John Milton’s Iambic Pentameter in Russian Translations: The Problem of Equirhythmic Correspondence to the Source Text

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Vladislav Bortnikov
{"title":"John Milton’s Iambic Pentameter in Russian Translations: The Problem of Equirhythmic Correspondence to the Source Text","authors":"Vladislav Bortnikov","doi":"10.15826/qr.2023.4.840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The author of this article compares two Russian poetic translations of J. Milton’s Paradise Lost by O. Chyumina (1899) and A. Steinberg (1976). The comparison is based on the rhythmic specific features of the introduction to the poem. The article aims to identify the translators’ strategies when working with the rhythmic structure of each poetic line as a peculiar case of meter (iambic pentameter) realisation. Obviously, preserving iambic pentameter does not mean making the text sound the way it does in the original in the target language. Consequently, when comparing two poetic variants of the text, it is necessary to consider the individual characteristics of each verse: pyrrhic feet, rhythmic italics, etc. The author proposes the term “equirhythmicity” for the degree of approximation to absolute rhythmic equality of the original. It is assumed that “equirhythmicity” can serve as a qualitative and quantitative characteristic of a translation and, therefore, as a basis for comparing translations. This assumption is tested with reference to the introduction to Paradise Lost, which occupies 26 lines in the English original and 35 (O. Chyumina) and 28 (A. Steinberg) lines in the Russian translations. This increase in text volume is not only due to the fact that Russian words are longer than those in English but also the absence of rhyme and regular stanzas and different translation strategies in general. The table of lexical correspondences proposed by the author demonstrates that O. Chyumina cares about rendering all words as fully as possible, thus not seeing any problem in syllabic inequality and, consequently, in the extension of the text. This occurs in the number of her lexical additions, which is 2.5 times higher than A. Steinberg’s. On the contrary, the latter tries to compensate for the syllabic expansion using lexical omissions and choosing the shortest possible equivalents. Based on the calculated average coefficients of syllabic correspondence and qualitative equirhythmic analysis, the author draws a conclusion about a more considerable formal correspondence of Steinberg’s translation to the original (as compared to Chyumina’s), with minimal lexical and semantic losses. Both Russian versions come to be “equirhythmic” and reflect the corresponding trends in the history of Russian translation.","PeriodicalId":43664,"journal":{"name":"Quaestio Rossica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quaestio Rossica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15826/qr.2023.4.840","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The author of this article compares two Russian poetic translations of J. Milton’s Paradise Lost by O. Chyumina (1899) and A. Steinberg (1976). The comparison is based on the rhythmic specific features of the introduction to the poem. The article aims to identify the translators’ strategies when working with the rhythmic structure of each poetic line as a peculiar case of meter (iambic pentameter) realisation. Obviously, preserving iambic pentameter does not mean making the text sound the way it does in the original in the target language. Consequently, when comparing two poetic variants of the text, it is necessary to consider the individual characteristics of each verse: pyrrhic feet, rhythmic italics, etc. The author proposes the term “equirhythmicity” for the degree of approximation to absolute rhythmic equality of the original. It is assumed that “equirhythmicity” can serve as a qualitative and quantitative characteristic of a translation and, therefore, as a basis for comparing translations. This assumption is tested with reference to the introduction to Paradise Lost, which occupies 26 lines in the English original and 35 (O. Chyumina) and 28 (A. Steinberg) lines in the Russian translations. This increase in text volume is not only due to the fact that Russian words are longer than those in English but also the absence of rhyme and regular stanzas and different translation strategies in general. The table of lexical correspondences proposed by the author demonstrates that O. Chyumina cares about rendering all words as fully as possible, thus not seeing any problem in syllabic inequality and, consequently, in the extension of the text. This occurs in the number of her lexical additions, which is 2.5 times higher than A. Steinberg’s. On the contrary, the latter tries to compensate for the syllabic expansion using lexical omissions and choosing the shortest possible equivalents. Based on the calculated average coefficients of syllabic correspondence and qualitative equirhythmic analysis, the author draws a conclusion about a more considerable formal correspondence of Steinberg’s translation to the original (as compared to Chyumina’s), with minimal lexical and semantic losses. Both Russian versions come to be “equirhythmic” and reflect the corresponding trends in the history of Russian translation.
俄文译本中的约翰-弥尔顿《抑扬格》:与原文的对等节奏对应问题
本文作者比较了 O. Chyumina(1899 年)和 A. Steinberg(1976 年)对 J. Milton 的《失乐园》所作的两个俄语诗歌翻译。比较的基础是诗歌引言的节奏特点。文章旨在确定译者在处理每行诗歌的节奏结构时所采取的策略,将其作为实现节拍(抑扬五拍)的特殊案例。显然,保留抑扬五拍并不意味着让文本在目标语言中听起来与原文一样。因此,在比较文本的两个诗歌变体时,有必要考虑每个诗句的个别特征:比兴脚、节奏斜体等。作者提出了 "等节奏性"(equirhythmicity)一词来表示与原文绝对节奏平等的接近程度。作者假定 "等节奏性 "可以作为翻译的定性和定量特征,因此也可以作为比较翻译的基础。我们以《失乐园》的引言为例来检验这一假设,该引言在英文原文中占 26 行,在俄文译本中分别占 35 行(O. Chyumina)和 28 行(A. Steinberg)。文字量的增加不仅是因为俄语单词比英语单词长,还因为没有押韵和有规律的句子,以及翻译策略的不同。作者提出的词性对应表表明,O. Chyumina 注重尽可能完整地呈现所有单词,因此不认为音节不平等会带来任何问题,从而也就不认为文本的扩展会带来任何问题。这体现在她增加的词汇数量上,是 A. Steinberg 的 2.5 倍。相反,后者试图通过词性省略和选择尽可能短的对等词来弥补音节扩展。根据计算出的音节对应平均系数和定性等节奏分析,作者得出结论,斯坦伯格的译文与原文(与 Chyumina 的译文相比)在形式上更加对应,词汇和语义损失最小。两个俄语版本都是 "等节奏 "的,反映了俄语翻译史上的相应趋势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Quaestio Rossica
Quaestio Rossica HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
70
期刊介绍: Quaestio Rossica is a peer-reviewed academic journal focusing on the study of Russia’s history, philology, and culture. The Journal aims to introduce new research approaches in the sphere of the Humanities and previously unknown sources, actualising traditional methods and creating new research concepts in the sphere of Russian studies. Except for academic articles, the Journal publishes reviews, historical surveys, discussions, and accounts of the past of the Humanities as a field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信