Vittorio Alfieri e la lingua “classica” di Simeon Marcovici: alcune considerazioni metodologiche sulle traduzioni dell’Oreste e del Filippo

IF 0.1 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Federico Donatiello
{"title":"Vittorio Alfieri e la lingua “classica” di Simeon Marcovici: alcune considerazioni metodologiche sulle traduzioni dell’Oreste e del Filippo","authors":"Federico Donatiello","doi":"10.60133/pj.2023.1.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\"The most representative Romanian translations of the 19th century can be the subject of an aesthetic-rhetorical study, which, usually, we would devote to an original literary work. Because of their experimental character, the translations are closely linked to the contemporary “language question”: thus, they offer a tool to observe the evolution of literary Romanian in those crucial decades. In other words, we can consider translations as a ground for the reception of Western models and the development of modern literary language. In this study, we propose overcoming the two most popular approaches to Romanian translations: the exclusively lexicographical one, which mainly focuses on the collection of data related to the neological lexicon: the exclusively historical-sociological one, which considers translations as historical-literary and socio-cultural documents without dwelling on the aesthetic-rhetorical values of the literary text. On the contrary, the value of such translations lies not only in their being (useful) witnesses to certain linguistic forms or certain sociological and historical contexts, but in the fact that they are autonomous literary texts. Composed exclusively of translations of literary works and technical texts, Marcovici’s output is a typical example of the extraordinary phenomenon of Romen translations in the first half of the nineteenth century. His prose translations of two of Alfieri’s tragedies, Oreste and Filippo, in a volume published in Bucharest in 1847, mark one of the high points of interest in Alfieri’s output in the Romanian nineteenth century. Such a late interest in an eighteenth-century author like Alfieri, who had played so much part in the Italian, Greek, and Romanian Enlightenment and Preromantic temperament, often cloaked in anti-Tyrannical nationalism, should not be surprising. Marcovici’s entire cultural activity shows a strong “anachronistic” inclination toward neoclassical themes, also motivated by his being professor of rhetoric at the College of St. Sava. For Marcovici, literature is not only to be considered in the same way as a “school of moralization”, but also a model for the correct use of literary language. It follows, therefore, that there should be a determined fidelity to the needs of popularization, to the “simple” style, to the naturalness of vocabulary and to the minimization of the needs of overdeveloped rhetorical language. The contribution will therefore go through some lexicographical, stylistic and rhetorical aspects of the two Alfierian translations, focusing on the “classicism” of Marcovici’s language.\"","PeriodicalId":41055,"journal":{"name":"Philologica Jassyensia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philologica Jassyensia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.60133/pj.2023.1.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

"The most representative Romanian translations of the 19th century can be the subject of an aesthetic-rhetorical study, which, usually, we would devote to an original literary work. Because of their experimental character, the translations are closely linked to the contemporary “language question”: thus, they offer a tool to observe the evolution of literary Romanian in those crucial decades. In other words, we can consider translations as a ground for the reception of Western models and the development of modern literary language. In this study, we propose overcoming the two most popular approaches to Romanian translations: the exclusively lexicographical one, which mainly focuses on the collection of data related to the neological lexicon: the exclusively historical-sociological one, which considers translations as historical-literary and socio-cultural documents without dwelling on the aesthetic-rhetorical values of the literary text. On the contrary, the value of such translations lies not only in their being (useful) witnesses to certain linguistic forms or certain sociological and historical contexts, but in the fact that they are autonomous literary texts. Composed exclusively of translations of literary works and technical texts, Marcovici’s output is a typical example of the extraordinary phenomenon of Romen translations in the first half of the nineteenth century. His prose translations of two of Alfieri’s tragedies, Oreste and Filippo, in a volume published in Bucharest in 1847, mark one of the high points of interest in Alfieri’s output in the Romanian nineteenth century. Such a late interest in an eighteenth-century author like Alfieri, who had played so much part in the Italian, Greek, and Romanian Enlightenment and Preromantic temperament, often cloaked in anti-Tyrannical nationalism, should not be surprising. Marcovici’s entire cultural activity shows a strong “anachronistic” inclination toward neoclassical themes, also motivated by his being professor of rhetoric at the College of St. Sava. For Marcovici, literature is not only to be considered in the same way as a “school of moralization”, but also a model for the correct use of literary language. It follows, therefore, that there should be a determined fidelity to the needs of popularization, to the “simple” style, to the naturalness of vocabulary and to the minimization of the needs of overdeveloped rhetorical language. The contribution will therefore go through some lexicographical, stylistic and rhetorical aspects of the two Alfierian translations, focusing on the “classicism” of Marcovici’s language."
维托里奥·阿尔菲里(Vittorio al菲里)是西米恩·马尔科维奇(Simeon Marcovici)的“古典”语言:关于奥雷斯特和菲利普翻译的一些方法论考虑
“19世纪最具代表性的罗马尼亚语翻译可以作为美学修辞研究的主题,通常,我们会致力于原创文学作品。由于它们的实验性质,这些翻译与当代的“语言问题”密切相关:因此,它们提供了一个工具来观察罗马尼亚文学在那关键的几十年里的演变。换句话说,我们可以把翻译看作是接受西方模式和发展现代文学语言的基础。在这项研究中,我们建议克服两种最流行的罗马尼亚语翻译方法:专门的词典学方法,主要关注与新词汇相关的数据收集;专门的历史社会学方法,将翻译视为历史文学和社会文化文献,而不关注文学文本的美学修辞价值。相反,这些翻译的价值不仅在于它们是某些语言形式或某些社会和历史背景的(有用的)见证,而且在于它们是独立的文学文本。Marcovici的作品完全由文学作品和技术文本的翻译组成,是19世纪上半叶罗马翻译的非凡现象的典型例子。1847年,他将阿尔菲利的两部悲剧《奥列斯特》和《菲利波》翻译成散文,在布加勒斯特出版,这是阿尔菲利在19世纪罗马尼亚的作品中最引人注目的亮点之一。18世纪的作家阿尔菲利在意大利、希腊和罗马尼亚的启蒙运动和前浪漫主义气质中发挥了重要作用,经常披着反专制的民族主义外衣,对他这样一位作家的兴趣如此之晚,不足为奇。马尔科维奇的整个文化活动显示出对新古典主义主题强烈的“不合时宜的”倾向,这也是他在圣萨瓦学院担任修辞学教授的原因。在马尔科维奇看来,文学不仅是一个“道德学派”,而且是正确使用文学语言的典范。因此,应坚决忠实于大众化的需要,忠实于“简单”的风格,忠实于词汇的自然,并尽量减少对过度发展的修辞语言的需要。因此,贡献将通过一些词典编纂,风格和修辞方面的两个阿尔菲利亚翻译,重点是马科维奇的语言的“古典主义”。
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
Philologica Jassyensia
Philologica Jassyensia LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书