Drama Translation Essay

However, the mission of a arranger of a maneuvertic clear is slightly contrastive from each tonic(prenominal) literary arrange. A maneuvertic school textual matter is scripted in order to be performed on stage. The exhibitative of much(prenominal) a text has t presentfore to bear in mind that the readers (i. e. the audience in this discipline) sh any non scarce follow the written form of the script solely in like manner and primarily its spoken version. This fact influences the tend of a interpreter to a great bound. He has to chose lyric that ar easily pronounce equal by actors and comprehensible to the audience.At the same term he ought to take to defy the tauting and form of the sure as much as legitimateistic so that the indication represents the goal and thrust of the skipper author. Each voice aims at a maximal realistic trustyity, including both the inner (authors and leaveors notes) and stunneder lyric of the drama. Translation, the s urmounting of the obstacle, is made possible by an equivalence of theme which lies behind the assorted verbal fashions of a thought. No doubt this equivalence is traceable to the fact that men of all in all nations exit to the same species.When an positionman is thinking of the woman whom he casts as my sustain, a Frenchman is thinking of ma mere and a German of meine Mutter. Among normal citizenry the three thoughts will be very similar and will retire the same memories of tenderness, loving care and maternal pride. In consequence my mother can be perfectly translated by ma mere or meine Mutter. (Savory 1957, p. 11) Savory (Savory 1957, p. 49) further much(prenominal) than states twelve rules of a proper description 1. A exposition moldiness get to the give-and-takes of the fender 3. A explanation should read like an original work.2. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. A description mustiness give the ideas of the original. A commentary should read like a interpretat ion. A translation should reflect the appearance of the original. A translation should possess the style of the translator. A translation should read as a contemporary of the original. A translation should read as a contemporary of the translator. A translation may add to or omit from the original. A translation may neer add to or omit from the original. A translation of verse should be in prose. 13 12. A translation of verse should be in verse.There is a close relationship mingled with the author and the translator of a literary work. Both of them aim their own style of constitution and expressing their thoughts. Neverthe slight, the translator shall al counsels be subordinate to the author whose text is considered the origination of a prominent text and its further stage deed. A translation may imply any of the idiomatic views which are peculiar to its style and which the translator sees fit to adopt but it needs not, because of this, possess the style which the reader may endure.Style is the essential fictional characteristic of every pick of writing, the out fix of the writers soulfulnessality and his emotions at the moment, and no individual paragraph can be put together without revealing in some degree the nature of its author. that what is confessedly of the author is true also of the translator. The authors style, natural or adopted, de statusines his choice of a word, and, as has been seen, the translator is often compelled to make a choice mingled with alter inbreds. The choice he makes cannot be reflect, though dimly, his own style. What does the reader expect what does the critic lease?One of the reasons for a preference for a unfeigned translation is that it is in all probability to come nearer to the style of the original. It ought to be more than accurate and any copy, whether of a picture or a poem, is likely to be judged by its accuracy. Yet it is a fact in making the attempt to reproduce the effect of the original, to o literal a make is a mistake, and it may be indispensable to alter even the face of the authors sentences in order to transfer their effects to other tongue. (Savory 1957, p. 54) 3. 1 THE INTENTION OF THE TRANSLATOR The sense of purpose of translators work is to of import(prenominal)(prenominal)tain, shew and imp finesse theoriginal text not to name a hot comp one and only(a)nt of work that has no precursor.Translation aims to reproduce. The blind of translation is founded on replacement of one beak of quarrel fabric by another and consequently on an independent creation of all chaste operator proceeding from the wrangle. Translation as a work is an fine reproduction, translation as a process is an original creation, translation as a geek of art is a causa on the boundary of art of reproduction and primarily creative art. ( charge 1963, p. 49)In the maturation of the art of reproduction two norms stimulate been applied according to Levy (Levy 1963, p.52) the norm of reproduction (i. e. positment on au whereforeticity and accurateness) and the norm of art (requirement on beauty). This basic aesthetic contrast proves contrapositive to translational authenticity and freedom. The authentic 14 method (i. e. the literal) represents a procedure of work of such translators who aspire to reproduce the original precisely, whereas the free method ( conformative) aims at beauty, i. e. the aesthetics and thought proximity to the reader, and creation of an original work in a direct native run-in.For a realistic translation bothnorms are infallible the translation has to be as exact reproduction of the original as possible but above all it should be a priceless literary piece of work. Newmark d heroic poemts the intention of a translator as follows Usually, the translators intention is identical with that of the author of the source language text. But he may be translating an advertisement, a notice, or a decorate of instructions to show his client how such matters are formulated and written in the source language, instead than how to adapt them in order to ingest a bun in the oven or instruct a new identify language readership.And again, he may be translating a manual of instructions for a less educated readership, so that the explanation in his translation may be much larger than the reproduction. (Newmark 1988, p. 12) The translator is supposed to be creative although his creativity is limited by the field of language. He can enlarge his native literature by creating new expressions (neologisms) or by incorporating foreign expressions into the native background (exotic expressions). Borrowing foreign language means or creating Czechoslovakian equivalents is not only restricted to the lexical units but also to the stylistic values.Levy (Levy 1963, p. 69) mentions blank verse, sonnet, ghazal, haiku, and blues in this context. 3. 2 THE interpretation OF A DRAMATIC TEXT The translator of a salient text has t o admire the extraity of a spoken word. Dialogues do not narrate and depict natural actions or situations as in prose but they form them. They do not narrate how pot meet and make relationships but perform the people performing and communicating with each other. The structure of a sentence of a negotiation is simple as could be, the sentences are usually paratactically connected, often without conjunctions. legion(predicate) unfinished sentences and ellipsis may appear. So-called contact words are very important as hygienic. Various modal particles and expressions that office have multi outlying(prenominal)ious context meanings are characteristic of language of a dialogue. In this vitrine dictionaries shall not be that useful for the translator for the language of drama is very specific and often peculiar. 15 In the frame of the artistic translation we further distinguish translations of poetry, prose and drama, which jibs to the traditional division of artistic genresinto lyric, epic and salient genres.What is the quintessence of a salient text? Prose narrates events but drama transfers them via speech. Generally, the entire content has to be transposed into dialogues (monologues, polylogues), being accompanied by facial gestures, gesticulation, stagy space and props. The language requirements are higher here than in prose the direct speech that essentially addresses the spectator has to be able to express even though indicatively far more than a dialogue of a novel.Except for the function of characterization of the protagonists the direct speech substitutes the other items of prosaic text (narrating the past, authors reflexion, lyric digression and so forth ), and at the same clip it should sound naturally, for it is mean for a direct audio-visual impact. Kufnerova and Skoumalova (Kufnerova, Skoumalova 1994, p. 140) mention two kinds of a dramatic translation 1 A piece of drama is translated as a literary text, and is originally intended more or less to be published for readers.That would be the case of most of the classical texts from Ancient times till 19th and twentieth nose candy. The translator proceeds from the original text and attempts to keep the most of its specificity. He is the only responsible and independent creator of the target text. The translator forms the closing version of the translation regardless of the voltage stage realization. 2 The handler asks the translator for translation of a grouchy play for the setting with original and sophisticated poetics. The target text is exclusively written in cooperation with the busy theatre company.The original text is not that important any more, production features and a nail down director intention predominate. The directors and often the actors themselves consider the text (and often even the original work) a kind of half- ready text, which they adapt during rehearsing the play, not constantly with a positive result. They create a dramatic text, tran sform the drama situations and adapt the language. Newmark comes with another theory of translating a dramatic work. According to him, the main purpose of translating a play is to have it performed successfully.16Therefore a translator of drama inevitably has to bear the potential spectator in mind though, here again, the better written and more pointificant the text, the fewer compromises he can make in favor of the reader. Further, he works under certain constraints opposed the translator of fiction, he cannot gloss, explain puns or ambiguities or cultural references, not transcribe words for the sake of local colour his text is dramatic, with emphasis on verbs, rather than descriptive and explanatory.Michael Meyer, in a little noticed article in Twentieth Century Studies , quoting T.Rattigan, states that the spoken word is five times as potent as the written word what a novelist would say in 30 lines, the playwright must say in five.The arithmetic is faulty and so, I believe , is the sentiment, but it shows that a translation of a play must be concise it must not be an over-translation. (Newmark 1988, p. 172) Newmark furthermore mentions Meyer who makes a distinction amongst dramatic text and sub-text, the literal meaning and the real point i. e. what is implied but not said, the meaning between the lines.Meyer believes that if a person is questioned on a subject about which he has complex feelings, he will reply evasively (and in a circumlocutory manner). Ibsens characters say one thing and mean another. The translator must word the sentences in such a way that this, the sub-text, is equally clear in English. Normally one would expect a semantic translation of a line, which may be close to a literal translation, to reveal its implications more clearly than a communicative translation, that simply makes the dialogue easy to speak.Whilst a great play must be translated for the reading publics enjoyment and for scholarly study as well as for surgical operation on stage, the translator should ever assume the latter as his main purpose there should be no difference between an acting and a reading version and he should look after readers and scholars only in his notes. Nevertheless, he should where possible amplify cultural metaphors, allusions, proper names, in the text itself, rather than replace the allusion with the sense. When a play is transferred from the source language to the target language culture it is usually no longer a translation, but an adaptation.Newmark concludes his thought by suggesting that some kind of accuracy must be the only criterion of a good translation in the future what kind of accuracy depending first on the type and then the particular text that has been translated and what the word sub-text with its Grician implications and implicatures can be made to counterbalance a multitude of inaccuracies. (Newmark 1988, p. 172) Jan Ferencik (Ferencik 1982, p. 72) was one of Slovak linguistic theoretici ans dealing with the field of translating, among others.He also analyses the translation of a 17 dramatic text and mentions that unlike translation of other genres the translation of drama is characterized by 1) written character of the text and non-written form of its runionate realization 2) collective and multistage character of an interpretation of the original in the process of creating the final translation text, on the reverse from the other genres, where the interpretation of the translator is unique and final.3) dissimilarity of each new social realization, curiously on stage, not only in case of non-homogeneous translators and stage producers but also in case of concurrent text and coincident stage producers within repeated conference (Stanislavskij theatre, emotions, improvisation, flying psychical and biological dispositions of actors, etc. ) excluding the technique of reproduced performances such as goggle box recording, film, sound recording, etc.A live specta tor, who himself acquires one of the interpreters of the performed text, is the participant of discourse during a stagy realization. 4) subordination of all the involved to the interpretation of the main concept, whichusually means a weaker creative participation of the translator in the resultant communication than while translating other pieces of text Furthermore, Ferencik mentions the chain of communication that relates author, translator, director and finally the audience of a dramatic work.The communicative chronological succession of translation of a drama, unlike another translational texts, is following pen Translator (Interpreter 1) Dramatic adviser and Director (Interpreters 2) another involved originators Scenographer, Composer, proletarian (Interpreters 3) Spectator, Listener (Interpreter 4).This chain of communication represents the time sequence of creation of a text and its social realization. (Ferencik 1982, p. 72) As I have already said, translators inter pretation of a text is only a derriere of a scenic interpretation which is, in connection with the presentation of a play, sometimes called director-dramaturgical concept. Naturally, there are differences in the approach to a translational dramatic piece of work, depending on the kind of its scenic realization (professional theatre, novice theatre, TV dramatization, adopted performance, film adaptation, radio play..) and on subjective characteristics of particular interpreters.I would like to conclude this sub-chapter by another feature of a dramatic work, which is a dialogue cohesiveness. Cohesion as one of the linguistic means is to be found in 18 most of text styles and represents a connecting feature. Newmark (Newmark 1988, p. 58) sees a mistake in neglecting the spoken language as part of a separate theory of interpretation. Translators are concerned with recordings of some kinds, particularly surveys, as well as the dialogue of drama and fiction.Moreover, cohesion is close r inthe give and take of dialogue and speech than in any other form of text. Here the main cohesive broker is the question, which may be a command, request, plea, invitation (i. e. grammatically a statement or a command or a question) and where the forms of address are inflexible by factors of kinship and intimacy, and, regrettably, class, sex and age. Apart from transposing the structure of the sentence (e. g. Could you come? tycoon perish Tu peux venir? or Bitte komm), each language has opening gambits semantically reserved for this exchange.Similarly, each language has marking words that signal a break or end of a subject, such as set, Well, Good, Fine, Now, I see (Ach so, Parfait, Cest vrai) and the internationalism O. K. Lastly, there are the tags that are used to keep a flagging conversation going isnt it, see, you know, which require a standard response. The translator has to bear in mind the main differences between speech and dialogue speech has virtually no punctua tion (The sentence is virtually irrelevant in speech Sinclair et al. , 1975), is diffuse, and leavessemantic gaps fill by gesture and paralingual features.As I was operative on the translation of Butterflies are free, it has been e particular(a)ly challenging to bring an adequate equivalent to various cohesive means. In English it is more natural to use such introductory cohesive links as you know and I mean whereas in Czech it sounds rather disturbing and that is why I act to omit or replace those by more accurate expressions of the Czech language background.3. 3 THE TRANSLATION OF THE TITLE OF A LITERARY operate Naturally, the backing of any literary work is an essential part and that is whytranslating the patronage represents a challenging process for the translator. We, as readers, may find out many important clues out of the title. I have been working with a dramatic text that was already translated by Ivo T. Havlu in 1972.He translated the title Butterflies are free as Motyli. Nevertheless, the title of this play by Leonard Gershe (1969) is based on a quotation by Charles Dickens and on a song sung by Don, one of the protagonists. Havlu leaves the song out but I attempted to 19 maintain the original version and therefore translated the song, with help of a lyricist, inthe rhymed form of Czech. We have finally translated the phrase Butterflies are free as Motyli leti na oblohu.Concerning the a priori background of translating the title of a literary work, Newmark (Newmark 1988, p. 57) distinguishes between descriptive titles, which describe the topic of the text, and allusive titles, which have some kind of referential or figurative relationship to the topic.For serious imaginative literature, Newmarks thinks a descriptive title should be literally kept (Madame Bovary could only be Madame Bovary), and an allusive title literally or where necessary, imaginativelypreserved. Kufnerova and Skoumalova (Kufnerova, Skoumalova 1994, p. 149) grant that the title, being a description, contraction or metaphor, is essential part of the translation.According to them every translator pays fear to the title and rarely makes a mistake there, knowing the whole piece of work. Translation of a literary title is often influenced by the hitch of time aim or fashion. In 1920 there was an effort to naturalize the title, realize it into the local background, especially in the field of proper names.Theinfluence of a cultural strategy of Czech language is displayed even in period habits, that is why it is sometimes necessary to adapt the syntactic structure of the title to the common native forms. Czech language prefers connections of action to nominal linkages. Differences in social mind, knowledge of life and institutions and other extralinguistic means represent a frequent reason for an adaptation of the original version of a literary work. Contemporary literary translation relatively respects the original version of the title of the work i n correspondence with the principles of modern science of translationand we can rarely encounter the demerits, alterations or changes.Literary translations acquire a better position than film works translations that often include mistakes and frequent interventions in the original version and thus substantiate the scrimpy competence of young translators and their insufficient responsibility. 3. 4 THE SHIFTS OF MEANING WITHIN THE TRANSLATION OF A DRAMATIC TEXT Within the translation of any piece of text a space for shifts of meaning, stylistic, etc. develops between the source and target language.The shifts might be unconscious,20 or intentional and conception. In the support case we speak about a renovation of a translation. The term renovation therefore does not only represent an adaptation of over-the-hill or archaic language, but it also a conscious conception adaptation of a text in a diachronic way and an adaptation to a different cultural and social background as well as to a particular directorial interpretation.Temporal and spatial infinite causes that some features of the original text stop being comprehensible in another society, they are not transmittable via common means andthat is why even the realistic translation often requires an explanation instead of a literal translation or only an indication clue.The explanation is necessary if the reader cannot understand a word, idiom etc. that was present in the original version. Levy (Levy 1963, p. 82) implies that it is not correct to explain an indication, continue and complete a pause, or to sketch in the situation that has not been measuredly made clear in the original. Usage of indication is hereafter separate if we cannot use a full expression because the language material has cause the artistic means and thus can be preserved.Slovak linguist Popovic mentions the shifts of a translation within his theory of expression An elaboration of the theory of expression becomes a starting point for a systematic evaluation of shifts in the translation, forms a basis of objective classification of the differences between the original and the translation. The demand to identify in the text every stylistic means from the morphological point of view helps us to estimate in theory of translation that which represents an equivalent.A system of means of expression enables us to evaluate linguistic means in the stylistic analysis in the context, i.e. not isolated, but in their relation to the system of qualities of expression. This must be assumed if we deficiency to undertake a theoretical investigation of conformities and differences that arise when an original work is translated. Such generalizing evaluation of means in the frame of the single categories an expression and of the qualities of expression makes it possible for us to qualify explicitly, more precisely and systematically, the shift of expression, the relation between the language of the original and that of the transl ation. (Popovic 1968, p. 238) Within my translating I have encountered several shifts of meaning. As the play was written in the 1960 it was very demanding to foreshorten on renovating the language and at the same time on preserving the original features to a certain extent so that the shifts could not represent such an interference of the original (Jill, for example, is mentioning Beatles, Jimmy Hendrix and Rolling Stones as her contemporaries and I therefore could not transfer the whole script into the present time. ).21 3. 5 THERENOVATION OF A TRANSLATION Every translation, not depending on the genre, gets outdated after a period of time. As the language develops, new words arise and are borrowed from other languages and it is therefore necessary to replace, touch on or adapt the original expressions. Renovation of a translation constitutes the chalk up of the shifts of time, place, semantics, composition etc. Depending on the extent of the shifts the final text might even lo se its original character of a translation and become a text of different, new qualities.As I have already mentioned, the renovation is not a prerogative of dramatic texts only. No type of artistic translation can do without any level of renovation, especially without time-language shift. Every translation of a literary work which has not originated at the same time with the original, which happens very often, requires a certain level of such shifts that may be called renovation. Renovation is a usual creative procedure which is not unsounded as a deconstruction of the semantic identity of the original.In case the translator extends the amount of shifts for a time language reasons, such a procedure is perceived as deconstruction of subject composition and is thus called modification, free translation, free processing, etc. Is it liable to qualify the limits of renovation of a translation? Is it possible to say the extent of renovation shifts that are considered to be an acceptab le translational procedure arising from a rationale concept? What are the limits of an arbitrariness of the translator and groundless torture of a text?It is therefore necessary to approach the quality, legitimacy and artistic adequacy of each translation individually. Concerning the dramatic texts, it is essential to examine the stakes of all interpreters in the final version of a text. Ferencik (Ferencik 1982, p. 79) suggests that the artistic time flies differently than the absolute cosmic time and the absolute time is not every time corresponding with the social time. That is why it might be useful to shift the time frame of the action precedent and reach the physical time via the artistic and social time means after arelatively short period since the composition of dramatic texts.It may also be necessary to shift the localization of the action and change the names of some characters, especially those that are conditioned by means of time renovation or real existence. 22 Fina lly, the reexamine has thus to judge the extent of translators and producers preservation, refinement or declension of the original intention of the author. It might happen that a dramatic work gets deformed because of ill-conceived renovation to such an extent that it becomes more an awkward parody of a comedy than a socially awful piece of work.Consequently it is essential to be very careful when choosing the beguile renovation means, to maintain their level and choose such means that correspond to authors poetics. Savory describes the renovation of a translation as follows Art, proverbially, is long, so that translation, in so far as it is an art, should be in like manner timeless, persistently reappearing as an inevitable response to the stimuli matte by succeeding generations.An artist in oils or water-colour does not intermit from making a picture of Mapledurham Mill because it has been drawn and painted so many times already he regards this fact as one more reason for his , the latest, attempt. In the same way writers have always been ready to express in their own language the passages, from epigrams and couplets to epics and long books, originally written in other tongues. Of subsidiary importance is the fact that a fresh translation of any work of literary merit is welcomed because the quick translations sound antiquated, or are obsolescent and this is a factor which cannot be neglected or forgotten.There are fashions in literature and changes in literary taste, so that a rendering of Virgil which satisfied the Elizabethans of the sixteenth century will not necessarily appeal to the Elizabethans of the twentieth. There should be lower-ranking need for hesitation on the part of anyone who considers embarking on a worthy translation, and one of the most unmistakable signs of the literary interests and activities of the present day is the popularity and the plenteousness of new translations. (Savory 1957, p. 28) Newmark (Newmark 1988, p.172) sugge sts that a translator of drama in particular must translate into the modern target language if he wants his characters to live, look in mind that the modern language covers a span of, say, 70 years. If one character speaks in a bookish or passe way in the original, written 500 years ago, he must speak in an equally bookish and old-fashioned way in the translation, but as he would today, therefore with a corresponding time-gap differences of register, social class, education, temperament in particular must be preserved between one character and another.Thus the dialogue remains dramatic, and though the translator cannot forget the potential spectators, he does not make concessions to them. 23 3. 6 LANGUAGE AND STYLE As Newmark (Newmark 1995, p. 123) implies, for the translator, language is a code which he is well aware he will never break, a system he cannot wholly grasp, because it is lexically infinite. All he can do is make assumptions about it, in accordance with the benefits he derives from it, depending on the turn back that suits the users at the time the assumptions, like the sense of the words, will change continuously.The translator is frequently faced with too little extralinguistic reality and too much linguistic ambiguity words either too far out of their usual collocations or so frequently in them that they become meaningless cliche, fitting as loosely as yale keys in the immense locks of their context. (Newmark 1995, p. 123) Concerning the Czech background, Kufnerova and Skoumalova (Kufnerova, Skoumalova 1994, p. 72) describe the Czech language as significantly different from other European languages that exist also outside Europe (Russian, English) in which wecannot find general colloquial form of the language as in Czech.On the other hand, there are many informal expressions, dialects, turn in and social dialects. Czech and partly German create a special area in Europe where general colloquial informal language is often used. In artisti c translations this general colloquial Czech language does not appear without the stylization. That can be achieved via various techniques, but all of them tend to keep the appearance of such features in the text, so that they would put to death their function and would not disturb the reader, or spectator.In my translation I have let Jill and finally also Don use such general colloquial Czech expressions although the original version had not always clearly stated those. I have done so in order to keep the unity and originality of the text. Slang represents a specific language field within each language and a specific line of work of translators to be solved. It often includes emotional elements and thus characterizes the speaker. According to Knittlova (Knittlova 2000, p. 111) the collation of get into words that have various system relations in different languages is very difficult.In slang (especially of young people) we can notice an effort to be outlandish and to exaggerate expressive gestures. Slang wants to shock, provoke, it is a sign of revolt or disobedience. It is presented via overexposing some categories of expressions, hyperbole, metaphorical phraseology, colloquial metaphors, irony, comicality, folk expressions and above all playfulness with the language. Several studies have been written about English standard and sub-standard slang.The term slang denotes partly 24 a special diction, partly highly colloquial language or jargon of a particular social class,a group or a period. In dictionaries the stylistic categorization of words or phrases that do not hold up to a formal language is denoted by slang. However, the boundary between slang and colloquial English is rather movable and indistinct. Slang is an attract of colloquial language, it is not tied in with the rules of standard English, but it is rated as vivid, colourful, more full-bodied as for the diction and more flexible. It arises by a natural need of creation of new words that emot ionally affect the utterance and express a subjective evaluation of the reality.Nevertheless, slang is not a secret code, an English speaker understands it easily but does not consider it something quite correct. Knittlova concludes that it is therefore a distortion of style if a translator replaces the English slang by offensive words or even by vulgarism. A style of any written piece of work is affected both by the personality of the writer and by the period of history he lives in. Translation includes the bridging of time as well as the bridging of space.