{"title":"《尼伯龙根历险记》俄文新译","authors":"Kseniia Kashleva","doi":"10.25205/1818-7935-2021-19-4-117-134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article analyzes the existing translations of the German medieval epic poem Nibelungenlied into Russian. Russian translations, made by M. I. Kudryashev in 1889 and Yu. B. Korneev in 1972, were based on the outdated publication of the Nibelungenlied edited by K. Bartsch. The edition by K. Bartsch is rather a compilation than a critical study. The basis for this edition was the manuscript B, in which K. Bartsch made a great number of amendments. That is why K. Bartsch’s edition cannot be regarded as a suitable source for translation. In contrast, the translation by Yu. B. Korneev contains a number of factual inaccuracies and additions caused by the translator’s aim to keep the original metre. The article shows that it is necessary to make a new Russian translation of the Middle High German masterpiece. The article provides a review of possible problems facing a translator: accuracy of translation; making comments that give missing information or explain unclear places in the text. It argues in favour of overt translation with comments that help readers to understand the text which is a product of both another culture and another time. The article features a new translation of the first chapter of the Nibelungenlied (the manuscript B) with comments.","PeriodicalId":434662,"journal":{"name":"NSU Vestnik. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New Translation of the First Nibelungenlied Adventure into Russian\",\"authors\":\"Kseniia Kashleva\",\"doi\":\"10.25205/1818-7935-2021-19-4-117-134\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article analyzes the existing translations of the German medieval epic poem Nibelungenlied into Russian. Russian translations, made by M. I. Kudryashev in 1889 and Yu. B. Korneev in 1972, were based on the outdated publication of the Nibelungenlied edited by K. Bartsch. The edition by K. Bartsch is rather a compilation than a critical study. The basis for this edition was the manuscript B, in which K. Bartsch made a great number of amendments. That is why K. Bartsch’s edition cannot be regarded as a suitable source for translation. In contrast, the translation by Yu. B. Korneev contains a number of factual inaccuracies and additions caused by the translator’s aim to keep the original metre. The article shows that it is necessary to make a new Russian translation of the Middle High German masterpiece. The article provides a review of possible problems facing a translator: accuracy of translation; making comments that give missing information or explain unclear places in the text. It argues in favour of overt translation with comments that help readers to understand the text which is a product of both another culture and another time. The article features a new translation of the first chapter of the Nibelungenlied (the manuscript B) with comments.\",\"PeriodicalId\":434662,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"NSU Vestnik. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication\",\"volume\":\"43 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"NSU Vestnik. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7935-2021-19-4-117-134\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"NSU Vestnik. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25205/1818-7935-2021-19-4-117-134","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
本文分析了德国中世纪史诗《尼伯龙根》现存的俄文译本。俄译本,由M. I. Kudryashev于1889年和Yu。B. Korneev于1972年出版,是基于K. Bartsch编辑的尼伯龙根志的过时出版物。巴切的版本与其说是一个批判研究,不如说是一个汇编。这个版本的基础是手稿B,其中K. Bartsch做了大量的修改。这就是为什么K. Bartsch的版本不能被认为是一个合适的翻译来源。相比之下,于的翻译。B. Korneev包含了一些事实上的不准确和增加,这是由于译者的目的是保持原来的节奏。文章认为,有必要对中古高地德语名著进行新的俄文翻译。本文综述了翻译工作者可能面临的问题:翻译的准确性;在文章中给出遗漏的信息或解释不清楚的地方的评论。它主张公开的翻译与评论,以帮助读者理解文本是另一种文化和另一个时代的产物。这篇文章的特点是对《尼伯龙根志》(手稿B)第一章的新翻译,并附有评论。
New Translation of the First Nibelungenlied Adventure into Russian
This article analyzes the existing translations of the German medieval epic poem Nibelungenlied into Russian. Russian translations, made by M. I. Kudryashev in 1889 and Yu. B. Korneev in 1972, were based on the outdated publication of the Nibelungenlied edited by K. Bartsch. The edition by K. Bartsch is rather a compilation than a critical study. The basis for this edition was the manuscript B, in which K. Bartsch made a great number of amendments. That is why K. Bartsch’s edition cannot be regarded as a suitable source for translation. In contrast, the translation by Yu. B. Korneev contains a number of factual inaccuracies and additions caused by the translator’s aim to keep the original metre. The article shows that it is necessary to make a new Russian translation of the Middle High German masterpiece. The article provides a review of possible problems facing a translator: accuracy of translation; making comments that give missing information or explain unclear places in the text. It argues in favour of overt translation with comments that help readers to understand the text which is a product of both another culture and another time. The article features a new translation of the first chapter of the Nibelungenlied (the manuscript B) with comments.