Grigor’eva A.
DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO THE REPRODUCTION
OF THE NATIONAL SINGULARITY IN THE RUSSIANITALIAN TRANSLATION
There’s a problem in translation theory that stems from its very
beginnings. It has always been hard to convey national and historic singularity.
The first theoretical findings on this subject in Russia were due to Pushkin,
Gogol, Belinsky, Dobrolyubov.
Only as late in XX century as early 50-s realia as marks of the national
color got their share of scientific acclaim. Sobolev, Chernov, Alexeev,
Fyodorov, Retzker, Kashkin and many others have written on the text “in its
national costume” since then.
But how is national singularity realized? Actions of a representative of a
certain nation reflecting his mindset, worldview, national customs and rituals are
its main manifestations.
Above all, national singularity is shown in the names for cities, animals,
plants, dishes, clothes, hats, kitchen utensils, musical instruments, weight
measures, proper names, nicknames, etc. Some ideas, occurrences, procedures
associated with the environment, culture and way of life of a certain nation are
absent within the others. The words naming such nationally-specific traits were
named realia by Bulgarian linguists S. Vlakhov and S. Florin. Being the bearers
of historic and national color, they don’t have counterparts in other languages
and therefore are hardly translatable by common and means require a specific
approach.
We’ve chosen one of the multiple Italian translations of Mikhail
Bulgakov’s “The Heart of a Dog” made in 1997 by M. Crino and a newest 1997
translation of his “Master and Margarita” by S. Arcella as a subject of our
research on conveying the features of Russian realia in the Italian language.
As it is widely known, both of these works depict Moscow in the late
1920’s – early 30’s, its people and topography creating a historic canvas of the
so called “Bulgakov’s Moscow”.
It deserves mentioning that the novel “Master and Margarita” banned
from publication for 30 years by Soviet censorship was first published in full by
the Italian publishing house Einaudi in 1967, two years preceding the first 1969
publication of the uncensored Russian version in Frankfurt-am-Main.
Though realia are not usually translatable there is no world that cannot be
even descriptively, that is as a phrase, translated into another language.
Therefore the question is not in whether realia can be translated but in how they
should be translated.
There are to obstacles in conveying realia in translation: 1. lack of the
translation of the counterpart of a realia in a certain language because of lack of
the object designated by this realia, 2. necessity to convey the historical and
national color of the realia along with its objective meaning.
There are no strict rules in translating realia and the translator,
considering basic theoretical propositions and using his language skills, general
knowledge and, in the first place, contextual setting chooses the best way
possible in every single case.
After the in-depth analysis of translational transformations in conveying
realia from the novels “Master and Margarita” and “Heart of a Dog” in Italian
language we constructed a general scheme of recorded methods of conveying
realia:
I.
Transcription
II. Translation (replacement, substitution):
1. Neologism: a) loan translation; b) half-loan translation; c) adaptation;
2. Approximate translation: a) gender-species correspondence; b)
functional analogue; c) description, explanation, interpretation;
3. Contextual translation.
I. Transcription of realia is a mechanical transference of realia from the
original language to the language of translation by the graphical means of the
latter with the maximum approach to the original phonetic form. Its desirability
and often even necessity lies in the need to convey the flavor of alienism,
characteristic local, national or historic color inherent to the realia by means of
“native” language: vnesla na kruglom blude…baba//entro portando su un
vassoio un gigantesco baba; s raznocvetnymi vodkami//contenenti vodka di
vario colore; vse ravno chto kaloshu lizat’//come quello di leccare una caloscia.
However, in case of a wrong choice between the methods of conveying
realia the usage of transliteration may impede the reader; in such cases realia
requiring complex explanations are usually made into footnotes: mi – novoe
domoupravlenie nashego doma//siamo i membri del domkom 1.Comitato del
caseggiato; v Mossel’prome//al mosselprom1, 1. MSPO: Associazione
moscovita delle fabbriche che lavorano I prodotti agricoli.
The exclamation of poet Bezdomny: “Vzyat’ bi ehtogo Kanta da za takie
dokazatel’stva goda na tri v Solovki!”//”Bisognerebbe prendere questo Kant e,
per queste sue dimostrazioni, spedirlo per tre anni a Solovki!”, - is
incomprehensible for ones who have never heard of Solovetsky Islands where
the Solovetsky forced labor camps were located.
Let’s look into the translation of proper names. The untranslatability of
proper names, their cultural specificity is based on the connectedness of most of
them to a certain nation, national traditions and culture which bond them to
realia.
According to the existing rule all proper names in the said translations of
two novels are subjected to transcription. Though if a translation, replacement or
any deviation from the established tradition is acceptable because of the need to
show the internal form or to put it differently, that is when proper names have to
acquire features of a common noun, they are exempt from this rule.
For example, a traditional dog name Sharik//Pallino, the “hereditary” last
name of Poligraph Poligraphovich – Sharikov//Pallinov and the nickname given
by Sharikov to doctor Bormental – tyapnutiy//il Morsicato, are conveyed by the
method of loan translation or half-loan translation.
Plenty of charactonyms in the translation of the novel “Master and
Margarita” will be understood only by Italian readers deeply knowledgeable in
Russian culture and even Russian language. For example, the name selection for
the most prominent members of the poetical subdivision of Massolit won’t leave
a shadow of a doubt regarding the poetic merit of their works only in the minds
of Russian-speaking readers: Pavianov, Bogochulskij, Sladkij.
The translation of subjective evaluation suffixes that are also the bearers
of the national color is a particular question in conveying proper names. The
main problem for a translator is to make the reader understand the meaning of
Russian suffixes which M. Crino (The Heart of the Dog) either ignored or easily
overcame applying half-loan translation conveying Russian jokingly-diminutive
forms or combining Russian names with Italian suffixes: Zinka//Zinaccia.
Not surprisingly, the meanings of Russian suffixes in the proper names
remained a mystery for Italian readers of the translated “Master and Margarita”.
For example: Varenka//Varenka, Manechka//Manečka, Kirjushka//Kirjuška.
II. Translation (replacement, substitution)
Neologism introduction, - according to S. Florin and S. Vlakhov is the
most appropriate method of preserving the meaning and color of the translated
realia when transcription is not an option because by creating a new word (or a
phrase) almost the same effect may be achieved. Loan translations and half-loan
translations may be such words.
a) Loan translations – “borrowing by literal translation (usually in parts)
of the word or a phrase” – allow the transfer of realia into the language of
translation retaining semantic substance but sometimes loosing the national
color:
in
“Glavriba”//alla
Genepesca,
economist-planovik//economista-
pianificatore, belogvardeets//la guardia Bianca.
There are generally much less loan-translation words than loan-translation
phrases when working with realia. Abbreviations which were symptomatic of
the “language disease” of those years are abundant in Bulgakov’s prose and turn
into phrases
when translated:
kooperativ
Tsentrokhoza//Cooperativa
dell’Economia Centrale, kultotdel doma//sezione kulturale del caseggiato,
zhiltovarischestvo//l’associazione degli inquilini.
b) Half-loan translations – somewhat partial loanwords. They are also new
words or (stable) phrases consisting partially of their own material and partially
of the foreign word material. We’ve recorded quite a lot of half-loan words in
the “The Heart of the Dog” translation but we’d like to cite the most joyous one:
tipichniy kulachyok//il tipico piccolo kulak.
c) Adaptation – an adjustment of foreign realia, that is giving it the
appearance of a native word. A small part of realia we recorded were adapted.
For example monetary units: po 35 r. 75 k.//per tre rubli e settantacinque
copechi, 40 kopeek//40 copechi.
d) According to our estimations, approximate translation of realia is
applied more often than any other method except for transcription. The
translator usually achieves, though not very accurately, to convey the objective
content of realia, but the color is almost always lost because of the replacement
of the expected connotative equivalent by a neutral one, that is a word or phrase
with no connotation. Following occurrences were recorded:
a) For example, using the principle of gender-species substitution in the
translation of a phrase “Dajte narzanu, - poprosil Berlioz”//”Ma dia dell’acqua
minerale, disse Berlioz“ the translator avoided transcription for good
substituting a general notion for a particular one. Though the national color
somewhat faded, the difference in the context is not prominent and therefore
there’s no extensive loss in national color.
b) Functional analogue is an element of a final statement that produces a
similar reaction in the mind of a foreign reader. This method of realia
translation allowed to replace dezhurnoe bludo, the dish traditional for soviet
cafeteria but unknown to Italian readers, by a familiar piatto del giorno that is a
functional substitution for the translated realia. The functional analogue is often
used for creating certain qualitative notions: maxnet kost’, a na nej s os’mushku
myasa//un osso con qualche avanzo di carne sopra, vsya kvartira ne stoila i
dvux pyadej Dar’inogo carstva//l’intero appartamento non valeva un solo
angolo regno di Dar’ja.
c) Description, explanation and interpretation as a method of approximate
translation by extensive description of untranscriptable realia is used quite often
in the studied texts. The translators resort to it when they find it necessary to
retain the intelligibility of a certain realia for Italian readers: komsomolka//una
giovane comunista, ne dorezannye bol’shevikami pomeschiki//proprietari
terrieri sopravvissuti al pugnale bolscevico.
d) The contextual translation conveys the content of realia by the
transformation of the context. For example, the following phrases with a
characteristic soviet realia of the early XX century associated with the policy of
forced increase of tenants: stoyal vopros ob uplotntnenii kvartir doma//è stato
discusso il problema del numero degli inquilini nei vari appartamenti and
vopros stoyal ob uplotnenii// È stata sollevata la questione della coabitazione; –
may be translated by eliminating the seemingly central concept “uplotneniye”.
Summarizing the above, it’s important to highlight that in both cases –
approximate and contextual translation – though they are correct and acceptable,
the translation achieved is a neutral and colorless substitute for the original,
realia fades and disappears.
In addition, we find it justified to mention several inaccuracies made by
the translators in course of their work with the texts of M. Bulgakov’s novels
“The heart of a Dog” and “Master and Margarita”.
-
Translating the words of Sharikov “Uvazhaet, gospoda, do chego
uvazhaet!” as “Come lo rispetta, questo mio signore, come lo rispetta… ” the
translator erroneously read the fragment because of the incorrectly placed
emphasis in the word “gospodá” directed by Sharikov to the audience. Reading
this word as “góspoda” and linking it to Professor Preobrazhensky, the Italian
author translated Sharikov’s appeal as “questo mio signore” being unaware that
“Gospod’” in Russian, as opposed to “gospodin”, is a word used for God only.
-
It’s right to assume that the phrase “tri bumazhki po tri chervonca”
was translated as “tre banconote da dieci rubli” and “za 4.5 chervonca” as “con
quarantacinque rubli e cinquanta” only through lack of attention because other
instances prove that the translator new that “chervonets” is a 10 rubles banknote since 1922”: prisvoil 2 chervonca//aveva sottratto venti rubli, poluchaet
chetyre s polovinoj chervonca//guadagna quarantacinque rubli.
-
A mistake in translation of units of measure was committed in
converting arshins into meters. Here’s the description of the floorage allocated
to Sharikov in the Professor Preobrazhensky’s apartment and the translation:
ploshhad’ (…) v shestnadcat’ kvadratnyx arshin//…un’area di quattro metri
quadri. According to the Russian language dictionary by S. I. Ozhegov, arshin is
a Russian unit of measure that equals 0.71 meters which means that the floorage
of 16 square arshins equals about 8 square meters and not 4 as it is specified in
the Italian translation.
-
A gross error was committed by the Italian author in his translation
of the name of the cosmetics manufacturing trust: “proklyataya zhirkost'!”//”Un
liquido diabolico!”. Obviously, because of the utter incomprehensibility of the
word the translator assumed he was dealing with a slip of the pen and translated
it as if it was “zhidkost’”, even more so since the hair dye is discussed in the
context.
-
Flaki , one of the most popular dishes from the polish cuisine, is
well known in Italy. It is traditionally translated as a transcription “flaki”.
However, flyaki gospodarskie from the “Griboedov” restaurant somehow turned
into obscure fliaski. We are left to assume that this groundless mistake is due to
the typographic error.
-
We’ve got to appreciate the Italian translator’s knowledge of
Russian history and culture for he correctly translated the name of a popular in
the post-revolutionary Russia democratic piece of clothing – tolstovka: v
razodrannoy belovatoy tolstovke//in una sdrucita casacca bianchiccia alla
Tolstoj. The notion casacca alla Tolstoj loaned from Russian culture as a halfloanword phrase correctly directs the Italian reader to the figure of Lev Tolstoy,
whose manner of clothing whist his period of “simple living” set an example to
his followers. However, tolstovka is a spacious long man’s blouse on gathers,
stand-up collar and a fastener, simply a shirt with a belt worn outside trousers.
Therefore, the usage of a word “casacca” (jacket, sleeveless jacket, kazakin) one
way or the other describing a piece of overgarment is a bit incorrect that could
have been easily avoided by the usage of a common Italian “camicia”.
Summarizing, we have to highlight that the reproduction of the way of life
and political environment in the Soviet Union of the 1920/30’s enclosed in the
pages of “Master and Margarita” and “The Heart of a Dog” in Italian language is
an extremely complex task because of the great historical, geographical and, last
but not least, ideological distance between Italy and the Soviet Union.
Besides the realia of everyday life, Bulgakov’s novels are filled with all
sorts of political allusions which sometimes constitute an obstacle even for a
Russian
reader.
Commented
editions
narrating
extensive
Bulgakov’s
factography may help Italian as well as Russian readers.
1. Axmanova O.S. Slovar' lingvisticheskix terminov. M, 1966.
2. Bulgakov M.: Sovremennye tolkovaniya. K 100-letiyu so Dnya
Rozhdeniya 1891-1991. Sbornik obzorov. M, 1991.
3. Vlaxov S., Florin S. Neperevodimoe v perevode. M, 1980.
4. Fajzullaeva R. Nacional'nyj kolorit i xudozhestvennyj perevod.
Tashkent, 1979.
5. Fedorov A.V. Osnovy obshhej teorii perevoda. M, 1983.