On Literary Translations and Their Ideological Deformations

This study explores how Mokitimi employed compensation in producing literal translations of Sesotho proverbs in her book The Voice of the People (1997). The impetus for this study was our observation that generally, researchers tend to provide literal translations of their Sesotho excerpts, not only to give readers a taste of the foreignness of the Sesotho culture embedded in the proverbs but also to familiarise them with its unique and interesting features. However, the lack of one-to-one correspondence for concepts or words in the source text in the target language often poses challenges in achieving a genuine literal translation in some communicative contexts. Based on the methodological principles of qualitative research, this paper explores how Mokitimi used compensation in the literal English translations of Sesotho proverbs and examines the communicative context in which these strategies were employed to understand the complexities of producing a literal translation. The researchers extracted excerpts from the book to which the compensation strategy had been applied and analysed this qualitative data based on the descriptive and target-oriented approach. As a result of this investigation, we argue that Mokitimi’s compensation strategies effectively communicate the meaning of the source text in the English translations of selected Sesotho proverbs and that using compensation strategies minimises the chances of confusion for the target readers and improves their comprehension of the proverbs. We recommend further research on literal translation, as its dynamics and complexities in handling cultural concepts have not received enough attention.

PMC44 IS A LITERAL BACKTRANSLATION IN PRO DOCUMENTS ALWAYS THE BEST OPTION?

The quality of state-of-the-art machine translation systems have prompted a number of scholars to tap into the readiness of such systems for “literary” translation. However, studies on literary machine translation have not overtly stated what they consider as literature and mistakenly assume that literary translation is a matter of transferring meaning and/or form from one language into another. By approaching literature as art and literary translation as an artistic work of re-creation, we counterpoint, in this article, the notion that literary machine translation can be seen as an indisputable evolution within translation technology. Ethical concerns may well be utilitarian in studies to date, but by advocating for a deontological approach, we consider that aesthetical value, cultural mediation (which includes the use of paratexts), and authorship of literary translation (should) rank higher in our ethical assessments of the feasibility and actual contributions of literary machine translation.

As part of a wider project exploring literary translation in the United Kingdom, the present article profiles the three named postgraduate taught courses focusing exclusively on literary translation which are currently available at universities in the United Kingdom: the MA in Literary Translation at the University of East Anglia (UEA); the MA in Literary Translation Studies at the University of Warwick; and the MA in Audiovisual and Literary Translation at the University of Essex. After providing a concise summary of the situation regarding (literary) translator training in the British context, online sources are used to obtain information regarding the structure and course content of each of the three degree programmes under analysis. The findings are presented, contrasted, and discussed, before some proposals for further research are outlined.

Literary translation remains a debated topic within translation studies. While consensus exists for technical translation regarding competence and training, opinions differ for literary translation. This research places the concept of literary translation competence in historical context by analyzing two examples spanning 40 years. In 1975, István Bart initiated a discussion in the Hungarian magazine Élet és Irodalom on the status of literary translation and translators in Hungary. The study reviews contemporary ideals from that period. It then presents the PETRA-E Framework, a recent project outlining the knowledge, skills, and attitudes expected from literary translators at different career stages. As both a competence model and educational guide, PETRA-E defines qualification criteria for evaluating translation competence. The aim is to summarize evolving views on literary translation competence through these two case studies.

Literary translation is a type of translation, which requires a great commitment in realizing it. The differences that may be shared by the SL and TL make translation as a process a complicated and challenging one, especially when it comes to literary text translation. The messages, emotions and culture that the literature of a language shares sometimes seem almost difficult to be passed from one language to another one. This is a consequence of differences that the two different languages share in their construction and in their culture. This paper has been focused on the problems of equivalence while dealing with Albanian literary text translation to English, carried out by Albanian university students who study English Language and Literature. Empirical and qualitative are the research methods that have been used in this scientific paper. All these methods have verified the three hypotheses of this research as well as have found the answers to the questions on this research. In addition, the results reached from the three aforementioned research methods have helped in achieving the objectives and aims of this paper.The corpora that has been used in this research is the Albanian literary texts: “Ajkuna qan Omerin” from Kangë Kreshnikësh (Kreshink’s Songs). The text has been translated by Albanian students that study English Language and Literature at the University of Gjakova “Fehmi Agani”, Faculty of Philology, department of English language and Literature and at University of Prizren “Ukshin Hoti”, Faculty of Philology, department of English language and Literature. The translated versions were used as primary source materials for analysis. Another instrument used in this research is the questionnaire, consisting of two open-ended questions. One question aimed at identifying difficulties or challenges that students might have or face during their translation, whereas the second question asked them about the solutions that they might find when dealing with difficulties or challenges during Albanian literary text translation. Thus, the problems of equivalence during Albanian literary texts translation have been identified based on the analysis of students’ translation, and on their responses regarding difficulties or challenges that they faced or had during text translations. The work presents the most common strategies used by Albanian students during the process of literary text translation from Albanian into English.
 
 Received: 18 October 2021 / Accepted: 2 February 2022 / Published: 5 March 2022

The modern stage of the world development can be characterized by a significant increase in the role of science and technology, in connection with which the problem of translating scientific and technical texts is becoming more and more urgent. That is why, among the important problems of modern translation studies, the development of such a field as the translation of scientific and technical texts occupies an important place, since the flow of scientific information, the exchange of experience between specialists of various fields, and the organization of international symposia and conferences require the active work of qualified translators. An essential feature of the language of scientific and technical texts, which distinguishes them from colloquial language or the language of fiction, is the use of certain lexical, grammatical and stylistic techniques. Translation of literature in this direction requires special skills and abilities, as it is necessary to convey the accuracy and brevity of the expression of thought, on the one hand, and preserve strict logical consistency and completeness of expression on the other. Among the factors that make scientific and technical translation from English into Ukrainian difficult, it is necessary to include differences in the grammatical systems of languages, which necessitates mastering certain translation transformations, orienting oneself in ways and methods of translating unique constructions. Difficulties in translation include the presence of ambiguous terms, grammatical homonymy in the original language, preservation of genre and style features during translation, which vary depending on the type of text (a monograph, an article from a special magazine, a technical description, a patent, a technical reference book). Such researchers as V. I. Karaban and I. V. Korunets were engaged in studying the peculiarities and problems of translation of scientific and technical literature. But, unfortunately, the degree of study of the proposed topic is insufficient, since the techniques and methods of translation of the accompanying technical documentation have not been fully explored [5], [7]. The relevance of our research is due to the interest of scientists and translators in the problem of scientific and technical translation, increasing the significance of the translation of scientific and technical literature as a way of exchanging and spreading information in the world. In addition, the study of the main issues of translation of scientific and technical literature makes it possible to master the techniques, means and methods necessary to achieve an adequate, equivalent translation.

There is little doubt that Translating the Perception of Text: Literary Translation and Phenomenology will appeal more to scholars in literary studies than it will to translation scholars in general. This is presumably not something to which Clive Scott would object. He narrows the scope to literary translation in the subtitle, and the examples of translation discussed in the book are all literary-poetic. Throughout the book he draws on examples of translation of French poetry, which is his area of expertise (Apollinaire, Baudelaire, Mallarmé). The core theoretical literature for this volume will also primarily be familiar to colleagues in literary studies. The most obvious example is Merleau-Ponty, whose thought forms the backdrop and frame of the entire work, but one might also cite Barthes, Gadamer, Glissant, and Richard.In Translating the Perception of Text, Scott presents a theory and practice of translation that falls very much into what French (literary) translation theorists would call a “prospective” theory of translation. His theory emerges from the experience of translation practice; it is concerned with a literary-poetic practice; and it is essentially an interrogative act that does not start from the assumption that translation is communication. The main aim of Translating the Perception of Text is to answer a question that Scott asks on the very first page: “how should I handle language in such a way that the experience of (reading) the source text (ST) can emerge?” (1). The real achievement of this volume, I think, is that it pushes for an overhaul of current understanding of the task of the (literary) translator. Even readers and translators who reject some of his individual claims and particular ideas will find that the thrust of the work as a whole leaves a lasting impression. If all this does is serve to remind the translator not to translate as would a machine (word for word, from one language to another, searching for sameness), this is still a valuable contribution.The volume starts with an introduction and is then divided into two parts: “Part I: Merleau-Ponty's Phenomenology of Language” and “Part II: Literary Translation as Phenomenology.” In the introduction, Scott touches on some tropes of contemporary translation theory, including the move away from the context of national standard languages, a recognition of multilingualism in both source and target texts, and the conception of translation as potentiality. At the same time, he has some very interesting ideas about what translation should be. For example, he insists here and elsewhere in the book that translations are not written for those with no access to the source language or source text (15–17), and he also argues that it is “translation's business to translate langue into langage” (10). We see an example of how this would work later in the book, in a discussion of the Zukofskys' translations of Catullus: “We begin to understand how the translator can begin to work towards the signifier of the source text, rather than towards its signified, and in so doing multiply the Englishes present in the text, in terms both of history and register” (100). Part I contains just one chapter (“Merleau-Ponty: Language, Painting and Translation”), in which Scott engages with the most relevant parts of Merleau-Ponty's writing for his own work on translation. This chapter is a necessary set-up for the rest of the book, but as such it is probably the least engaging for those interested in translation.Part II, on “Literary Translation as Phenomenology,” contains five chapters, which examine in turn “Overwriting and the Overwritten Text,” “Listening and Speaking: Sounds,” “Listening and Speaking: Rhythm,” “Writing and Speaking,” and “Translating the Time and Space of Languages.” These are the chapters that will be of most interest to the scholar and that I think will prove most inspiring to translators. Their titles alone reflect several key themes in Scott's translatory thought. The most obvious of these is the idea that translation responds to the reader's own synesthetic experience of the source text by translating toward other, or multiple, levels. Scott's text comes alive in these chapters because he is able to work simultaneously with the large theoretical toolbox he has set up, but also on translation itself. It is worth noting that it is not just phenomenology that informs his work. His interest in the materiality of language means that technical texts from linguistics provide him at times with analytical tools and terminology to discuss particular translation choices. This is done generally successfully, such as when he compares the formal properties of elle rougit and she blushed (63-4), but a linguist might question his selection of theoretical texts because it feels at times somewhat haphazard. Unsurprisingly, Scott is most insightful when reading his own translations, which often go through multiple versions in each discussion. This is not just because more abstract ideas become clearer through exemplification, but also because his conception of translation as “translationwork”—“the textual equivalent of the Pompidou Centre” (108)—rests on this process of opening up and transforming.To say that Translating the Perception of Text will appeal more to literary scholars than it will to translation scholars is not to say that translation scholars should not read this work. In fact, they will get a lot out of Scott's book if they can get past the particularity of this style of literary-theoretic writing. His own formal choices might feel particularly “foreignizing” unless they are understood to be reinforcing his argument; this includes his use of diagrams, tables, doodles, phonetic symbols, and the uneven use of abbreviations which might at first look like bad copyediting. Similarly, they will need to accept the significance he accords to certain translation choices, such as his fondness for the use of ▲ (104–5, 119–20). Finally, there are a number of unanswered questions that translation scholars are left to answer for themselves. This includes, crucially, how Scott's conception of translation really relates to imitation, and also what would happen if we tried to apply his theory and practice in a domain other than the literary-poetic.

This paper is about two extreme methods of translation: free and literal translations. These two methods are important in differentiating between the different translated texts especially because there are numerous other methods between these two extremes.
 This paper aimed at presenting a detailed explanation of two important methods of translation: literal and free. The aim is to show the difference between them, and which one is better for using in translating texts.
 To do this, the researcher wrote three sections. The first section introduced the concepts to be researched. The second section reviewed the different methods of translation. The third section showed the difference between the two major methods of translation, namely literal and free translation.
 The study concluded that literal translation is risky because it ignores the target language. It does not take into account the grammatical distinctions between the source and target languages, even if they may come from different language families. Conversely, in the context of free translation, the translator translates freely without constraints. He is not strictly constrained by the source language rules. The type of text or context may sometimes entail the method of translation to be chosen by the translator.

Beyond the Mother Tongue: The Postmonolingual Condition

The article discusses the problems related to the specification of the levels of linguistic personality of a literary translation. Translator’s linguistic personality is a subtype of a linguistic personality, which is always limited to a special social function and conditioned by the ideas, style, linguistic peculiarities and preferences of the source text author. Therefore, a literary translator represents the reality that was perceived through the prism of a source text author’s mentality and cognitive experience, but with the attraction of own cognitive baggage and understanding of the foreign culture. The topicality of the research is conditioned by the necessity of definition of key components of s linguistic personality as essential elements of a literary text translation from the point of view of pragmatics. Moreover, the development of linguopersonology contributed seriously to the development of anthropological linguistics, therefore, the literary translation, being a part of anthropocentric paradigm, needs more detailed elaboration of a linguistic personality of a literary translator as this sphere is insufficiently researched. According to the understanding of a literary text as a complicated and multilevel phenomena representing a secondary objective reality and involving various contexts, it is necessary to take into consideration that a literary translator is also a secondary linguistic personality whose main goal is to represent an adequate text in the target language. Basing on the functional approaches, the levels (which are: linguocreative, pragmatic, cognitive, ideological and socio-cultural) reflecting the specificity of literary contexts were defined and justified. Each level is illustrated with the relevant examples that provide practical application of the developed theory. It is also emphasized that the differences in perception of a linguistic picture of the world by different cultures may affect the adequacy of translation, therefore, only linguistic knowledge is not enough for developing good translation skills in the sphere of a literary translation.

Machine translation is widely used in people’s daily life and production, occupying an important position. In order to improve the accuracy of literary intelligent translation, this study explores literary intelligent translation based on improved optimization model. According to semantic features, machine translation was used to create a semantic ontology optimization model that includes an encoder and a decoder, and a conversion layer including a forward neural network layer, a residual connection and a normalization layer were added to the semantic ontology optimization model between the encoder and the decoder, the conversion layer was used to achieve grammatical conversion, which improves the accuracy of intelligent translation of the semantic ontology optimization model. Results show that the BLEU value of using this method to translate literary sentences can reach 17.23 when the number of training steps is 8000, and the training time is low, the translation result has a low correlation misalignment rate, which can meet the user’s literary translation needs.

Considering that, in general, translation programs in the United States for the most part concentrate on translation theory, and when occasionally they teach the practice of translating, their focus is often on training professional translators for non-academic purposes, teaching the practice of literary translation and training literary translators, for all intents and purposes, seems to be neglected. This is particularly true concerning classical Persian literature, with a tradition of more than a millennium. Likewise, adequate attention has not been paid to rendering modern Persian literature, despite its indisputable quality and high volume. In this article, after a brief discussion of my own outlook and philosophy of literary translation and theoretical view of translating based on my experiences as a practicing literary translator who taught translation courses for over forty years, I will focus on teaching the practice of literary translation and provide a description of the methodologies I have used for training several generations of translators. I will then conclude with a discussion of the target audience of translations and the conflicting outlooks of practicing literary translators and translation critics.

UKRAINIAN TRANSLATION WORKSHOP IN PRIASHIV
 Ukrajinský jazyk a kultúra v umeleckom a odbornom preklade v stredoeurópskom priestore : Zbornik príspevkov z medzinárodného vedeckého seminára, ktorý sa konal dňa 27.9.2017 na Katedre ukrajinistiky Inštitutu ukrajinistiky a stredoeurópskych štúdií Filozofickej fakulty Prešovskej univerzity / Filozofická fakulta Prešovskej univerzity v Prešove ; ed.: Jarmila Kredátusová. Prešov: Filozofická fakulta Prešovskej univerzity v Prešove, 2018. 216 p. (Opera Translatologica; 6/2018).
 
 Ukrainian modern academic traditions in the Western Transcarpathian area of Priashiv (Presov in Slovak) go back to the 19-century intellectual institutions of the Ukrainian Catholic Church of the Byzantine Rite. After WW2, the main centre of Ukrainian education was the Pegagogical College which was later transformed into a separate university. This university helps the local Ukrainians maintain and develop their rich traditions of learning and research. It is no surprise that the very university hosted the International academic workshop “The Ukrainian Language and Culture in the Literary and Sci-Tech Translation of Middle European Space” (27 September 2017). The workshop brought together specialists in Ukrainian Studies from Ukraine, Slovakia, Czechia and Poland. One year later the conference volume was finalized and published.
 The first part of the book contains the historical and bibliographical essays which record the history of Ukrainian-Slovak and Ukrainian-Czech literary translation. Jarmila Kredátusová’s task was to present the outline of Slovak-Ukrainian and Ukrainian-Slovak translation which started progressing rather dynamically only after WW2. She presents its history divided into decades and discusses specific features and some statistical data from each period. In the end, she also describes today’s hardships of this translation in Slovakia (relations with readership, translation criticism, professional qualification) which are similar to ones in Ukraine. The history of Ukrainian-Czech translation is longer and richer. The existing extended papers cover the pre-1989 time rather well, that is why Rita Lyons Kindlerová and Iryna Zabiyaka dedicated their articles to the editions and tendencies of the recent decades. Rita Lyons Kindlerová offers the analysis of translated literature from Ukrainian into Czech and pinpoints the turning moment of the year 2001 when Ukrainian literature started reentering Czech society and have promising prospects among readers. Conversely, Iryna Zabiyaka studies the literary presentation of Czechia in Ukraine and considers the most important translations and main tendencies. She also designs a list of Czech authors whose writings are worth translating into Ukrainian. At the same time, she characterizes the pitfalls of Ukraine’s translation market from the viewpoint of these translations. Since we lack translation bibliographies and insightful translation monographs, the above articles contribute to a larger possible publication in future which will reveal more sociological dimensions of Ukrainian-Slovak and Ukrainian-Czech translation.
 Papers in the second part focus on literary translation. Liudmyla Siryk outlined similarities in the translation theories of Mykola Zerov and Maksym Rylskyi. Thus, she has proven that Rylskyi’s views were the further progress of Zerov’s ones, and we have to remember it may be a gesture of respect or substitution: Zerov was murdered in 1937, and Rylskyi fulfilled his duty to preserve and develop the fundamental ideas of his friend and colleague. Anna Choma-Suwała explored the facets of literary interpretations and connections between Oleh Olzhych (Kandyba) and Józef Łobodowski. Łobodowski’s translations did not only discover the intellectual poetry by Oleh Olzhych, but they are also a contribution to the Polish-Ukrainian cultural contacts and cooperation. Yuliya Yusyp-Yakymovych addresses to verse translation by investigating the specific features of rendering intonation, rhythm, meter, repetitions, onomatopoeia and aesthetic norms in translation. Adriana Amir’s contribution deals with the Slovak-language translation of Vasyl Shkliar’s historical novel ‘The Black Raven’ (done by Vladimír Čerevka) and tackles the issues of reflecting lexical means for showing the real historical context which border on the shaky axiological limits of political correctness. The main aesthetic form of contemporary writing is the usage of non-standard language which is abundant in modern Ukrainian literature. That is why Veronika Dadajová regarded incorrect figures of the literary sociolect as a topical point of literary translation nowadays. Meanwhile, Viera Žemberová interprets Yuriy Andrukhovych’s literary and aesthetic experience for Slovak readers by analyzing his novel ‘Recreations’ whose Slovak translation was published in Priashiv in 2003.
 Sci-tech translation is focused on in the third part containing articles on rendering terms and grammatical problems of interlingual translation. The paper by Mária Čižmárová will serve as a practical tool for Ukrainian-Slovak translators and interpreters who will have to render idioms with the floristic component. Similarly practical are the contributions covering two branches of Ukrainian-Slovak specialized translation: commercial translation (by Lesia Budnikova and Valeriya Chernak) and legal translation (by Jarmila Kredátusová and Valeriya Chernak). The study of loan words is the topic of the paper by Jana Kesselová which offers the complex view of loan processes in today’s Slovak. However, it would be desirable to discuss Ukrainian sources as well. It is rather a rare case when one volume consists of papers discussing both literary translation and sci-tech translation, but in the presented book, this amalgamation is quite natural and shows the multifacetedness of Ukrainian translation in Slovakia.
 The informational contents of all the papers are rather high, and they will be useful for practical research by scholars, translators and critics. The good balance of early ‘classical’ and recent publications creates a complete picture both of the coverage of the topic in the chronological dynamics and the presentation of the academic traditions of institutions where the papers were produced.
 This conference volume is an important contribution to Ukrainian Translation Studies in the area of Priashiv which has been shaped and developed by the publications in the literary magazine ‘Dukla’ (published since 1953), the proceedings of the Cultural Union of Ukrainian Workers (‘Naukovi zapysky KSUT’ in the 1980s to the early 1990s) and other editions of the Ukrainian Division of the Slovak Pedagogical Publishing House. The book will be useful for really wide readership in academic, literary and professional communities.

Book reviewers play a gatekeeping role in a given literary community, and their reviews provide insights into their attitudes and reactions towards literary works. This study aims to explore to what extent literary translation and translators are visible in book reviews of literary works translated into English and in what aspects book reviewers comment on the translation of literary works. 84 reviews were analysed against a construct for evaluating reviews of translated literary works. The results indicate that, compared with previous findings, the role of literary translation and translators is increasingly visible. The results also suggest that, different from previous studies, the proportion of comments with substantiations is increasing and reviewers begin to focus more on the translation process than on the translation product. Such a change signals a shift in the expectations of the gatekeepers of the anglophone literary community about the reception of foreign literary works from a product-oriented criterion emphasising readability to a more comprehensive and dynamic model. This shift unmasks the role of literary translation and translators in the international circulation of literary works and may reduce the severity of the anglophone cultural hegemony resulting from the prior preference for fluent domestication of foreign works.