw

Roudcclgc,pp,23-50

(cd)(1992)Gcschic

,,sFcm, irc sc Jl (/l,erscFzunf/Hi hcs,,sFcm

LiFcrdr/ r ns` rions, Berhn schn1idt

(1995) Anthologies of Litcraturc in Translati n: Thc G t ngen Research

Pr ,jcd, in H Kittd(ed,)rnFern hond` nFho` s jFerdFurc in TrdnsF n,
i

Bcdin schmidt,Pp

Kn x,R
K

A (19s7)On nJ` shrdnJc n,Oxb1 d

i

lkr,Wd979)
1e er

~ (1989)

271-8

jIl/;hrunJ

n ct erscrzuP

sll

Oxford universitv P1 ess

i$cnscJ,q

,Hodcbclg QucllC aljd

Equivalcncc in Tral)sla n Thcory, in A Chcstc1 n)an (cd. and

trans R tfin s in TrdnsFcIFion

f,co , HClsink

0y Finn Lcctura Ab, pp

99-1O4

Koskinen, K. (2000)

InStitutional Illusions: Translating in the EuroPean uni

Commis on, rhe I nsFdro,6(1):49-65.

Kramer,L (1978)Fxso^,Lond n:Miner`a

K stal,E (2002)JnvisibFc

7ork

Bolf s ncF TfdnsF

rion,Nashx lllc,TN:Vandcrbilt

Univcrsit Prcss

Kry nski, V (1983) TchCk110 ,Trc 11blay,Brassard ou c

11mcnt changcr la vie
trc,
Par lC th

v nr

Prci,,i

rc9(3): 10-11

Kushncr,T (1992)HnJeFsin mc c ,P rr

Dn :J ennium HPProdch s,L ndon:R yal

Nau nal Thcatre and Nick Hcarn B oks,

514

BIBLIOG RA PHY

Labov, W, (1972)

n u c
n rJ c Jnncr Cirr; srt`dics jn rJle B ck, rlJ` sF
vr CuFdr,

Uni crsity of Pennsylvania Prcss,

PhiladelPhia

Ladminl,1R(1979)Tr du re;rJaJor n2cs

Pour fd dJuc
n,Pt ris Payc,t

(1986) Sourcicrs

d csrJ,

ct

cibhstcs, Rc, uc

Fiquc12:422~33

Lak f,R

(1975) dnJ qfc nd

%J,,cn s Pfdc ,Nc vY rk Harpcr and R w
Lalo lc,M(197+l sPc
re,Montlcal:L Hcxagonc
h

(1 9lD nsc

FusFrdr,on de Fd F Ju

qtrJbJcosc,P s:st, crS-La llt

rapport sur une

Lan11)crt,J, (1990) LC sous-titrage et la qucstion(lcs traductions

cnq tc, h R Amtz and G ThtDme(edS) c6cF'u f 1ss nsch E cb ssc

1znd Per
fi
n,Tubin cn Narr,PP 228^38

(1995) Translatlon,systc 1s and Rcscarch:The C nt0bution of Polysystcm

udics to Translati()n Stkldics,

rR TIdducrion,rc,ri,,inoF ie,R ddcFIOn FudCs

105-52,

sur fc rcxrc cr scs FIdnJ rrl,dr1ons8(1)

Lambcrt,J,L D hulst,and K van Bragt(1985) Translated Lkcraturc in France,

1800 1850, h T Hcrmal s(cd,)% %niPufd n o/ r drure:sFu es
r r rcins`d io,,, London: Cr om Heln ,PP 149^63
Lanc-Mcrcier, G (1997)
Translaung the untranslatable: Thc Translator
Acsthctic,Idcol gical and Pohtical RcsPonsibility/

d cF9:43^68
ir

Larbaud,V (1946)s us F in 'ocdrion dc sdinF Jr rl,c,Par :Gallinaarcl 1997,

Larose,R (1989) Tfa r1 s conFci,lPordines dc F FrcIducFion, QuCbcc:Prcsscs dc

Uni crsito du Qu bec,2nd editi n

Lasswell,HD(1964) ThC structurc and Function of Communication in socicty,
in L Bryson(ed) flc r- muniC on Jdc Hs ri sJ ddrcsscs,2n(l cditi n,
r

Ncw Y rk:Co Pcr Squarc,PP 37 51

Lattimore,R(cd,and tlans)(1951)Trl

i d f

Homcr,Chicago:u vcr

of

Chicago Prcss

(1959) Practical

N tcs n Translating Greck Poct1y,

On TrdnsF Fi n,Camb dgc,lX/IA Har ard

Univcrsity Prcss,Pp 48^56

La losa,S(Cc1,)(1998)hc C rPus Bdscd HP`rodc

LcaP, w (1996)

T%rd s OuF

, cr 43(4)

sh,

in R Browcr(cd)

Minn P lis

ulll
crsity of

inncs ta Prcss,

Lc rclc,J~1(1990)Trlc Fcncc nfu ,Lond n alld Ncw York Rtltledgc

Le erc,A(ed and trans)(1977) nsF rirlJ ir drurc;rJ, Gcrmdn TIddi nJq m

uF/,er

ro Ros nzW i

7,AssCn:Van Gorcum

(1992)Trdn ri@n,R ,l ririn , nd

and New York R udedgc
(ed and trans)(1992a)

rJle Jlfdni`u dri

nsF rion/HIsro

Ncw York:Roudcdgc
Lcnk,H,(ed)(1977)J fcnd`uJ,fsr oricn inr

rcl

/Cu urc;

sziPfin

Lcscurc,J,(tl anS,)(1953)GiuscPpC Ungaretti,

N inuit.

Lcu cn~Zwart,

F
,

Dissimilaridcs,I,

Td. c

k,Lond n and

~s^ourc b

r,MuniCh Fink,

s cinq v'cs,Paris:Editi ns

Translation and Ori na

K M van (1989)

mc,London

de

similarities and

151-81

(1990) Tmnslati n and Oh nal: mila ties

2:69-95.

and Dissimilarities,H,

% eF

IBLIOGRAPHY

Lcu cn

515

Zwart,K M van and T Naaljkcns(cds)(1991)Trdns d n~Srudi s;TJ,

s drc

,Amstcrdam:R dol,l
Lc cnst n, E (1976) T
vards a C luParative styhstics in Enghsh and Hcbrew,
rhc'1

Fis Jc oum
D1 16-22
'
`(I
Lev llc,sJ,(1991) /,e suby
in
ivc ribC;rr ns

cncdn FicF
IdFin HI

on, ,Patll,

1innesota: Gra / lf Prcss,

Lcvy,1(1965) Vill

Translati n The ry bc of usc t Translat()rsP in R.Italiaanclcr

(Cd)rJbc crzcn,Frankfurt:Athen un1,PP 77-82

(1967) Translation as a Dccision P1 occss, inoH Dy R ,,dn dk b5t,rl

The Haguc: Mout n,PP 1171^82
,

- (1969) Die Fjrcrdr, e bc,rs rz ,, ; ThcOIie cincr 1`nsv rFun , trans

schamschula,Frankfurt Athcn un

JJ,

Lewand wsl I,T,(1973-5) in uisrischcs orFeI buc JJJ,Hcidclbcrg:QuCllc and

N1c cr
Li

ia,A,t d K Ha (e(lS)(1997)V crJ Phr'scd ,,Juqg

Ncw Y rk and L 11don:Oxfc,rd unive1

L

Gcn(`c nd scxu

ckc,WN,talld A D Bo

sitv Prcss

th(1955)'lr chjnc D ns`dh I,gf dnJu es,NCw YOlk

Wilc
L rcnz,

,,andF M, Vuketks(Cds)(1983)Di

furion dcs Dcn

cns,Munich and

Zurich:Pipcr.
Lo1

her,W,(1991)Trdnsfdri n PcJormdnc ,r nsFdri n

Pr ccss,dnd7 dnsFdhoia

s dF :}~,iics,Tubingcn:Narr

(1996)
A Ps)d1ohnguistic Anal)'sis
f

Translation P1 occsses,

Merd 41:

26- 32

Lucas,I (1994)JJ99P rrjncnF Dccoru ,;G^ rb rricdF rdn c1`,=rcs,Lond

Cassell

Luther,M(1960) On Translating:An Ol)cn Lettcr, trans,C M JacobS,rcv,E

T Bachmann,in1 9rks,cd E,T,Bachmann,PhiladclPhia:Muhlcnbcrg Prcss,
o1, 35,Pp, 179~~202

M Duf,P (1984) M niquC MCrcuK/M eC uragc, n&jnc2(2):14-15,

Madntyre,A (1988)II%

us iccP

II%

ch Rdo@ndf/P,No c

Dt Iuc,IN:univcrsity

fN trc Dan1c Prcss,

Mahny, P (1980) To vard thc th1dcrstanding of Translation in Psychoanalysis/

in Rycho

Mdm

r,K

n sis nd

Djsc urs ,Lo11don

Ta istock,1987,PP315

(1992)RCviCw of Gtltt(1991),/lfiild nd d

(1993)

undcrpinning T1 anslatin ThC ry,

Malc,lle,J (1988)Thc s

cn

IIr

Jc7(3):298-309

d er5 133^48

iaf sFics in rhc Fr ol TF ns` ritDn;somc

n s nd PIdcdcc gf rdns d on,Albany:statc University

Manchcstcr,P T (1951)
68-73

VCrsc tlanslation as an intcrPreti

roo

fNew Y rk

C art,

r Fhc

Press

Hi id34

Mandclt,aum,A (cd alld ans)(1958)G un

rctu,Lj o f Jdn,Milall:
Schciw lcr,L nd n:Hamish Halllilton,and Ncw York:Ncw Dircctions

(Cd and tmns)(1975)se crcd

cms

G tIs

tJilJdIcF

Ith a,Ncw York

Corncll univcrsit Prcss,

Marc el,J,(1982) c/ou d
Ma1

solais,G(1977)

T1

T,0c,Mol trcd;EIP.

ad rc et monter Ma(lCmosclle Jtllic, Cdhids dc F N u c`fc,

comPJnjc Tfl& Frd 11(2)

Martcl,F(1996)

c R sc

`c`

11-12
ir

Lcs oI,,oscx

s Cn dn

dcF,

`is F968,P

is:seui1,

516

BIBL1oGRAPHY

Mardn,1R,,C,Matthicsscn and C P ntcr(1997)"%r n

L nd n:E

1 h funcrion F Gr mm r,

Arn ld.

(1994) E)iScoursc, Idcology and Tranqlad n, in R dc Bcaugrandc,

A Shunnaq and M Hellelledb) u c,D c urse dnd Tr nsJcz n in rhc %sr

nd 1ddfe dsr,Am crdam:Bcn minS,Pp,23^34

Massardicr Kcnncy,F (1997) Towards a Rc(lcHniti n of Feminist Translauon
Mas n,

Pracucc,

Th

IdnsFdror3(1) 55-69,

ctry, in R Br wcr(cd,)on
n,CambHdgc,MA:Har ard Univcrsity Prcss,Pp.67^77

MathC
s,J (1959) Third Thoughts on Translatin8P
rdnsFdFi

Mattllicsscn,FO(1931)TrdnsFJ

on

n Fizdb rhdn

HIr,Cambridgc,MA:Harvard

univcrsit Press,

MauPh,A(1980)%
s grrJ,cc-i,,L
May,E,T,(1988)IfoIllc rd

n(lon:C r

B und;H/me

con m1Fies n rhe CoFd

r,New

York:

Baslc Books

May,R,(199+l The TI nsF ror in r/,e xF On Re J Rus n iF dFu in

q sh,

Evanston,IL N rth vcstcrn univcrsity Prcss,

Mccrschcn,V,dc(1982) La Tra lucti n ang sc,Probl mcs dc nd lit ct dc

rcIdu'ionc- rcIdizi nc,A/l an: Dedul
in
qualit
Mcrrkk,J.,all lB,T,Ragan(1996)H m sexu Fi in/lr dcm nce,Ncw York and
Oxbrd Ox rd u crsit Prcss
Mcschonnic,H,(1973)Po r`d Po Fi ue Jf,Paris Gallimard,
Mcycr,M(cd)(1994)Tf, Po Fics dIad Poerics gf CdmP,L nd nc lld Ncw Y rk
R udcdgc
(1994al lntroduction Rcdalming thc Discou c of Camp, lll M MCy
(Cd) J,c PoFJ cs dnd PocHcs ol CdmP,Londoll and Ncw Y rk;R tledgc,
,

PP

1^22

Mkriammos,P,( ans)(1981)G

Vldal, /rl Cdrfon Pras dc F Ri" ,P is:Pcrqona

Millct, ,(1971)s ud`Pof Fics,London Hart~Da1 ls

ligan,

E E, (1957) S mc PrinciPlCS and Techniques of Translati

n, /lrod rn

dnfuq ournd`41 66-71

M on,G(1970) Ffom e PdiF' M lltreal:Pres s de u vcr dc Mollt d

M rgan, B. Q, (1959) A Critical Bibh graphy f Vorks n Translau n 46

Bc-1958, in R Br wer(ed)On Trdns Fi ,Cambr ge,MA:Har =ard
uni ersity

Press,PP 271^93

Morgenthaler,E (1980)
k

mmunik

Fi

oIl,m un dFioIasori

nrierrc x r mn, r Ezn

c K mP rcnz Z r TexFbi`dur,f uncl Tt

rk mm n
r ch

xrr cePrion

'such,J

LJs n tIr ichcr

zu rschficsscn,D ld f:khwalln,

MoHn,M.,and C B

an(l(1979)Lc r roire imd

nd1

dc cLIFFure,M ntR

Hurtubisc HMH
Moss p, B

(1988)

ThcOry,

Translatlng Institutions

A Missing Factor in Translati

TR1(2) 65-71.

(1990) Translating Insututi ns and Icliomatic Tl anslation, /lfcFd35|

342-55.
Mounh,G,(1955)Lcs BcF

cs,Pahs Cahcrs dtt stld,

es Jfd

(1963)
s ProbDm s

s dc d rr ducri
rh oriq1

Munday,

(2001)fIaFI ducin

TFd,as

and Ncw York R udcdgc

n srtldics
d

n,Paris:Galli

`ard
flco
s nd PPIic ons,Lo

,
Mura C (1933) Ozu Yas ir
Attitudc ),sTs13:25.
Mullay,S O (1979) ThC A
211-23

BIBLIOGRAPHY

n Ge utsu T do ( Ozu Yas S Arjstic

of Gay Insulting, n hr PoF icdF in u^Fics2

Nab k v,V (1941) ThC Art of Transla

(1955)

517

RcPubJic105: 160~2

on, Nc

Pr blCms f Translad n:

Onq I, in Enghsh,

P rris n

Rcricw 22

496-512
Na d,N L (1955) Thc DCcadcnt Li
Na arrc,Y

(1976)

Comm n" df,13May,Pp,163-6,

es D ni rcs CFientcs,in TFa
re II,P is:Flammarion,PP
,

139-224.

Ncubclt,A,and G shrcvc(1992) r ns on ds xr,Kent,Ohi :Kent sta

F

Uni crsit Prcss

AH usc of Many Rooms`Thc Rangc of Translation

inD Y Ka sh and F,Massardicr Kenncy(C(lS)TrdnsF in sFcv -

(1994) F rcw rd:

studics,

G I,dcr dnd R c in fr nc/, lI/omcn

ir1rlJ, F783~r823,Kent,OH Kcnt Statc

univcrsit Prcss,

Ncwman,F.W(1861)HoI,9cric rrdnsFdri n in rlc

dnd Pr c c ,London:Williams

and N rgatc.

Ncwman, S S,(1955) Vocabulary

Lcvcls Zuni sacrcd and slang usagc,

souF csrc our,a

fHnr o`oFo 1 345^54
Ncwmark,P,(1977) C`
mmunicativc and Scmantic T nslation, B bc`2 163 0,

ches r IdnsFd on,Oxbr( P gam n,

(1988) xrb ok9f Trdns` rion,HemPCl HcmPstead:Pl cnticc Hall

(1982)^PPr

(1991) ThC Cursc of D gma in Translation studics,

105-8,

bcnd sPr c cn36

york (1988) Brie y Noted, 2M ,P,119

Nida, E, (1945)
Linguistics and Ethn l

ord

gy in Translati n Pr blcms/

1:

194-208,

(196+l%w rd

cncc rc,, dH , rh sPc R nc Fo Princ

Nida,E,and C Tabcr(1969)rh

J,c dnd Pr c c

nd
`cs

Procedurcs fn oF ed in BibFc rczns dF r,J, LcidCn Br l

gf nsF on,Lodcn

B ll,

rcprinted 1982,

Nictzschc,F (1882)

r,

st e

ce, ans

W,Kaufmann,New York

Vllltagc,

1974,

m
l

(1992)si in rrdnsF Fi n;HIsFOrJ,P srsrrLIcFu ism,dnd c CoF@nid`

ConrcxF,Bcrkclcy and Los Angclcs Univcrsity of Cahf rnia Press
N ld,C(1988) xr n ,sc und c cr/uiaJ rl rcHsche Grund`dJcn, cF odc und
Niral lana,T

Hn ndunJ oncr Jbc

Groos;2nd cdition, 1991,

d krisch

(1991)%xr

nd,sis in Tr

nsF Fi

nren

cr' i,JsFc c

n,Am dam

and Atlal ta;R

(1996) Tcxt TyPc and Translauon Mcth d:An

Translatlon Criticism, Tfl r ns` ror2: 81-8

xF nd sc, HCidelberg:

Pl

O ccdvc APPr h to

(1997)rdnsFdFion s d PuFPosg cFi i funcFion J1sr1``rodchcs ExPF

in d,

Manchcstcr:st Jcromc.

Norton,G,P.(198+l Flc

Jd

dnd Iczn tJd c gf D ns` on in Rcnoss

dnd F eir ffuraldn sF nFecedcnrs,Gcnc

a:Droz

ncc F,

dncc

518
N

BIBLIOGRAPHY

h
si

P%s %
;i t

:I

:;

10(2)
O B11cn,J,(1959) Fr m

in R Browcr(ed.)On Trdn

Frcnch to En81ish,

n,

dri

Cambridgc,~ A:Harvard Univcrsity Prcss,PP 78^^92

O

Gorman,N (1959a)

Languagc and Visi

n,

Poer

93:329^32

(1959b)Trlc NiJh he Hdmm r,Ncw York Harcourt Bracc

Okac(la s,(1988)s
C

ku NrJillon~

iil,

Baburu Purcsu,

T k o

(1989)yim ku

J f rl,

in

JI J

FfoV k1J

if

Intr ducti n to `d
Subtitlcs- Film Translati

n@G uFsu Fo Chishik

n Techn l y and Kn
vlcdge ),

Ch k

Con thc sPot Transmission ol

subddc Translation Lecturcs ),Toky :Gogakushunjusha

O Ncill,E(1959) hrcc Pfd

,Ncw York: lltagc

lll d) D rs us lcsrmcs, ans M Dumolltand

Thcatre sch l, unpubhshcd luanuscript.

Orr,C, V (1941) ThC Problcm of Translati n,

M G g0re,Nau nal

lru"c dnd Fr 2 31 32

Ortcga y Gassct,J (1937) La Miseria y el esPlcndor de la tra

C I,lP r sj

omo (f933 F9

427-48

, Mad

lucci n, in Obr

(1992) ThC MisCry and thc splcndor of Translati

R,Schultc and J 8uenet(cds)f,c cs

z,,D dcn F D r dd,Chicago:uni

`fr

Ota T (1939)

n,

trans,E G, hllcr,in

of FI nsFdFi n n nr ofP ssczJ

suPa Impozu ni Okcru Nihongo n Hinkon

JapanCse Language of

( Thc

sP kcn Titlcs ),Ni on Ei d4 5(May)

(Cd Dds s n Gco semj

(1986)

ersity of Chicago Prcss,pp 93-112

P vcrty of

51

PaePcke,F (1979) Ubcrsetzen als Henneneudk, in P Lch 1ann and R W

Reista de Occidcntc, 1947, pp,

,Hodelber~g:LamlDe khn0de

TCxtyCrstchen~Tcxttlbcrsctzcn~ubcrsctzungskritik,

in M sncll~

H rnby(ed)t/ll s Fz1`nJsisscnsch:cine Ncuorienrier1 nJJ zur Jn ri nJ`on

xis,Ttlbingen:Franckc,PP 106^32
Panneton, G, (1946)
La transPosiu n en traductl n/
TJ,cori

LJnd Pr

1Jni crsity

of Montrcal,

unPubhshcd thcsis

Pannwitz,R (1917)Dic KrIs S

d cuIoPt| ch n K1IFF1Ir,Nurclnbcrg H Car1,

Pastrc,G (1997) Linguistlc Gcnclcr Play amongst Frcnch Gays and Lcsbians,

A,Li h

al d

K Hall(cds)( 1/ccrl

York and Lond n

Pllrds d; u Gcnder dIad scktJdFi

in

,Ncw

(Dxf rd Univcrsit Prcss

s J, V lk(1979) sexist slang and thc Gay Communi A1 C

You Onc Too?
ch1Jdn Occ si@n
N xIv
Per
'l
`P n and Mcaning in Field llVork, Hum n
PhilliPs,H P (1959) Prblcn1s of Translati
Penel Pe,J,and

O~f ni7 Fion 18

PhilliPs,1B(1953)
Bibfe rrdnd r r4
TJ,c PJ,

cnix grs

184~92
S mc

Pers nal RcHections om Ncw Tcstamcnt Translati

n,

53-9,

m,rDi
e rc~s rrccr

C rcri

(1813),L ndon

Pintt,r,H,(1971)O d ralcs,Lon(lon Mcthuen

1co k

(nd)zm n
r,trans,R Kisle ,unPubhshed lnanuscriPt,

Pktt,HF(1975)rc,xrlT iss nsch und%xrdnd e,H dclbcrg QLlcllt and Mcyer

PoP vic,A (1970) Thc C nccPt f ShiR f ExPrcSsi n in Translati n Analysis,
lll J,sH lmes,F dc Haan nnd A P P vic leds)rJac N rurc gf Ddns`dFion,
The Haguc A/1outon,PP 78^87

BIBLIOG RAPHY

519

Pound,Ez1 a(1934)TI, ABc gfRc diI9J,New York:Ne v Directions

(1954)z jrer ss s,NCw Yo1 k:Ncw Dirccti ns,and Lond

Fabcr an(l

Fabcr

Pratt, M L (1986)
IntcrPrctivC stratcgics/Stratcgic Imtcrprctations: On AngloAmcrican Rcadcr-RcsPonse Criucism, in J,Arac (ed) PosFnaodcrnisn, dnd
Po`irics,MinncaPohs:Uni cr ty of MinncsOta Prcss,PP 26^54
(1987) Linguistlc UtoPias, in N Fabb,D.Attridgc,A Durant,and C

McCat,c(cdS)Tl, i uisFics
I irinJ
H umcrlrs

bcr

ccn dnJuc c

drlcf

ircrt,r
,ManFhcstc r:Malac11cster univcrsity pKss

Pr ust,M

(1924)"Fd R

TcmPs Perdu,vol,VI, J

ch hc d

P,jsonni odon,e cr

Gomorrhc HI),Paris N uvellc Rc uc Frangalse

Puls or,G (1994) Hot Off the Press Gay MCn s Publishing, in E Healey and
A Ma n(cds)s @nc ,d``2sj Tfl linJ r cL sbi n nd G c mmuniG n
Brirdin, London: Virago,

PusCy,J R (1983)chind dnd Ch

r/ s

Ddr

n,Cambridgc,MA:Harvard Uni

crsit)

Press

Pym.A,(19t 5) Eur Pcan Translati n Studics, unc science qui d rangc/and V11y

r lsP
s :
% cF8:16577
TcIilli

(1996) enuti s

Vi bility,

(1997a)P ur unc Ffli uc du Frdducreur,Arras:A is Prcsses uni ersito,and

Ottawa Prcsscs dc U vcrsit d Ottawa

s uiv enz Rc sitcd, Jlc

(1997b) Kollcr

(1998)Jlfcrh J jn Trdns`crj n

(2000)N idh rhc nonFicrJ

Manchcstcr Jcromc
o

Q nC,WVO(1960)H

Rabin,C(1958) Thc

T, ns ro

Jrlrcrcu`r1`rcs in HIsPdnic HIsr

ord dnd OIJccr,Cambrldge,MA:MIT

123-45
Rahd, V,(1988) Conrr
soc c

nd

ror3:71-9

st Jer lnc

9,

Prcss

in A,H slnith(ed.) crs gf

on 2, London seckcr and
arburg, pp.

Linguistics of T1 anslation,

rrdns` Fj n sFudis in C illmunic F

fd

Fr nJ

Ffjsro,9Manch ter

crj,,Jc
nid` s

n nd Chrlsr dn ConIc,rsi n in
a,New York Corncll u er ty

TrdnJdFi

uncfcr di sPdn^h Ru`c,Itll

Prcss

Raymond,J,(1955) Two First No

727-8
Rechy,J,(1963)Ci

Rehbein,J,(1977)

els,

Nc

sr F sraadn

dnd N

ri

n,21May,PP

NiJhr,NCw Y rk:Grovc

@mPFcxcs H ndcJn

EFcilacnrc zt

r Ffdnd`unJsrh cd sP che,

Stuttgart: Mctzlcr

Rcichcrt, K (1996)
It Is Timc`The Bubcr~R senz 'cig Biblc Translation in
Colltcxt,
f1 urtIr

in s Budl&and W Is

ns t,f rh sP c

Bcr"

(cds)Trlc rrdns`dm j`i9'LD/f

ccn,stan l cl,CA

cLIfrurc;

stanb1 du vcr Prcss,

pP 169-85
Rciss, K (1971)`Ir c k cn und C nzcn d t/bcrserzunfsk rjk Kdr oIi n und
i'ncn r ne sdchJcrcch BcurroF nJ on l/bcSe tJl,f n,Mu cla Hucbcr,

(2000) rdr2s rion

r rdns`dri@n

ChrIcism:TJ,c Porcnrid

Rciss,K and H J V

dnd im Fdrj nsj Cdr

or es

dnd Chrcrj

ssessm nF,trans,E,F,Rhodcs,Manc11c~ster: Jcrome

meCr(1984)GrundkJLIr2f in rd emcincn Tr 2nsldrionsFhcohc,

Ttlbingcn: NicI11cycr, 2nd cditi n, 1991

520

BIBLIOG RA PH Y

R 1er,F.M,(1989)fIl

oj nJ j Jc nd Tr nsJ Fi n~lrom
Prer

Ci v ro I9rF

r,

Amsterdam and Adanta Rod Pi,

Rkhk,D (1991)

dnJ in1o 16,

Dnald Richic n subdtling Japanesc F ms,

)crcinstin1111ung
Ric(ll, R (1983) Ev lution und c lutionJrc ErkcnntI1is Zur L

uketits
dcr Ordnung dcs Dcnkcns und dcr Nature` in K Lorcnzand F
n cns,~ unich and Zurich Pipcr,PP 146^66
(eds)Dic
`o`urion tfcs D

Ricu,E V,and J B PhilliPs(1954)

150-9

Rioux,M,(1974)
R hns n,C

es Qy

(1995)sc

bVcc,

Rol)in n,

D (199

s,Paris Scu

nddF
n rfl

C nrur/Frencl, ireF rur

T1 anslating

fn

the G sPcls,

,London: Casscll

rr nsF rion

Trdns` 2r r6:

urn,

/in

HoI,l sCX dF

enrieF

BaldmoK, MD: Johns HoPkns

univer t Prcss

(1992)
The Asccuc Ir undati ns of Vestcrn Translatol
Augustinc,

bf

; d nd n, fe

Trlc Trdns`dFOr

JeromC and

gy

dnd LiFCrdrurc 1: 3-`25

(1996)Trcns`d 1on dnd T bo ,DcKall):Northcr11nlin is1I11i

crsity Press.
(1997) r n Fion dnd m r Pt co`oni J Tf,c sxPf0 Cd,Mant llestcr:

JCromC
(1997 % t

CH cd`Jnr v nrioIas,Kellt,

is TldnsF honP C nrr! d rJlcoriC

(DH Kcnt Statc Uni crsitv Prcss

(ed.) (1997b) 0rcrn Tr nJcarion

flc
,fr m Hcr dorus
Manc hester:st

Ni sc c,

Jer me

c
iFi sB ond Rc son,All,any
F@r su

(2001)V
h Trd

statc

`drcsP
rrdns`
rk P1
ess
Y

univcrsit of Ncw

(2003)Pc rm Five Lin uis ic sPc nJ nd T,

J
l

nJ ds Doinf in s iFll

ns

9rds,London and Ncw York Roudedge

R bins n,S,an(lD,Smith(1973)HP/dc

icd

Hdndbook gfC

n dIcn ench,Torollto:

RIac 1illan

Robyns,C (1994) Translation and Discursivc Identity, Pocr1cs%d

Ro(lo

Jac Crisis P ricd` d rn^m;C

"ck,DN(1988)
FIFI Tl,eo9',Bcrkelcy

Contcrl,Por

ri sm nd

405 28

Jdeo

o n

and Los Angdcs Uni crsity of Calibrnia

Prcss,

Rolo,C l(1955)RC"Cw of Ash(1955), fdnFic,APril,PP 84^6

Ros ~Lan ,F(1983) nJudJe ds%rk nd Ddd scmorIc%m@FofJ~lfor
dnd c nomiCsi trans, RI Adams cF

IiIaJ shcs

Hadlcy, IA BCrgin and

`, s

Ga1 vc

S an,F(1954)Bo,lJ

ud

tIr risr sse,Palis;Julliard

%ger,JC,(1994)LdnJu

P inc hn dnd TrdIasFd

Am erdam:Be amhs

Sagcr, s F. (1982)
Das Zusan`1ncn virkcn

ion

Consequcnc

uF m ri n,

disP sitioncllcr und institutioncllcr

Momcntt im verbalcn Vcrhaltcn, in K Dct ing,J Schmidt Ratlcfcldt,and

V

sucharowsk(cds)sPF chc c cnn n und crsFehcn,T l)ingcn:Nicmcyer,PP

283-92,
sald,E (1978)Or,cnrdF sm,New York:Pa1 theon
Sandc ,M(1992) Tminhg hr C mmu ty

Intt

PrctC 9

Co rcnce6PI oc cdi s,L ndon Aslib,

in C Rckcn(cd)`

Sahg, G (1979) AgrCCmcnt and Disagrccmcnt: A Modcl r a sPcCch Act

Asscssmcnt of Translations

unPubhshed thesis

k
Savory,T,H(195

B1BL10GRAPHY

TJ,e rr Tr ns` ri n,London:J

521

nathan CaPc,alld B

st n

Thc Writcr, 2nd cditi n, 1968

Scllaclcwd(lt,W( alls)(1958)Homc r:DiC O /sse ,Hamburg:Rowol lt,

schleiermachcr,F (1813) Uebcr dic vcrschicclcncn Mcth dcn dcs ucbcrsctzcns,
inM R dcr with L,Em skbt,n(c )schr cn und nF JJ%, o111of H.
scher,U

Balth,K Cmmcr,G,Mcckenstock,and K_V.sclgc(cds)Kri i

and Nc vY rk:Waltcr de GruytCr,2002,Pp,67^93

Ges m Fdu b ,BCrhn

stl

ultc,R.,cand J. guenct(cds)(1992)rFle hcs gfTrdnsF n

n oFo /?f ss s
^n
mD
dcn
ro
D
rid ,Chicago:u vc ity of Chcago Prcss,
~fr

Schwartz,B(1964)
jl

``1A

rch % Frh

sc

dnd Pow

r n

FLI dnd rhe ll/esF,Cambodgc,

HarvarcI Univcrsity Prcss

schwcda Nichols n,N,(1994) Pro ssi nal Ethics br C urt an(l Communit

hD L.Hammc,lld(d.)PrQ ls"ond^sucs~for nsF rs

IllttS tcrS,

terq,Am dam Bc amhs

S.,D (1973) L Di /t,criquc Pcur cf c sscr`cs

cnd

J,aFcrP

briquesP

Jm c

cr s

n276-7(octobcr)

110-11

s guinot, C (1996)
Some Th ughts about Think~Aloud Pr

rd t,r 8

t cols,

75-95
Shackmal,,J(198+lr/lc RiJhF ro be(Jrlde rooJ Hcn o n r iaJ irh, mPFoJ_
iP
nd TIdjninJ CoI
n,uniy rI, rcrs, Cambridgc: Nati nal Extcnsion
c c8C
shal esPc C,w (1962)Tf,cO rd C^oI,lPferC rks,cd W
g,Lol don Oxb1 d
Uni crsity Press

(1978) cbCrh,tl ans,M,G ncau,Montleal VLB

sllC ,R (1992)

R CrdrC Form on h thc Ca

z on of La

18tl

Ccntur

Gcrman N vcl, Univcrsity of Tcl A v,unpubhshed dissertauon

shimizu S (1985)E dJimd un
Ha akawa shob

FiRy YCars f FiIm subtiding ),T kyo

(1988)E d JImdku n sukurikdFd Osh1em su CTcaching thc Way to Makc

ovic

Go,ancn C

Subtkles ),T ky :

(1992)

Vd

Translati

yim

Bunshun Bumko,

Ho ku de w pCdi ( ilm suL,titling Is Not

,T kyo Hayakawa sh b
ExtCnding thc Thc ry of Translation t IntcrPretation

),cd N Todaand T,ucn

Norms as a Casc in Point,

Shuttlew rth,M,and

Shlcsinger, M (1989)

rd cF1:111-15,

M Cowic(1997)Dicr on

st JeromC,
ermarl, (1983)rf,e su cc

gr TrdnsFdrion srudi s,Man

chcstc r

lx

mon,S(199+lI
cois

,Montrca

ri

s miorJcs,Oxfc,1

fcd sF nJue

d:Oxf

cl ul.lvcr ty Prcss

Trdduc on F cuFFu ddns`

r rdrur
quJbV

Bor al

(1996)Gcnder in rI nsfdri@n:t^tzFrur F fdcnri,dnd Fhe P Firics nsmis on,

and Ncw Y rk:Roudcdgc

(1999)
Translatlon as a Modc of Enga8cmcnt: A Cultural and Ethical
Agcnda, rf,c TrdnsFdFOI5(1) 113-17
simon,s.and D Homd(1988)lrdPPiIlJ Fcr Furc % Hrr dnd PoFirics gf r ns` rion,
L nd n

lMontrcal V hiculc,

mon,S,and P
c F nicI`

Picrrc(c(lS)(200Ol C nJi rfl rIl,sf

rd, Otta /a univcrsit of Otta va Prcss

D ns`d nJ

n r e PosF

522

BIBLIOGRAPHY

mPs n,P

(1993)I nf qJc,Jdc o ` nd%inr gr

Roudedgc,
smith,AH(cd,)(1958)'4sPccrs gr

e ll

rdnsFdhon:&udics i

London and Ne v Yolk:

C mmunicdH

n2,L ndon

Scckcr and Warburg,

sncl

Homby,M.(1988)

r nsFdri n

srtIdi

Bcnja1nins

n rnrdred HPProdc h,Am dam

- (1990) Linguistic TraI)scoding of Cukural Trt l1skrP A Chtlque of

Trar1slati

n ThcOrv in Gcrmany, in s Bassnett and A,Lc

rrdnsF Fi n,HIsr ry tind CuFFure, L nd n:

Sontag,s,(1964) N tCs n CamP

York

h HJ Jnsr

JIlre,Pr

Dcka, 1967,pP 275-92.

Sclutcr,A(192

fInrs n

t,r,s`

vc1

c (eds)

Pintcr,PP 79~86

i n dnd Orh
ssq ,Ncw

rIOn~Fr m tiFIn i,,ro

nJFJSh,London

s 0ct r

Pron1 ting Ch1 istian Kn 'lcdgc

Spcrbcr,D,and D,Wilson(1986)R

dncc Communicdr1on dnd C

nihon,Oxhrd:

Black vcll,

S tzCr,L(1970l0ruJ sd

s9 e, al s

A Colllon,M,Foucatllt alld E Kaufll

is:Gallirnard

Pa1

spi ak,G

(1992) ThC P litics f

Translatl

n, in Dt
side j`,r

c c in`i
7c inc,

London and Ncw Y rk: Roudcdge, 1993,

str

l,R,and E,shohat(1985) Thc Cinema after Babc Languagc,Dilrcrcncc,

Power, scrcen26(3-4):35-59

al

ke,s,(1999)Bchind Jn/crF d Con,m s; ns ion nd

rj ns

in Frlc Nin rccnr C nru,

steincr,G (1975)f
`

Bd3c

IaJ`o_Gt

In,dn CuFrumF

Cleved n:~ ultilingual A/1atters

ecrs clr dn u dnJ rldnsfdrjo

,L ndon,ox ld

" crsity Prcss,3r(l cditi

a11d Ncw Y rk:Ox%rd uni
n,1998

Stcincr,T R.(cd)(1975a) nJFish TI4nsFdFi n o,`65o~FsOO,Asscn:Van

Gorcum,
s mmcr,G (1981)
hJsi n in,Je rochencn D ku^dcursc
ern des n /IscJlcn,
/l

sF

Bochun1 scn1inar fjr sPrachlChrforschung,

St r ,H

J (Ccl)(1963)Dds Probfci,,Jcs(/b s rz ns,Darmsta lt:VVissc11sChaRlichc

Bud1gcsellschaR.

storr,F,(1909) ThC Art f Transladon, EcfucdFjondF Rc ic 38 359~79,

Strindbcrg,A (1985)J dcI,, is fFC uFi ,trans B Vian,PaHs:L Archc

lla d) Madcm0scllc Jtlhe, adal,t G Marsolais,Nati nal Thcatre kh

unPubhShcd n1anuscriPt

cJl,

Sturgc,K (I997) Translation stratcgies in Ethn graphy, h r nsFdFOr3 21~38

sturr ck,1(1991) On Jak

l)s n

in T A sebcok anclJ umikCr

on Translation,

scl,eok(ed9Recenr D
c`
Pmenrs jn rJ,
nd
Bcrhn

M ut n(lc( ruytcr,PP 307-21

sullivan, A (1996) I 1rrud`o N

Tabucchi,A,(1994)s

nc Fc ;U%d rc,srinaoni

Tachibana T (193o) Tokjirsu( Auth

ltati

shoin

Tamura Yukl11iko,

/lr r cc

Tanaka J (1980)N1h n i d

v;rflc semj

'4n.1 n2cnr bour H J,,oscX1J

',,,dF

Picad r

shir ku

f^fisF

nz

cb 99O,

i , I~ol)(]ol

,Milan:Fckrinclh

c Knowlcdgc of thc Talkic ),T ky

KJz,cmd unP s bJ,1Fcb

ual 1931
Ff rtdFsu sh

rr( Thc

JaPanCSC Cincma H ),T kV :Chuok

Hist ry f thc DcvcloPmcnt f

r nsha

BIBLIOGRAPHY

523

Tancock,L, V (1958) somc Problcn1s of st e in Translation om French, in

A H smitl (cd,)HsP rs rrdnsfdFi n srudics in Con,municdFion2,London
Scckcr and Warburg,PP, 29-51
Tcnnys n,A (1972)s rcd Pocr,,ed C Ricks,Lond n Longman,
c

6No cmbcr,P,13C

Timcs gf ond n(1958) PCrPlexities alld Poctry,

Tir nen_Cond , s (1992)

A The rctlcal Acc unt of Translauon: Vithout

Translation ThcoryP d cr4:237^45,

Toda N,(1994)JJr,a ku n N k ni/Insc1( A L in Subtides ),Toky Hakusuisha

Toury,G (1977)Tr ns rion

er
Noril,s dnd L

Porter Institute for Poetics and Scn1i

(198Olf,, rch

Tr nsf rjons inr

Jjeb ,Tel

A v

tics

dr^h 0rJ dns` on,Tel

I

Aviv:Portcr Il,stitutc br Poetics

and Scn1i tics

- (1985) Translational

soluu ns n thc Lexical Lc cl and the Dictionary,

J T masZcZyk an(l B Lcwandowska T maszczyk(c(ls)JnFcrnd

n lrcdninJ nd L c P / Hbsr crs,Lodz

(1985a) A Rationale r
(ed)rhe lrdniPuF

ri

n of

Croom Hclm,PP 16~41

(1995)Dcsc P n
j

dcll,hia

U cr ty of Lodz

Dcsc1 lPtiVe Translation Studics,

ircrdrtIr ;sFu

nsF Fion

in

iond Cozlfc,rcnt c

in T Hcrmans

cs in iFcr ,TI drlsF ri n,London:

srudies-4nd B9r nd,Am

Klam and Ph

Benjamll s

Translation Burcau(1984)Conrrdcror s Guide; nsF Fion,Ottawa:Depa mcnt f

thc sccrctarv of Statc

T mblay,M (1969)
-

(N
Cmbcr)

Intclligcn

de H dc soi m me, %n e^du d c r CI)1

3,

(1974)B llJ ur`a,b zlJour,Montreal:Lcm ac

Trinh T Minh~Ha(1992)Frdmcr FI med,London and Ncw York:R udcdgc

Trudeau,D(1982) unJrc cF son PJChJ,M n cal:Hurtuh
,

TtlrP,G(1984)Vourqu0

trad rc lrcre C ur f

Tymoczko,M (1999)rrdilxJ
n sh rrdnsFdH n,Manchcs

sc

scane2(2),

rion1n Pos coFozlidF ConFcx : r ish Lir rLII

r:st

c1n

JCr mc

(2000) Translati n and Pohtlcal Engagcmcnt:Actl isrn,Social Chan8C and

thc R lc of Tlanslati n in Gcopolitical ShiRs,

TJ,c nsF ror6(1):2 49,

n Fhc P n PFcs gr TI n d on,c(1.1F,Hul tsmr n,

sSq
Am dam J hn Bc amllls

T ler,A F (1978)

Undcrhill,RM(1938)snJii,Jror P wcr,:crkeley,CA:un1

er ty

of Calibrnh

Prcss

uPc11kc,J (196O)Rdbbjr R1`n,Ncw Y rk:Fawcett

(1965)sh fcn B x,trans E KasPl,Td A v Am Ov 1,

n Dijk,T,and W Kintsch(1983)srrdr ics fDiscou c ComPF h nsion,NeW York

VL

Acaden ic Prcss
Van Hoof,H (1991)Hisr
m n e, Russic, Pq

dc rd rr dutrj n en occidcnrf Ddncc,G

s-B S,Paris

nde Br d nc,

and L u ain la_Neuve: 1)uculot

Venu ,L (1986) ThC Translat s In isib ity, Cr1r1cisi,,28 179-212

(1991)RCview of Benjarnin(1989),Chey tz(1991),and Robins n(1991),

``

exru
(ed)(1992)RcFhin
`P'czcrjcc6: 316-24
inf Tidns`drj n;D^co s ,sul,Jcc

Ncw York Roudedgc

(1995)

ri nsfdFOr

Y rk;R udcdge

/,,

si3

/;

Hisr rJ

Ti

"

n and

,Jdc F

`,Lond

IasF hoIa,London

and New

524

BIBLIOG RAPHY

(1996) uncqual DcvcloPments; Current Trcnds in Translati n studics,

c mP r riye Lir re49: 360-8
(1998)%e sc ndd`s
TF n d rion o rds dn Erhics Di~ffe ncc,Lolldon
and New York R udcdgc
(2003)
Translating Dcrrida on Transladon; Rclevancc and DisciPlinary
istc
R
nce, /t,urn
sm16(2) 237-62
qf Cri
zr1

'

Verocr, B (1996) An ntervicw with Rcnaud Camus,

McPherson,C,A Portcr and R. ronak(c )sume

,d esbi n 99 irin in Frcnc

Uni crsity

in B R/Ial)u cr, K
xr G
v Havcn, CT: Yalc

scx/Differcnr Tc

, y Fe f cnc/, srtIdics 90, Nc

Press,Pp,7-21,

Vcrmccr, H.J (1970) GCnCrat c Transformationsgrammcttik, Sprach

und slD1

Cht)

l gie,

z irschr fur Ph ncri

cl:leich

385404

(1972) F cm nc S^P chlliss nr :3n Df hrunJ,F1 Ciburg Rombacl1,

- (1978)
Ein Rahmcn r einc allgcmcinc TmI1slauonsthe c,
bcndc

s`rdch n23 99-1O2

(1979) Vom richt cn
serz r25(4)

ub tzcn,

2-8

eifu sbF t rD@Fmcrsc cr und

r

(19:3)i4
rz

zur ridns`dti nsrhctDrlc,Hc cbcrg Groos

F Ku/r nd
(1986)% tlsscrz n y cinc TJ ns rionsr ric inV Jc
ric, Hcidc bcrg: Gro s,
s`r c r

`ir
(1989)
SkoPos and Columission in Translationd Acdon, trans A
Chestcrman,in A Chcstcrman(Cd)Reddi s in r ns`dFi n Tr,c ,,HClmnb
0y Finn Lcctura Ab,PP 173^87

(1992)s izzen zu on r GcschjchFc dcr ridInsF rj on,Frankft n V lag r

h)tcrkukurcllc K 1nmunikatlon

Vidal,G (1948) TJlc Ci9 cInd rhc PiFF r,London Panthcr,rc iscd cdid n, 1965
Vieira,E,(1984) C mParatlvc stylisdcs Applicd to TransIation m English to
P rtugucsc/ conft rcncc PapCr,
vina)',J P and J Darbdnct(1958)s

uc cOIllPd cdJ``dnccis cF d

dnJfcIls,

Didicr

(1995)c m F rjl c s 6fFFcncJ, nd Fib

Paris

dbodoFD

r Tldns` ri n,

tralls arld cd,J C Sa~gcrand M J Hamcl,Am crdam:Bcl lamll S

Vinccnclcau,G (1988) Hollywood Babd Thc Coming of sound and thc NIultiPlc~
La11guage Vcrsion, cprintcd in A Higson and R Maltby(cds) %Fm 1`roPe
t

cnd fj`n, ila ricc l Cinc 2ci,Comm rc

V di ka,C

F (1964) ThC Hist ry

xc clrlJ

dnc C1

92t -F939,Exctcr:

`rurd`

ersity of Excter Prcss,pP, 207-48

LI11i

ofd c Ech of Litcrary Vorks,

in P,L Garvin

(Cd and trans)H Prq7uc schoof Re Jer on srJlcrics, 1rcr srrucru dnd s

Vashington,DC GcOrgctown uni crsity Prcss,PP 71^81

n Flotow, L (1991) FCrninist Translation: contcxts, Practlces and Thc

TR

rrdduc n,Tc,rm n G RJdccrlcln

4(2)

rudcs

sur

rc

69-84

(19
Jeromc.

nsF
n

V ssl ,K(1932)Tlle

dnd Gcndcr; rdn rin

sFl F

in r/,e Fd

'

ries,

r scs Frdny%'mdri ns

Fcminism Manchcstt

or dnJLIdJc in C1 iFi on(1925),trans

O Ocscr,

London: R utlcdge
:nJ1`g
n rhcr
Waard,J(lc,and E Nida(1986)fr m Onc

in Bib`e rr nsf rj:, ,Nash 9illc,TN:Nelson

Funcriond`

qtJi d

ncd

BIBLIOGRAPHY

525

Wadcn ,C(1998) Commu ty IntcrPrCdng, h M Bakcr(cd,) n c P J

r nsF rIOn~s^r1Jdi s,London and Ncv York:R utlcdgc,PP 33-7

Wagncr,E,s Bctsh alld J Mardncz( 002) dnsfd

for
r:

JzlsHruhons,Manchestt

C uroPcdn IJIlion

Jcmmc

ard,M,(

ans)(1988)A,Camus,Th
srr n ,NCw Y rk:Alicd Kn pf

cinbcrg,H,(1985)B Ze,C u , nd ovies,Ncw York Anthology Film Archivcs,

Vcinmann,H
1r,9

(1977) Nar Ssc

ct l autl

Pour un cthn tyPc qu

b cois,

%ix cr

Jcs3(2)(DCcCmbcr) 266-76.

W rod,R(198

m e ns hoIa osc c n m PJ s ro Ffebre

958~F980,Uni crsity of Tcl A iv,unpublishcd disscrtation

/c ,C

B (1932) La

c mPdr

th ric dc la a lucti n

Wc er,PN(1974)Puhsna nd
N
i ndFisila,Bl

si

dc, Rcyue LirF drure

r,Ju c; sFu jn dern tJl n dnJ Bc,Foru$idn

omington,IN:Indiana uni crsity Prcss

m^EmP ,Lc lldc,ll:PiCa l

Whtc,E(1988)Trlc BedurJ

au XVI c

c12: 330-55,

(1994) Out f

`R
tllc Cl
sct,On

t the Bo kshdf, inffl BurninJ ib

n rr,P
nd s Xu FiFy,London Chatto and Windus,PP 275^83
`iFjcs
"-r1rii,Js AIDs Awarcncss
and Gay Culturc in Francc, in J OPPCnhcimer
(1997)
and H.Rccktt(cds)HcFinJ on H Ds;s x,DrtJJs dnd PofiFics,Lond n and Ncw
Y rk ScrPent S Tail,Pp 339-45
Willhms,1,and A chcstcrman(2002)rr,c rq' B 1ni,cr
in TIdnsfdrion sFudi s,Manchcstt r: JCr
VVils n,A

Cuide ro Doiiaf Rese

rc

mc

dnd Jfr
r,H m nclsw h:Pengt ln

(1952)H mF c

Vils n,

D,, and D SPcrbCr(1988) Mood and Analysis f Non clcdarati c

in J Dancy,J Mora csik and C,C.W Ta or(eds)Jfunadn
HJen dnJuq7e,Du: / nd Fuc,Stanford,CA:stanbrd uni ers y Prcss,pp
scntcnces,

77-101
Wils n,E (1946) B
ks,

Ncll 9 orkcr,

13Apr

,PP 99^100

W ss,W(1977)rJbe eF7uIafs ssensch Pr bFcmc tlnd/lre h dc ,sttltt rt:Klett

(1982) Mcnce T, nsFdrion P,ob ms nd llrLiFh ,T bingen Narr
(1988)
n zu cohc und s dcr m nscJ,FIchcia und dcr
ni n tjIad lJbCrs t'
J,

mdsc jnc`

r lJlD rseFz un

Zubcr,R,(1968)

7,Ttlbingcn:Nicmcycr,

es 3c cs

F j%rn2 F1on du Jo cF ssiqLlc;P rroF

cr GlIcz dc Bc,`zdc,Paris;Cohn

`es

d bFdnco1 rr

Index

abridgement484

Alain277,282

acadeIllic institutions 13-14, 180,211,

241,244,2521306, 315, 316, 342,

376, 379,398-400,416,427,429,

430,441,454,461,491-2
accCPtab ity of translati

n149, 163, 165,

208,249-50, 357, 360,484

accuracy5, 15, 77, 105, 121, 125, 156,

Albee,E 359
Alcacus67
allcgory241, 355,433,487
Allcn,W l/l/lldr`t/F ,ri

allusion298,407,487
Almotanabi99

'P464

Amadiumc,I 375

222,473,484,492

An crican Bil) c socict

theory of translation222-31227-8;
5cc agency

AmeIIcan Litcrar Translators Assooatlc

actio1

113, 121, 134-5, 155,

176, 178,222,241,278,484
addrcsscc in translation232;se

Amyot, 32
anachr nisn1 102, 112, 165, 353
analytical Phi1oS

dfst

audience,readcr and rcadcrshiP

phy111,331,390

Anaxi1nandcr112

adcquacy of translation t forcign tcxt 5,

Andcrson,B 495-6

149, 160,203-4, 208, 210, 398,427,

Andradc,lNI dc:lf cum if,l 287

442,484;scc
`so accuracy,
corresPondCnce,equi
alcnce,dehty,

dn1z,,c466-7

idcntit

anthroPol

Acschincs13,23,36

gran1mar334,474,477,479,480-1;
transitiVit
Al l

ter,F 376

244,251-2

gy 1,4, 111, 150,226,325,

anti-Sclnitism73,437

agency369,370, 371,411-12,483;in
action theory of translati

anth logics223,241,

377,380

Aeschylus Jdmen n n19

sec d s

315

Am s,F 310

Adam ,A 359
adaPtati n16,64,

113

n,

APollinairc,G 197

APPiah,K A 7

330

1,389-401

1rdbidn^ Jhr 73^ 102; cc

scl
dnd t,nc NV

r/,c Tl,

rs

Arabic language95, 104, 157, 371, 372

sunJ

NDEX

528

72-4, 101, 105, 112, 154,266,

arcl,aisn

Bclloc,H 73

338, 352,364,419,484,492,494,499
Arch ochus67

Bcngah languagc 330, 372, 376, 378

arca studies226

194,264,426,443,487
3c ls 1454,457,461-2

Arguedas,JM287
AHosto,L 65

Bcndey,E 239, 242,2+3-51

Bcr:eron,L 340-1

istoPhanes113
Arist tle29, 32, 112, 114
A1

Arlt,R 283-5,338; s sjcrc

Bcrman,A 2,7,8,225,226,276-89,
I

329,334

s281,

Bcrman,R 292

285

Armand,O 318
Arnhcim,R455
Artaud

bestscllcrs in translation496
Betz, 288

4,73,96, 16O

Arnokl,~

Bl)al)l)a,H8
Bible translation 14-16, 23,25-9,64,72,
83, 113, 142, 154, 155, 156-7,

A 252

Asad,T 226
Aschcid,A 450-1
Ash,I 496-8

159-60, 163 7, 170,240, 338-9, 364,

428

Ass ns,R,C,98

bilinguahsn159, 130, 134, 162, 293, 342,

Assises dc la T1 aduction

audicncc65, 154, 155-6, 158, 162, 166,

241,257,296-7,363,450,463,465,
491;scc clfs

rcadcr and readership

Augustinc4, 148, 194;Dc docrrind

Chri

Black,GA 163
Blake,W 74,76

Blanch t,483; rr F de m r

,A 399

Bl()olu1H 316
B

un Kulka,S

7,222,290-305,327

Boas,F 141

Auth rizcd Versi n f thc Bil)le 159;se

King James Bible

Boccaccio,G 101;Dccdmcr n97

B

hr,N 140

452

Bonncfoy,Y 281
Booth,lM 409

erv,P 399

Borchardt, R 72,73, 82

authorshil

5, 14, 16,40,44-5, 307-19,

Babuscio,J 310-11

Borgcs,J L 73-4,94-108
Bory,J-L
d Pcd dcs z b s403

Bachclard,G 278

Bradstrcet,A 123

Bac n,F

B1

189

agt,K van150

Bl^ccht,B 240,2411243-53, 341,464;

Bakcr,M 8, 327
Bakhtin NI
287-8
BalibaI

317

Bloch,E 499
Blo()n

idnd14-15

Auhls Gelhus36
Auste11,J 396

347,376

Littoraire;Ades

(ATLAs)444

V,7,8,71-2,7s-83,83-5,

BClllamlI,,

uj

Ui241;Thc Cduc

244;D

,R 358,368

n Ch
Circ`e

n)244,354 s;

urtzJc nd ih Kinder(Ivf@rher

Balzac,H 279,282

Go d 1bf,ld

Barnet,S 251

lrurr rr

Barrett,R 404
Barsky,R 500-1
Barthes,R 398,415~16

si

n b vo sezuJz2(Tl,e
fvrc l/t

CovrclJe dnd cr Chifdrcn)239-40,242,

243-52, 361; Rc.F,ecr Fc 1i%ddinJ 355

Brisset,A 8,329,337 8
Bristo v,E

K 296- 7

Bassnett, s : Tr ns`drj n sr1`dies221

Br ad vay

theatcr242,245,247,252

Bataillon,M,368

Broch,H 279

Bausch,K R 103

Bront ,E ur/,cr
f HC1fhrs298

Bassani, G
rdin
'`J

dcj FInzi C

Beauheu, V L, 351
Beerbohm, 159
bc``cs i,,fJJ

s17,288,307,311

nrini487

Brower,R 114
Broxx 1,P,and

s L~evh1son8,408
Bubcr,lM,al1d F Rosenzwcig73

INDEX
Buchncr,G 177

Chinese translati n tradition496

Btlhler,K 172, 188

Chry PPus29

Burkc,E 384
Burton,R F 94,95,96,97,98-101,
102, 104, 105-6

Ffdrofd s Pi

Ciardi,J 494

Ciccro4, 13, 16,23,29,36,61,431;D

Ji v

Butlcr,J 411
Byron,L 98, 116, 118, 120, 122;Chifde

mdJe116,12

lfdz Pd

119

nrion

229;Dc PFimo Jenere rdFOrum

13-14,428
Cirizen K

nc456

chcho 134,484
closc translation53,65, 134, 153-4,475,

476,481,484,489;s c clfs
Cabrera Infante, G
i

d Htaln 7n z

Pclrcl vn

Cain,JM488;TJ,c Posrm n fTls

RIn s

65

cohcrcnce:in textual intcrPrCtation290-1,

Callimachus67
calque129-30, 132, 134, 135,476,477,

481,492
CamPbcll,G 159

C lcridgc,s

translation

T 95; Thc
97

Rll lc0f the

Ancicnt N1arincr

Camplon,T89

col niahslI16,8,226,309-11,329-30,

Camus,A 488,497;I rrdnJcr4::^91;

298
Camus,R 417; rric s4o8,415;N Fes
mn,cr

296-303,305;intertextua1229
cohesi n:textua1291,294;in

291-5,30

camP333,405-12;in translation412-21

L Ff

337-8,356, 362,430,440,463
Coctzcc,JM F c381
cogniti e theory of translati n326_ 7

l91ce476
Calder n,P

litcral

translation

codc138, 139,142, 157,222,272,314,

fonrc tlifLlnro318

Caesar,J 170

ofr

347,348,371,376,377,385,496
colloquialislu113, 165,485,497,499
conununication cross-cultura15,221,228,

483;intcrhngua1139;in languagc5-6,
71,81, 113, 150,224,257-8, 391,

chrienncs417

Carroll,L: abberw cky 396

Castlghonc,B: hc C urricr16

393;in litcraturc 5,75, 81, 221;in

translation5, 18,45,75,80-2, 147-8,

150, 159, 163, 168,224, 291,304,

cataChrcsis 272,427
Catalan languagc340
Catb1

529

d,JC 148,150,151,327

312-13,326,329,331,332,334-5,
337,393,463,482 91,495-6,

Cavalcantl,G 72,87-93
Cecchctti,G 492,495

498-501
con nunlty205,206,334-5,346,483;

Cclan,P 197,285
censorshiP 332

constructcd through translation

cerf,B 99

491-502;gay403,407,412-13,416;

Cer antes,M

de104,279, 338;Don

279

intcrPrcti C223,491;linguistic8,

173,

176,297,339,343,344,392,393,

Chambcrlain,L 7,8, 225,226, 306-22

Chan1bcrland,P 349
and D Pollard8
Chan S,

c mParati

ChaPiro,M 28O,281

Conrad,J 286,384;

vPho

Chatcaubriand,F R dc 116

Constantinc the Philos

Chauccr,G 101,106,338

Pher142

convcntions linguistic45, 390-2, 394-7,

Chekh ,A 296-7, 329, 341, 358, 359;

rl,c chcr9`Orth rd296;Thc l,rec

sisFe

353-4; L/nc c
n
cl358, 360, 361-2

120, 124-5
Chev tz,E 329

397,404;sce dfx sohdarit

e literature7,86

cc)rnParative styhstics 114, 187

n286-7

401,450,464;litcrary395-7;of
subtithng455,457-8,462,466
con ersational rnaxiIns300, 326, 391

V A 158

Ch nier,A

C
PCr,

chiasmus 162

coPyright83, 224,251
Corneille,P 67

Chincsc languagc372,466

corPora:of translated texts 150, 184, 327

530

INDEX

corPus linguistics32s,327-8

Dcvi, 33O, 372,373, 374,376, 377-8,

corrcctness 5, 156
corresPondencc

385

bet Vcen r

[) hujst,L 150

reign and

translatcd texts5,59, 147-8, 153-4,

156,431;dynan ic147-8;forn a1147,
154;scmantic 14, 148, 154, 161,259;

dialcct18,43; 338-9,341,352, 353,368,

465,466 483,4s5,486,494,497;sec
/s non~standard,standard

styhstic 14, 161;sce d tl accuracy,

Diaz~[)iocarctz,N1 319

adequacy)cquivalence,6dehty
Coxxlcv,A 17, 38,40,41
Co PCr,V

308-9

445
Dil/lorcnce1n Tr nsf on256

Crc h P485-7
Cr n icux,B 359
C1

E)icklnson,E 376
dictio11arics 132, 140, 222, 340-2,440,

diglossia347, 352, 363, 364

lsp,Q 405,406,408

Cuh h,A

Dionysius thc ArcoPagitc142

257

direct translation128;scc

cultural studics7, 325-6, 328-9, 333,

translati

334,409,453
ry4, 325
Czech languagc 142

325, 326, 333

domcsticating translation 16~17,49,55 6,

60,61-2,64-5,96, 195,224,262,
334,449,463,482-3

AbIancourt,N P 8, 16-17, 31-7,73

don inancc370, 375,403,416,494,499;

Daniel,s 120
D

Annunzlo,G 87,494

sce d`so major y

Dantc Ahghicri72,73,86,338,494;
J,,l

rn@494;

Da idson,D

Dc B lla,P

8,394
rJle D

Donne,J 89,1O6

Nuord87

d1
r

ursc

Dostocvsky,F 281,279;BJOrJat,is
Kdrdrndzol`280
o+r c subfil,,c
drama translation23 53,329,341,

384-6

352-63

dcc(xling155, 166
deconst1 ucti e
sce d s

discourse analysis224,257-8,291, 304

cultural thc

s0hte
al

Drant,T 310-11,312,314-15

translation224,264,464;

6dehty abusi

Def c,D

R Bins n

Drydcn,J 4,8, 17 18, 19,38-42,73,

84,463

Cr12s@c381;R xtIn tI381

dubbing450,454,457,461,469
Du Be ay,J 339 342,349-50 364

dcictics258, 332;autodeixis430

Ddille,J 64,66

Dub()is,J 343

Dc lN/lan,P 83,224,330; Thc1)urloincd

Ribbon

386

Dc lMille,C B 103

Dun10nt,M,and NJ1 Gr goire357

t,T 417,420;Pdlst, e dc 2nFtlisic
Duve

412,418-21

DcluOsthcncs 13, 23, 36

Denham,Sir J 17,39,40,41

DC Q11incc),T95

Dcrrida,J7,8,9,224,256,257,
260-74,316-18, 330, 331-2, 371,

423-46,464; flc dr rhc Orhcr31

Dc`d clr
n F@` ic378; Living
nl

C)n/Bordcr LiI1cs 316

La luythok)gie

blanche r vhite1ythology )262-3,

Eaglcton,T 315-16

Eco,u 314

cdlting222,223,237
Edn 0ndson,` 296

Edw ds,O159
Elton,O 122, 125
eml)irical research150, 184,222,292,

296,303-5,325,328,324

265-74,4+8;Posjrjons264; Lc retrait

c1npiricisYn6, 113-14

de la m taPhorc

n9'c/t

Pctlid

Thc Retreat of

)261,263
Descartcs,R 87,278
lMctaphor

Dcsai,A 380

Dcutsch,B 122, 125

B2irdnnicd100,106,240,245

Enghsh languagc39,s8-90, 130, 132,

139, 157, 165, 166-7,257-60,292,
330, 331, 338, 347, 371, 376, 378,

383 425 6,430,454,476;Alncrican

INDEX

531

129, 329, 338; Ehzabcthan88;Jacobean

432,451;abusivc224 5, 262-5,271,

465;Prc~Ehzabcthan92~3,353;
standard485,494; 7ict rian87,492

332,464; ,e
so accuracy,adequacy,
CorrcsPondCncc,cqui alence,identity
tl

Enghsh translation traditi()n16, 17~19

Filln10re, C 296

cquivalcncc5, 14 73, 139, 147-9,

llll studies325,448,452,464

210-11,221, 224,263,287, 326,335,

428,431,464,473,484;dynan1ic
156-7 159, 162~7,29S;of cffcct or

nhn translation332,448,461;see cllso

dubbing,subtithng
Finn ~ugrian languages 157

rcsP nse

Fish,s 223

18,+5, 152, 158~9, 160~1,

162;
rn a1147, 156, 158, 161~2;
functi(

11a1 148, 168, 169;

Fltts

Iexicographica1222,2+8,485,487,

489,492,495,498;pragmatic147-8;
situationa1131-2, 134-5, 137;stvhstic
72; scc cI
c,adequacy,accuracy,
corrcsl) ndCncc, dchty,idcntlty
Erasnnus, D 32
ethics f translati n8, 101, 197, 223, 22s,
226, 237,277-_8, 332, 334, 372,428,

483

Jht y

,9 399

Flaubcrt,G
106

dddmc B rd 257;s n,mb

Flol^es,s 412,419 21
uency in translati n 18,73, 113, 115,

287, 329, 334,497

Fogdin,R 395
folk talc147

Fontanicr, P 272

Ethicr-Blais,J 343
cthnoccntric translation47,62,225, 278,
281, 329, 376
cthnography111, 113, 154, 155, 226, 331
Eticmblc

D 1l3

FltzGcralcl,E99;TJ,c RubJ!vJr tn/Om

R 135

n5, 19, 20,49~55,

59-63,65~6,72~4, 114, 150_1, 195,

reignizing translati

225,263i276-7, 330,332,334, 377~8

forcign loan words 101, 129~30, 136-7,
140

European uni n47O,471,481;European

Parhament473,474,475,476,479;
Translation service473
Eustachc,J

flc llf rher dz2

F/,c1I71 re462

I]ven~Z har,I 7, 149, 150, 199-204, 330

cxi8tcntial Pbcn nlcnolog)

71, 112,482,

489-90

157,425-6,429

forcign languagc acquisition50, 51,61,

187,379,454
fc,rmdism7,72,150,483
Forstcr,L I58
F ucault,N/I 277,380-1
Fo er,R

421,471

France,P 7

cxoticizil)g translation285~6

Franckhn,T 3o8~_9

CxPhcitatioI1222, 281, 292, 304~5, ;27,

Fm r,J328

428

Fra

Cxpurgati()n 16, 35,96,97,99, 1O0

hlse c g11ates(hlSe llicnds,hux amis)

129, 157
Fansha
c,sir

lcy,W 221-2

Ficc translati n8,

14, 16, 18,40, 50,73,

8I~3,84~5,96~7, 113, 115, 128,

132-6, 153, 197,257~60,281,286,

489,497~s;see

R 17, 39

translation

`so Paraphrastic

e,J H 163

fantastic litcraturc 106

Fre1

279,
Faulkncr,

French lan8uage32, 129, 130_1, 132,

284,285,338

minism7,225,3o6,316,318~19,325,

sexua1

136-7, 167, 173,257 60,281,286,

292,338,339,34o~3, 346,358-63,
424-6,43o,442 3,476;Antillais286;
Beaucc352;Gascon285;Gasposic 352;

Fc11g Chi253

Old286;Normandy286;parisian329;

329,330, 334,369,371,373-81,399,
410;scc cI/xcl idcntity

Fe1

gender,identity

ron,J 352

dehty5, 32, 50, 52, 81~3,93, 105, 121,

148, 197,224 5,232,236,261,298,

307, 309, 311, 314, 318,326,431,

Pical

(1286;Qu b c)is134,329,
c

34O-3, 346 63;sagucnay352

Frcnch translation tradition16~17, 19,62,
6+

280

532

1NDEX
Ncw

Frcud,s 285, 372

Greck Bible117, 166-7,462;s dJx

Frisian languagc 157

Te amcnt
Grcck languagc 14, 35, 130, 143, 157,

Front dc Lib ration dv Qu bec342

function5-6,71, 147, 163 169-72, 185,

205,242, 329,331,335,491
functi

nahsln5,8, 14, 16,72, 148, 149,

150,222,325,463

Gadda,CE279,28
brurr Jc,

id

166-7
Grcel,e,G486;Tllc C orln nnd J nr486

Grcsset,NI 284,285
Grcvc,F P 105, 106

Grice,P 7, 300, 326, 331, 390~ 7

Q`cr

P sriLci co

erufcIncl 338

Ghmm,1176

Guarani languagc287

Galland,A 73,94~8,1o1,106

Gu n,R

game thcory 150

Gucrne,A 282

Garneau,lNI 340,345~6, 352~3,355

Gollemin Flcscher1J257-9,267,271

Gasch

,R 84

Ga tonsky,S

16o

Guillory,J 398

311~12

Gawcda language338,364

Guimar s Rosa,J279,287

Gutt,E-A 9,326-7

Geertz,C 331,394
Gcnet,J, N@r ~Ddmc dcs eurs408

Haberm ,J 502

genrc 19, 394,486;translation as74,484;

Hagstr

sCC tz stn

text tyPc

Ge rge, s 79, 82
GermaiI

,J-C353,355,363

Gcrman language5,16,19,82,91,129,
157, 173, 338-9,441
Gcrman translati n tradition7, 19-20,
71-2

73,74, 151,223,225,239,310

334

461

286-7

cy,K 7,8,333,402-22

Hasd f,O

168

,B,and I

1as n327

Hcath-Stubbs,J 399
Hebrc v Bible 141 15, 24, 25~9, 73, 162,

Gilbert,s 488-91
gloss translation93, 156
G bard,H

329,339

462;sec d/x

C)ld Tcstament

Hebrew lan811agc157,162,292,295,
299, 302, 305

Hcgel,G W F 194,196,262,331,383,

G bin,P,347

441,442,443

Go(lard,B 325

Godbout,J 365-6
Goethc,J 4,8,19-20,63,6 ,82,
158, 176,231,240,447,463

182

Gold nidt,V A 285

Golin

382
Har

Hays,H R 239,240,243~51

Gide,A 95,105,417;as translat r135,

G mn,R

150,327,473;a11d R Hasan

294
Hammer~Purgstall,J
on6566
Harris,W3823;fJ,e GllT nd QLl rrcr

Hatill

Ger w,A

m,WO,180-1

Halliday, 1

Heidcggcr,M 112, 113, 155, 194, 195,

196,261,276,281,443,446; The
Anaximander Fragmcllt 112

Heinc,H 163
Hemingw E 488; The K lcr
298-301

,C 492

Gombro vic`, V: Trdns r`dnu k338,364

Hclnpel,c G 184

GoodsPecd,E J 159

Hcnning,RI 102, 105

Gottingen uni

crsky223

Herder,J G 19

Graham,J224

Hennans,T 224

grammar4,13-14,17,52,140 1,161,

hermcneutics71, 197, 309

hcrmeneutic thcory oflanguage6,8,46,

163, 187, 196,258-9, 262,272, 273,

280 1,291-5,304, 308, 330, 375,

392,449,459,465,471

71, 112, 150;of translati

granunar lnanuals140,242

193-8,225,312
Herrick,R 89,90

Grass,G 287

heter

glossia287-8

n15O,

INDEX
Hindi languagc95
history51,62,67, 183;of translati n65,

irnPhcaturc111-12,259,326, 332,391,
392, 395;sce czbcl conversational
maxil 1s,G1 lce,P

74, 114, 184-5,211,212- 3,221,

225,277,317-19,326,328,329,428,

irnPossibility of translation5,35,74,347,

433,443,453,455,458,463- 4;of
translation studics2,7, 191,461;
historiograPhy223

434;sec d so untrans1atability

incommensurabihty51,74,224, 335,491,

492,495,496,500

Hoby, rT 16
H lderhn,F 73,79,80,82-3, 225,276,
279,281
Holland,P 16

indetern1inacy: of addressce233;of

Holly

Ind -Eur PCan

`ood96,454,455,456,457,458,
460,464,467
Holmcs,J 150,180-92,328

idcntity411;of language224,264,425;
of litcrary systems241; f rncaning211;

of reading398;of translation460
languages 157

infonmation as comn1unicatcd in

translation75,80 1, 140, 155,487;sce

Holz M ntta1 l,J222,233

o rncaning

Homcr14, 18, 35, 36,63,71, 127, 197,

494;fiidd17, 19, 154,308,494;
O ssc,19,39,154,238
homoPh ne,homonym419,425,429,443
H ra,J 142

informati n thcor 181

Horace4, 16,20,67,84, 148,310-11;

intcntion

inscriPtion6, 19, 329,482-3,486-7,

491,494,496,498-9
instrumental thc ry of languagc8, 18,

224,225

rs Pocricd5, 14,23-4,38,39

authoria1175, 331, 395-7,484;

in languagc78, 369, 390-3;in

Housc,J 148,149

Hugo,F-V 432,435,440
Hugo,V 177,282
Humboklt,W von19,71, 176

533

trans1ation79, 169,214,223,224,
393,427,472,474,478,480;scc dfsc,
function,PurP sC,Sk pos theory
interlinear translati

Humphries,R 314

n66, 83, 153, 162,

179

Hungarian languagc 157

intcrnct466,473

Hu shih496

interPretation6,71, 112,113, 150, 153,

Hutcheon,L 411

326, 327;and cohcrcnce296;as

Huxlc ,T,H

translation93, 139, 317

496

intcrPrcting(oral translati
idcahsn

n)44-6, 186;

conu unity or liais n500-2;conference

112

idcntity cultural and p

208;simultancOus 135

htica18, 329, 330,

335,340,345-6,353,496;gay and
lesbiaI1402-3,411,413-21;gcndcr

in ariants

in translation147, 178,484,485
Itahan language87,89-93, 130, 342;

Abruzzesc296

225, 373,411,450;linguistlc369, 372,

425;as rclati nl)ct vecn foreign text

and translation5,65, 147, 153, 163,

kamiJ % n 9%m nR tIrns466

Iwasaka A 457

221-2,263,440;scxua1333,411
J k n,J215

idiolcct287
ideol gy8,74,

151,223,242,249-51,

Jakobson,R 7, 113-14,138-43, 172,

337,430,444,463

329, 330, 331, 334, 335, 341, 342,

350 1, 352, 355, 356, 357-8, 361,

Japanese languagc450,453,454,465-6

363,411-12,421,449_ 51,458,459,

JavanCsc language 157

464,466,481,483,491,496

JCr mC4,

idioms134, 162, 166,286-7

ilnitation13-14, 16, 18, 19, 38,40,48,

50,52, 54, 59,62, 121, 196, 197,278

irnPeriahsn120,66,73, 151, 334,370,

374,378,380

15-16,21-30, 148, 194,428,

462
J

hnson,s 101

Jonson,B 38,39
u
`
J

329,352,

356, 358

wCtt,B160,161

534 IN DEx
ke
Jc,S ,J279,396,426; nn dns I

Lcccrclc,J -J 484-5

287,427

Lec nte de Lislc, C A/1 197

Juvena129

KaRa,F 1o7,279

Lc verc,A

7,223,239_55

Le Pardi,G

87

Lescurc,J 495

Kakar,S 373
Kamishima K 453
Kant,I 428

Levcnston,E 292

Karccvski,s 141

Lcvinc, S J 225, 318~19

Le Tourneur,P 17
Lcuvcn-Z vart,K

Keats,J88,120; The Eve f saint M r

119

L vi~Strauss,

van222

C 313, 314;

nrhroP

J1c

sri ucfurto`c 197, 312

Kdly,L 5
Kcnny,D,328

Le ,J148,150,162
Le vis,P

E 7,8,56-75,224-5,332,
334,448,464

Khahdasa66
KikLlli H458
Kikuyu languagc380

lcxicon5, 113-14, 163,392,413-14,

King,T 406

hnguistics 1,4,7, 111, 139, 148, 149,

459,471

King Jamcs Biblc162,494

150, 151, 181, 187,205,221,226,

Kinncll,G 281
Klcgraf,1183

325,326~8,332,421~2;comParati

Klossoxs

sk,P 277

404,491;critica1421;functional-

Knight,M 170

systcn ic150,333,421,471

Knox,R A,160

hteral translation5,8, 19,40,50,53,72,

80-3,84,95,96-7, 101, 115, 121,

K ller,W

147, 184
Kora11100,105

124, 125, 128, 140, 153, 156, 160,

Koscgarten,J G L 66
Koskinen, 470,472,473

162, 197,225,237,266,281,286,
288,303, 330,378, 389,392,428,

Kramer,L

475,492;see

Fggors407
Krilov,I 122
Kristcva,J 375,384;C

`s@closc translation,
word~ft)r word translation
in se

I9o

ncn384

hterary criticisn1 1,4, 79, 86, 111, 116,

Kurosa va A,:R n464-5

150, 151,221,223,226,241, 325,

Kushner,T:

333,427

nJ

or contrastive 187, 205, 257; f contact

meric@403,405,

406,407,408 ^in

htcrary cxPcrill cntation71_-3, 334, 372,

Kyd,T 123

462,464~6
hterary languagc 360-1

Labo,L 195

hterary PrOse279;in translati

La Fontaine,J de 106, 117, 126

Lak r,R

4o4,406

Ldollcle,M348,351,352,356;DcFens
i

sc,e
so

srrdFi n dc`d dnJ1`cq1

c@isc 342
1

Lalondc,R 353~4
Lambelt,J 150
Lanc,E 94,95-7,99, 100, 1o1, 102, 104

Lang,A 100
Lar1)aud,V 114
Latin languagc 14, 32,39, 86,97, 104,

130, 339,342,351
Lattilnore,R 158,494
La iosa,s 327
Lcaguc of NatilDl1s135

LeaP,w 406

no el,prose ncti

n279-88;

htcrary studics 181, 395

cr

hterary theory4, 233, 239, 315-16, 325

lite1

a1

y tradition+86-

7,494,+95,499

litcrary translation5,6, 16,71~ 4,

112-13, 149, 157, 199~204,223,234,

277, 327, 331,397~4oo; cc drama
translation,narrative ncti n,p ctry
translation

Litt1uann,E 97, 102, 104, 105-6

Living Theatcr250
Loeb Classical Librarv314
logic52-3, 181, 264, 330, 370-1, 375,

434,+39
Lucas,I 405

INDEX 535
hC
lresse ci

Luoan16,3

286, 338;see dfso sPanish languagc

lunfard

Luthcr,M 16, 19,64,73,79,82, 195,

338-9, 351,428,443

424-5
n1etaPhrase38, 124
metaPh r262,272,395,427
dy

machinc translation 131, 186, 259

machine-aided translati

metcr sec Pros

n 186

mctonymy262,314, 372,411,419,
427
Meycr, 411-12
MikrianunOs,P 412,415,417
Milligan,E E 159

MacIntyrc,A 8,486
NIacKcnna,s 195
Macnaghtcn, V H 102

alcr,C 318-19
m ohty371,377,380,500

Mi1t n,J118,251

malor languagc371
mal r

Mlnh-ha,T T,449-50,458
anslation148
n1in rity8, 333, 344, 380,409
n1inor languagc328, 329,483

htCr.attll e149

minimax strategy ll

N1alhcrbc,F de 116, 117

Mallarmo,s 80
Mal

GoJs66

mctalanguagc 128, 129, 130, 141,

ne,J226

min

alraux,A

479

N andelbaun

,A 491-5,499-500

lit

at"e149

Miron,G 347,348,352,353
n

NIanhcirn,R 243,245-6,248,249,251

issionary translators 165

modcrnis1n71-3, 114,334,494,499

maniPulati n:translation as224

modernizing translation 113, 338

Mann,T243;Dr F usFus252;JoscP dnd modtllation133,137

H1s Br

Fhcrs252;Thc gjc l/fo1InF

1n

Montaigne,M de279,281,285

252,288
M. rdl

Moore,M 376

,JC95,97,101-5,106,286

Mon

marginahty340,376,402,403,411,417,
420
~1arlo fe,C

Marsol

as

sF

487

A/1ossoP,B 470,471,472
motl1er tongue50,51,53,56,57,59,
339,347-9,351-2, 368;and

To His Coy Mi ress 119

Marx,K 249,372;CdP1F /240;Marxism

225,244,329,457,499
mascuhnism74,225
p

t ola/orm

Morris,W 101
A/Iorrison,T 383,386;Bc cd382,386

494

s,G 360-3

arvell,A

`ia,A:

Morgenstcrn,C 170

translati n78,309,311,352-
nativc languagc

n,I 7,8,333-+,470-81

3;sec o

1Mottc,A H dela17

Masudi101

A/Iounin,G 147, 151,337-8

Mukhc cc,B380

n1athcmatics74,181,183,264

N ulkay,M 180

Matsui s 457

Matthcws,J158
MatIpln,A:

May,R,332-3

Mund ,J472,473
I

406

aC459

musical theater246`7

`cs o/rlle c

meaning77, 138-9, 153, 161,392,395;

P tCntia1296;in

subtithng460,462;in

161- 3,

193, 288-9, 390,484-5,487

Mdx llle,H 283,341;/lro

Di

lMcrllck,J,and B T Ragan416
Mesch nnic,H 8, 151,225, 285
nacssagc: in translation 128, 129, 131--4,
136, 139, 141, 143, 154- 8, 161-6,

168,260,484

fso litcrary Prosc,noVcl

252,282

lMcnandcr24, 36

Nab kov,V 8, 112-13, 11s-27, 195

narrative fcti n396;in translation333;scc

translation80 1,82- 5, 131, 132,

nationalism5,16,19,73,ll4,329,332,
342, 345, 350, 351,373, 374,453,

454,496
national languagc5,6, 339, 340, 353,
356, 368

nati nal htcrature5,6,73, 329

National Thcatrc(UK)244

536 INDEX
native language50, 53, 55, 56, 59, 347-8,
352;and translati

n352;sec

tonguc

rnother

n 151, 164, 195,

tt^anslati

oltcga y Gassct,J 74,175-6,194

Ota T 461-2

195,288

ncok)gism74, 101, 140,484

O"d40,41

New En ish BiblC159

Nevn1an,F.95,96, 160
Newtua11,S 164
Ncw11)ark,P 148

zu Y Pclssjnt, nqr459

Ne Tcstamcnt25-9,

Panactius36

Palgravc, F 86

Pammachius21, 3o

157, 161, 163, 164,

Panncton,G 133

166, 167

Ngu wa Thi ng o380

Pann vitz,R

N d

paraphrasc 197,2221 237,265,437

`nfen64
Nida,E 7, 113, 147-8, 153-67, 182-3,

364;% .Ird

c s cnt eo/rrdns`d nJ

182-3;and C,Taber338,364

ParaPhrastic translation15, 18, 19,28, 3s,

48,50,60-2,66, 113, 11s, 124, 126,

Par dy116,

Nir 1jana,T8,329-30

121, 196, 338,406,411,

Par n masia143,265

Paru Qu b cois342
Pasternak, B 142

non-standard dialcct484;sec
s
slang,rc n1ainder,

vulgarls111

Pastiche278

in language usc292;in translation

147, 149,200,202,207-16,288,

297-8,304,330,327,357,483;in

Pastrc,G 405

Patronagc223, 242,421

Patrick,G Z 122

translation studics5, 147;socia1206~7

N rnes,A M 8,447 9
N rth,sir T 195

Paync,J 102, 106

Peircc,C 139

Poguy,C 197

nou c zu

rc,

2dn418
No alis282,463

PE 315

no e1

106,279,283-4,287-8,396-7,

pcrR)rmatl

P dcll,c,J aIld s J Wo 412

4s4

Ftznric497;CJa n c350;
rribune496;Comm n e 496;
c mP rcl ivc crd urC492;E nb
rJ
Rcr1e 100; n h irt
,Ffisr il398;

bhque translation 128;scc o iec

translation

Bricn,J 160
Occitan languagc340
O

Ogawa s and Iizuka T:'11`

e272,433,438,442

PCri dicals
c i

i c

iFerd9

dnd NtIr1
lic C

447
o G

n as64,469

418,419;translati

Nizan i65,66
c lloquiahsn

72,82

153, 196,266,281,428,461

Nietzschc,F 4,2o,67-8, 151,310

nor us

om

n76~83,87,93, 307

0rr,C V 158

243,277;se tzJso don1cstjcating

n:natural

translation,translati
nc classicisn

3O6-7,311-15
original c mpos ion:di erenccs

`s

natuI ahzi11g translati

originahty57~9,223,224,240,253,

P`rdf

`
Ffi5r

" )or

496; t,3server244;Poc r/495;sfcv nic

Re c 122; d 208;rlmcs gf ondm
495;%hc 242,245,252; fv hr

rman,N 495

Okaeda S 453,454,456

rdP450

C)ld Tcstamcnt 154;scc c/xt,Hebrcvv Bible

Petrarch 16, 92, 116

0hvier,L 454

Pcvrchtte,R 417

O Neill,E 35 Desjrc tJnder

onolnatoP0eia134, 165

9 265; c srdFcsmcn
er489~91,

n497;N

rbc Fms357

orahty283,285 6,351,354,361

Philetas67
PhilliPs,J B 157, 160
Phil

Phy 1,4,7,8, 59-60,71,73,74,

oral litcrature 331,400

106, 111-12, 150, 182, 183,221,2531

oricntahsm74,95, 104, 226, 330

317,331,332, 378,441,442-3

INDEX
PhonCtics351,352, 354,355
physical scicnces74, 150, 183,250
Pic della lXIil^andola102

537

Proust,M 279,281,283,285,364,414,
428
crb 134,286-7, 372, 389,3941 396,

Pr

400

Pidgin 195

Pindar38,40,82

psychoanalysis225,253,278, 373,383

Pi11ter,H:@`J jm s294-5,302-3

Psychol gy 185, 326

Pirandcllo1 L 359

Psych hnguistics 150,222, 296, 305, 328

ia,C 89
Pitoer,G 359

Pubhc Broadca ing systcm(US)251

corncll university Press492;

Pist

publishers

Plato23,6o,61, 112, 161;Platonisn1288

Plautus29

Grovc Prcss421;Inscl Vcrlag106;

Plctt,H F I68

Oxfc,rd univcrsky Prcss86;Pushkin

Phny thc E1dcr \ rurdf Hisrt,r, 16

Press78;Random H use 122;

Macmillt

l1122;Ncw Dirccuons487;

Phny the Younger13

univcrsity of Cahfornia Prcss 122;

Plotinus 195

pubhshing industry86,252, 377

utarch 195

Pure language72,78,80,81-2,84, 349

c,EA9s

purplc Prose 165

Pocticisln492-5,499

PoeticS114,223,242,244-9,253,495
PoCtry translati n 5, 15, 16, 17-20,

38-42,64-6,67-8,721s7- 93,

PurP se authoria1 154;thc translat r s77,

154-5;sec d s0functi n,intcntion,
skoPos thC ry

PushkIn,A 112, 115-17, 119-20, 124,

112-13, l15, 118-19, I21-7,143,

126;Eugene ncgin112,115~17,

154, 158-9, 166,238,279,282,

491-5

122-7;Enghsh translati ns of122, 124,

Point of ie 471

125, 195;French translations of122,

124; Gern1an translations of122, 124

on338

Polish lan8uagc 338

Plqmd

Pohtencss theory333,408-9
Pohtics f translation5,6,8,73,224,
325-6, 329, 330_1, 334-5, 374,439,

Qucchua language287
quccr studies334,409,410-12

442,449-50,462
PolysyStem417,418;Position ol translatcd
htcraturc ithin199 204;theory of

Quevcd
Qtllnc,

,F G dc102

VVo8,lll-12,113,218,224

QttIntilia,113,114

149-50, 325 330

P
P

Pc,A 18, 118, 120, 127

Po ic,A 148

P rtugucsc

languagc292

PoSiti iSm72,

112

l niahsIn8,
P Stc

Rabclais,F 106,279

Rabin,C 1t3
Racinc,J B 285
racisn1332, 370, 372

226, 325, 329, 330,

334, 371,376, 379,386

PoStstructuralism6,7, 22 5, 319, 325,

328-9,332, 371, 377

Pound,E 7,8,72,86-93, 159,334

pragmatics205 325,326, 395,415
Pragn1atic tcxts232;translations of500

Raclin,DP 122,125
Rahcl,V 226
readcr and readcrshiP47,49, 50-55,71,
75
6,

154, 156, 162, 170,291,

296-301,303,327,335,378,384-6,
449,452,459,464,466-7,483,487,
490 2i494-500; ec

Pratt,NI L 404,491

`s(,audience
readcr-resPonsc thC ry223

Pr ost,A

rcading as translation384-6

484

ProPCrtius20,67

PrOshad,R 373-+
prosody I9, 39, 52~3,61,63,65-6,
88-92, 116-19, 121-2, 126 -7, 166,

414

rcahsllI165,378,383, 384,401,464,

490,491
Rcchy,J

Cio`or

NiJhr406;=lriss0 .n^r

405; I %@ri tI405

Rcclam,P 105

538

INDEX

rc renjal thco9oF mcal 1ng6,ll3-14,

222

n223,239,241-5,250,251,

253-4

saint~siln
scl1

re ister)04,349,354,

isra1226

n,C de279

un

samoyed `cl66
lan uagcs 140

356,358, 364,

407,409,417,419,483,485,486,
489,492-4
Reiss,K 148-9,168-79

Sand,G 368
sanskrit374
SaPir- vhorf

e autonom `of trans1ati n 5, 8, 14,

71,72,221,327, 335;sce.I sc,ndehty:

abusi e,translati n: as third c de

hyPothe is 392

Saussure,F dc266
sav ry,

T 159

schclling,I

88

Schiller,J C F 0n230

rclativisn1399
relc

said,E (9ricnrtI

rcfracti

rclati

sagan,F Bo rr,^rcssc49 S

ancc thcOrv8~~9, )26-7

schlcgel, A VV

rcmaindcr335,427,464,484~7,489,
490,494,495,497,498-500
Rcndall,s 83-5

schlcicrmachcr, F 4, 5, 8,43-63,71,

176, 197,225,309, 334

112, 150

rcsearch n1cthod

gy1s0;in translati n

studies184-91,217,325~6,421

on63

schlcgel, F 79

schumann,C 306, 307, 319

scicncc c)f translation 150, 182 3

retranslation358~63

scienti c translati

re titing

101,223, 278,283,442

: Thc Lad fthe Lakc 119

scott,sir

rhet ric4,

13-14, 17, 20,22, 29, 268,

scade,J393

272,282-3,330, 370 1,375, 380,

n 131, 187,277

Rich,A 319

scgmentation209, 228,452
S guinot,c, 328
semantics131, 15O, 182,390, 395

Richards,I A 185

sciniotics7, 139, 375,412,451;scc

383

RichardsOn, s
C`tI,i 9 484

Richie,D 452-3,466

s@

scnsc-for-sense translation 15~17, 23-5,

Richtcr,J P 279

28, 38,41, 114, 148,428

Rieu,E V 154
Rilkc,R M 195
Rimbaud,A c

slgn

sCPtuagint 14-15, 25~30

shakcsPearC, v 63,65, 87, 88,98, 106,

118, 120,240,279,281,329,338,

ivrc97

Bdrcd

RiPPs,R,and Y sauvageau357

341,353,454,494;H m cF107, 115,

Roa Bastos,A 279,287

135,453;K nJ ccr296,444; lrdc`,crla

340,352-3,355;Tl,e lrcrchdnr P 1vnicc

Robbins

H 242

RobinsOn,s,and D smith:Pr

zcricd`

n uc`
c ndd1dn FrcI, -
du
dnfd^c zn d n340 1,365

Ffdndbcol
Pr riquc

450

R b@c

423,427,430 46;O
279
shclley,P 88,118; Thc

Fjcff

454;sDnr,cFs

T1 lumPh c)f LifC

316

Robyns,C 330
Rodd,L 466

shiRs bct :ccn f rcign tcxt and translati

romanticism20,71,74,76,79, 150, 195,

6, 148, 149,208,222,267, 335,409,

485-6; cohercncc222,296~303,

239,240,241 242,252~3, 318, 334,

305; fc

463,493

forn1a1 157; of rcgistcr332,485;

R man

translation tradition36,67,462

Rosc n11non,carl of38,39, 307~8, 309,

scmantic140,479; fP int
@translati

of vie

and lii guistic

difFcrcncc
i

,B 158

Russian language120

`cc d`

G 87~8,153

Rousscau,J J 282; N u dfc J` c122

142

csion222,291~5, 304-5;

471;c f transitivity471,472,474-81;

312
R ssetti,D

Russe

129, 139, 140, 141,

shilluk languagc 155

shimizu C 459
shhnizu s 453,454,457,458-60
shutdevvord1,lM,and Rl Covvic8

INDEX
sign, signiier,signi cd 113~14, 139, 224,

262,331, 355,428,431,440;sec cl

539

systcms apProach to litcrature223, 240--4,

254,421;sec
s
PolysystCn thcory

scmlot Cs

siInPson,P +73-4,479
skoPos thc ry223,227-8, 325

Tabucchi,A 487;sosrjen

Pe`cjr

485-7
Taotus16,31,51
Tamura Y 457,458-60

slang74, 101, 165,286,465

slavic languages 142

smlthcrs,L' C 99

targct oricntation149,205,483~4

sociolcct287, 352, 354, 356

357,363

Tasso,T 65
n 13I, 187, 235,277,

sociology 183;of translation 185

technical translati

sohdarity379,407,408

326,500
Tennyson,A 88,95,107,494;JI,

sontag,s: Notes n CamP 409

s
Ph clCs80,82, 197,276; nr f nc250

emo,Idm119; ulyssc 493

sOurce oricntation161-2

Tcrcnce23,24,36

soutcr,A 160

tern nology140,

SPalding, 122, 125

sPanish languagc95, 1O4, 165,279,286,

340,474;Argcntinc95,286,338;

exican 129;Peruvian286
speech act thc ry424
SPe1liI1

sPCrbCr,D,and D

VilsOn8~9

SPitzCr, L 283, 285

ak,G C 7,8,330,369-89

text linguistics 171, 205,233, 326

teXt tyPe8, 147, 169, 171-3, 184, 187-8,

209,327;sce dfs gcnrc
123~6, 148-9, 170 1

tcXtua anal sis

288-9, 305, 326, 327, 332-4,421-2,

475
tCXt Varicty 173, 238
Thc critus36,67

lnas,D 372

standard dialcct19, 350,484,485,4941

T11

497,499
stanisla sky,K 248

Th mso111J

srdrdrs456
Steiner, G 6, 7, 8, 150, 193-6, 282,

312-14

163

flars94^7, 101-4,
105, 106-7,286;scc d o rdb1 n

rhc Tla uscInd ond r,ne

fl

t11ink-aloud Protocols213, 328

stcn1n1cr,(J 292

Toda N 453-4

stcndha195

T(ist y,L

stcreotypc329,404,450

Tottel,R 16

s rnbcrg,J

r ccD457,458,460
n:

stcrnc, L 279
ste c11son,R

L 121

storr, F 159
st

ndberg,A329,358,360; iss Jtlhc

360

161-2, 187, 338,471;

n studies 182-4

184-5,223,224,225,226,278-80,

355^6

sPcnccr, 1 496

sPi

of translati

1,362

279

Tourncur,C 106
Toury,G 7,149, 150,205-18,297,330,
483-4
rddurrore, rrcld F@r 142
translatability8,76,83,84, 111-14, 139,

262,297,3s6,424-30

stylc in translati

n56, 159~60,483,486,

488-91;Jcc c c camP,htel ry Pr sc,

translatcsc372, 378
translation:abusi

c448-9,463-7;as

aRcdik f lclreign text76-7,443,487;

poct1cs

subtithng332,447-67

annotated96, 100, 106, 117, 127, 1s4,

298,331,399 427,429,

sullivan,A 407

156, 162

surrcy,carl of16, 116

466;as aPPr Priation334,427,462,

veJish language 157

inbun1c,A 88,98, 1O6

swiR,J Gu/
Tr vc 170

synonomy 139,221
syntax sec gran

mar

463;cannil)ahstic312;and canon
f

rInation94,244,252, 319, 341, 359,

430,440,441,483,490,491,492,
494;vs commcntary260,261,273-5;
and comlnissio11234-8;as convcrsion

540

INDEX

431,435,443;c vcrt 148;cultural

transposition 132, 133, 136, 143

381, 383;deforn1ing tcndencics f

Trcmblay,M. 356-8;and translation

278-88;expurgatcd96,97,99, 105;

357-62

gendcrcd rcPresentations()f306-19;
hyPertextua1278;indircct or

Triolet,E 358-9, 361-2, 368

TurP,G 354-5, 359, 361

intern`cdiatc359;in institutions332,

T vi language 331, 389, 393, 394

333-4,470-81;intedingua1139;as
i11terPrctation19,93,139,222,224,

Tynal1,K 244
T
tlcr,A,F ll4;

232-4,259-60,261, 312,326;

Trransf riDn18-19

ss9' n eP, nciP e o/

interscn1iotIc139;intrahngua1 139;

invisiblc163,334,461,465,472;and
hnguistic dircrcnce2591 293,295,

unconscious in translation225,278,283,
352

Undcrhill,R M 159
ur`Esco473,479;C uricr473,474,475,

304-5;as litcrary genrc or111ode74

76,79;and thc lnarketl

lacc319,328,

498;natura156,60, 156) 163-6;and

oCdiPal trianglc311-12, 318;o ert

477,478,479
Ungaretti,G 491-5,499

148;Pietistic311 12;Prcfaces to338,

363,420;radica1111;as1 ecoding139;
rclc

unit f translation132, 161, 171,428,

452
uni ersals:(,fc gnition326-7;oflanguagc

ant9,426,440,443;as

rePresentation260 1,471;the selcdi n

60,147,150,313,333;of sul,lccti ity
n151,208,222,
ff )reign texts for199~200,209,319,
415-16;of translati

482;thick399;as third codc222;

288,294,426

unnaturalncss in53;scc dlso closc,

dcconstructl

untranslatability3s, 140, 143, 193, 224,

c,dircCt,domestlcating,

264, 331, 382,424-30,432,440,441,

drama,cdln centric,cxoticizing,hhn,
445,462,465,465,466
f reigni ng, cc,gloss,intcrhnea1 ,
uPdikc,J RtZl ir R n301
1ite1

al,litcrary,machiI1c,modernizlng,

naturahzing,obhquc,paraPhrastic,

Urquhart,T 106
utoPianism498

Poetry,scicnti c,scholarly,sensc-R)rscnsc, teChnical,

v rd-for-
0rd

-9;in acadcn1ic disciPhnes

n71,498-500,502;in

180;in translati

translation studics 181, 319

translation criticis 1 190, 278

tlanslauon su atc es r met11 ds5,8,

Vaillant,A 142

13 20, 35-6,49~50,72-3, 114,

128-37,221,225,237,327,330,331,

Valory,P 114
Vallc Inclan,R

333, 334,470,474,478

Tirdnc,Bt,nJerds287

Xrenuti,L 334-5,464,472,482-s02

translation studies:as an academic

Vermeer,HJ 7,8,223,227-38

disciPhne1^4, 150, 181-4, 221,223,

vcrnacular15, 114,285-7,339, 340, 342,
325-6,448,452,470;dcscriPtive 150,
343, 351, 357, 3s8, 360, 376
184-5, 334,47s;cxPcrIIllCnta14, 148, Vian,B 359,360~
1

328;and litcrary theory239;Pure

Vidal,G 412; rl,c ci
150, 18 91;see t en1Pirical rcscarch,
412-15,417
185

rescarch lncthodo1

gy

Vidor,K:

translation theory4-6, 13,71,72, 111,

147, 148, 149, 185-9, 226, 309, 325;

fcmil)ist318-19

ri

nct,R

`dnd r c

Jle ChdmP459^61

464

Vietnamese languagc 371

Vinay,J-P,and J Darbel11et8,128-37,

translator training 1,4, 11+, 149, 189,

225, 226

211,223,325,326

Virgi117, 36,38,40, 114;

itcz,A 359
transParency in translati n5,427,433,
442,462;as illusion17, 151,329,334,
Vivckananda373-4
497;as rcnectl n of thc lrD1c

81

Pifftir

n tcxt60,

voss,J H 19,20,63,65,197

Vosslcr K 73,151

eid277

lNDEX 541
vulgarisn1 165,409

Wittig,M 372

Vulgate15~16

vvord-R,r~
0rd translation5, 13, 15, 16,

18,23,24,28,36,38-9, 130, 148,

aivai langua8c 165

428

V rdsxs0rth, V

`alkcr, A 372

Wallcr,E 38

Vard, I 488-91

74

Wyatt,sir T 16
Wvchf6tc Bible 15-16

Veil,G

102,105
Vcinbcrg,H 455-7

Xcnophon23

Wcinmann,H 347
Yan Fu496

cst,C

B 153
White,E 408,415-17
Wh rf,B L 140

YarmolinskI,A I22

Yodogawa N 460

`cland^C
M 65

ilamcnvitz-N/Ioellendo11r,u
Wi e,O:rFlc u~
Willc ,J243

Young,E NV r

66

Doll

n73
n Gr 102

Zohn,H 83-5

Villiams,T 357

Z la,E

Vilson,E

Zulu la11guagc157

489-90
Wllss, V 150, 183

Tl,o1u Fs17

Young,R : Tt,non]o7 Connccrj

279

Zulli languagc 164-5

n465-6