索福克勒斯《安提戈涅》中的乱伦禁忌与神法:法格尔斯与希尼译本之比较

박재영
{"title":"索福克勒斯《安提戈涅》中的乱伦禁忌与神法:法格尔斯与希尼译本之比较","authors":"박재영","doi":"10.17259/JCERL.2017.26.1.81","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay compares Robert Fagles`s and Seamus Heaney`s English translations of Sophocles` Antigone to examine how different understandings of an original Greek text can engender different versions of English translations. Fagles`s Antigone, first published by Penguin Books in 1984, is still widely read as a best selling version of Antigone, and Heaney`s version is famous for the translator`s renowned status as a Nobel Prize winner and his scholarly achievements in literature. What is at stake in Antigone is the conflict between Creon and Antigone concerning the burial of the dead body of Polynices, whose unpatriotic deed resulted in his death. Creon, as a King of Thebes, has to keep the human law, which should punish the traitor, while Antigone, as a sister and woman whose duty is to mourn for the dead of any Greek men in accordance with the divine law. Any translators should, first of all, understand Sophocles` intentions in creating this story, which is obviously very hard, so as to reproduce the original Greek text to English version. After close analysis of the two English translations, I found that Fagles read incestuous relationship between Antigone and Polynices and translated the original text as such, while Heaney tried to clear any such problematic readings from his translations, which is in line with Hegel`s reading of Antigone. By providing the reasons for the different English translations of an original Greek text, this essay also aims to say that translations are new creations of translators and provide lens through which we can read one orignal text with different perspectives.","PeriodicalId":432663,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Classic and English Renaissance Literature","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Incest Taboo vs. the Divine Law in Sophocles` Antigone: Comparing Fagles`s and Heaney`s Translations\",\"authors\":\"박재영\",\"doi\":\"10.17259/JCERL.2017.26.1.81\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This essay compares Robert Fagles`s and Seamus Heaney`s English translations of Sophocles` Antigone to examine how different understandings of an original Greek text can engender different versions of English translations. Fagles`s Antigone, first published by Penguin Books in 1984, is still widely read as a best selling version of Antigone, and Heaney`s version is famous for the translator`s renowned status as a Nobel Prize winner and his scholarly achievements in literature. What is at stake in Antigone is the conflict between Creon and Antigone concerning the burial of the dead body of Polynices, whose unpatriotic deed resulted in his death. Creon, as a King of Thebes, has to keep the human law, which should punish the traitor, while Antigone, as a sister and woman whose duty is to mourn for the dead of any Greek men in accordance with the divine law. Any translators should, first of all, understand Sophocles` intentions in creating this story, which is obviously very hard, so as to reproduce the original Greek text to English version. After close analysis of the two English translations, I found that Fagles read incestuous relationship between Antigone and Polynices and translated the original text as such, while Heaney tried to clear any such problematic readings from his translations, which is in line with Hegel`s reading of Antigone. By providing the reasons for the different English translations of an original Greek text, this essay also aims to say that translations are new creations of translators and provide lens through which we can read one orignal text with different perspectives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":432663,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Classic and English Renaissance Literature\",\"volume\":\"61 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Classic and English Renaissance Literature\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17259/JCERL.2017.26.1.81\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Classic and English Renaissance Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17259/JCERL.2017.26.1.81","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文比较了罗伯特·法格尔斯和谢默斯·希尼对索福克勒斯《安提戈涅》的英译,以考察对希腊原文的不同理解如何产生不同的英译版本。法格尔斯的《安提戈涅》于1984年由企鹅出版社首次出版,至今仍被广泛阅读为《安提戈涅》的最畅销版本,而希尼的版本因其诺贝尔奖得主的声望和文学学术成就而闻名。《安提戈涅》的关键是克里翁和安提戈涅之间关于波利尼斯尸体的埋葬的冲突,波利尼斯的不爱国行为导致了他的死亡。克瑞翁,作为底比斯的国王,必须遵守人类的法律,惩罚叛徒,而安提戈涅,作为一个姐妹和女人,她的职责是根据神圣的法律为死去的希腊人哀悼。任何译者都应该首先理解索福克勒斯创作这个故事的意图,这显然是非常困难的,以便将希腊原文复制成英文版本。通过对两本英译本的仔细分析,我发现法格尔斯对《安提戈涅与波利尼斯的乱伦关系》的解读是这样的,而希尼则试图从他的译文中清除任何有问题的解读,这与黑格尔对安提戈涅的解读是一致的。本文通过对希腊原文的不同英文翻译的原因进行分析,也旨在说明翻译是译者的新创造,并为我们提供了从不同角度阅读原文的镜头。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Incest Taboo vs. the Divine Law in Sophocles` Antigone: Comparing Fagles`s and Heaney`s Translations
This essay compares Robert Fagles`s and Seamus Heaney`s English translations of Sophocles` Antigone to examine how different understandings of an original Greek text can engender different versions of English translations. Fagles`s Antigone, first published by Penguin Books in 1984, is still widely read as a best selling version of Antigone, and Heaney`s version is famous for the translator`s renowned status as a Nobel Prize winner and his scholarly achievements in literature. What is at stake in Antigone is the conflict between Creon and Antigone concerning the burial of the dead body of Polynices, whose unpatriotic deed resulted in his death. Creon, as a King of Thebes, has to keep the human law, which should punish the traitor, while Antigone, as a sister and woman whose duty is to mourn for the dead of any Greek men in accordance with the divine law. Any translators should, first of all, understand Sophocles` intentions in creating this story, which is obviously very hard, so as to reproduce the original Greek text to English version. After close analysis of the two English translations, I found that Fagles read incestuous relationship between Antigone and Polynices and translated the original text as such, while Heaney tried to clear any such problematic readings from his translations, which is in line with Hegel`s reading of Antigone. By providing the reasons for the different English translations of an original Greek text, this essay also aims to say that translations are new creations of translators and provide lens through which we can read one orignal text with different perspectives.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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