Intralingual (Re)translations of Foreign words and phrases in the texts translated into Ottoman Turkish

Abstract

The Alphabet Reform of 1928 necessitated transcription/intralingual translation of works written in Ottoman Turkish in order to pass them to posterity. Reprints made in the new alphabet were soon to replace old books as the law only allowed book printing in Latin alphabet as of 1 January 1929. This intralingual translation activity has continued in full throttle until our day. At first, authors of the Ottoman period did intralingual (self) translations to continue their fame and remain readable in the Republic period. Similarly, the ageing words were simplified in intralingual translation efforts in the new era. However, there are translated works besides authored books to be transferred to the new alphabet. During intralingual translations of Ottoman translated works, the source text may contain lots of foreign words and/or phrases that are written as they are or as pronounced by the authors of the source texts. This may result in different renderings of the same foreign words by the translators. We find it important to problematize this subject as there is increased interest in our day on translated works by the Ottoman authors. This study aims to describe the strategies adopted by the translators, by examining how foreign words and phrases were rendered in the two transcriptions and/or intralingual translations of Ahmed Midhat Efendi’s Niza-i İlm ü Din – İslam ve Ulûm. The first intralingual translation of the Ottoman Turkish translated text was done by Mustafa Yıldırım in 2018. It was followed by Bünyamin Tan’s intralingual translation in 2021.

Keywords

• Transcription/transliteration
• intralingual translation
• foreign words
• translation strategies

Kaynakça

1. Ahmed Midhat Efendi. (1896-1900). Nizâ-ı İlm ü Din – İslâm ve Ulûm I-IV. Tercüman-ı Hakikat Matbaası. Istanbul.
2. Allen, G. (2002). Intertextuality. Routledge. London and New York.
3. Bengi Öner, I. (1990). A Re-evaluation of the Concept of Equivalence in the Literary Translations of Ahmed Midhat Efendi: A Linguistic Perspective. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Ankara. Hacettepe University.
4. Berk Albachten, Ö. (2012). Intralingual Translation as ‘Modernization’ of the Language: The Turkish Case. Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, 21(2): 257-271.
5. Berk Albachten, Ö. (2014). Intralingual Translation: Discussions within Translation Studies and the Case of Turkey. In A Companion to Translation Studies (pp. 573-585). Edited by Sandra Bermann and Catherine Porter. Wiley Blackwell. West Sussex.
6. Baydere, M., Karadağ, A. B. (2019). Çalıkuşu’nun Diliçi Çeviri Serüveni Üzerine Betimleyici Bir Çalışma [A Descriptive Study on the Intralingual Translation Adventure of Çalıkuşu]. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, (Ö5): 314-333.
7. Bozkurt, E., Karadağ, A. B. (2013). Ön Sözleri Tanıklığında Bir Gazeteci, Romancı, Oyun Yazarı, Dergici, Sözlükbilimci, Dilbilimci, Ansiklopedist, Şârih ve Çevirmen: Şemseddin Sâmi [Şemseddin Sami as Attested by His Prologues: A Journalist, a Novelist, a Playwright, a Magazinist, a Lexicographer, a Linguist, an Encyclopaedist, an Annotator, and a Translator]. İstanbul Üniversitesi Dilbilim Dergisi, 27(1): 27-53.
8. Bozkurt, E. (2014). 1908-1929 Yılları Arasında Batı Dillerinden Osmanlı Türkçesine Çevrilen Romanlarda Mukaddime Geleneği [Tradition of Prologue in Novels Translated into Ottoman Turkish from Western Languages between 1908 and 1928]. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Istanbul. Yıldız Technical University.

9. Bozkurt, S. (2007). Tracing Discourse in Prefaces to Turkish Translation of Fiction by Remzi Publishing House in the 1930s and 1940s. Unpublished MA Thesis. Istanbul. Boğaziçi University.
10. Draper , J. W. (1874). History of the Conflict between Religion and Science. D. Appleton and Company. New York.
11. Draper, J. W. (1893). Les Conflits de la Science et de la Religion. 9th ed. Ancienne Librairie Germer Baillière et Cie. Paris.
12. Durmaz Hut, A. (2019). Çevirinin Yansımaları Olarak ‘Çeviriyazıların’ Farklı Adlandırılışları Üzerine Bir Çalışma [A Study on Different Classifications of ‘Transcriptions’ as Reflections of Translation]. In Çeviribilimde Araştırmalar [Research in Translation Studies] (pp. 177-196). Edited by Seda Taş. Hiperyayın. Istanbul.
13. Eker-Roditakis, A. (2019). Repackaging, Retranslation, and Intersemiotic Translation: A Turkish Novel in Greece. In Perspectives on Retranslation: Ideology, Paratexts, Methods (pp. 67-86). Edited by Özlem Berk Albachten and Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar. Routledge. New York and London.
14. Genette, G. (1997). Paratexts Thresholds of Interpretation. Translated by Jane E. Lewin. Cambridge University Press. New York.
15. Gökduman, U. C., Karadağ, A. B. (2019). Retraduction et Paratexte : Les Retraductions Interlinguales des Misérables dans l’Empire Ottoman et Leurs Retraductions Intralinguales dans la Turquie Moderne. Moderna språk, 115(4): 50-70.
16. Işıklar Koçak, M., Erkul Yağcı, A. S. (2019). Readers and Retranslation: Transformation in Readers’ Habituses in Turkey from the 1930s to the 2010s. In Perspectives on Retranslation: Ideology, Paratexts, Methods (pp. 129-147). Edited by Özlem Berk Albachten and Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar. Routledge. New York and London.
17. Kalem Bakkal, A. (2019). Intralingual Translation Has No Name in Turkey: Conceptual Crowdedness in Intralingual Translation. transLogos Translation Studies Journal, 2(2): 48-69.
18. Karadağ, A. B. (2014a). Çevirmenin Tanıklığında Tanzimattan II. Meşrutiyete Kadar Çeviri Tarihini Yeniden Okumak I-II [Rereading the History of Translation from Tanzimat to Second Constitutional Period in the Witness of Translators I-II]. Diye. Istanbul.
19. Karadağ, A. B. (2014b). Çeviri Tarihimizde Fennî Romanlarla Bir Kültür Repertuarı Oluşturmak [Forming a Cultural Repertoire in Translated Literary History by Means of Scientific Novels]. İstanbul Üniversitesi Çeviribilim Dergisi, 6(2): 45-73.
20. Karadağ, A. B. (2014c). Tanzimat’tan II. Meşrutiyet’e Çeviri Roman Hâllerine Ön Söz/Son Söz Tanıklıkları [Translated Novels from Tanzimat to Second Constitutional Era as Attested by Prologues and Epilogues]. In Metnin Hâlleri: Osmanlı’da Telif, Tercüme ve Şerh [Modes of Text: Indigenous Writing, Translation, and Commentary in the Ottoman Period] (pp. 99-145). Edited by Hatice Aynur, Müjgân Çakır & Hanife Koncu. Klasik. Istanbul.
21. Konar, A. H. (2019). Elucidating or (Un)breaking the Chain? Intralingual Translations and Retranslations of Şeyh Galib’s Hüsn ü Aşk. In Studies from a Retranslation Culture – The Turkish Context (pp. 27-40). Edited by Özlem Berk Albachten and Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar. Springer. Singapore.
22. Koş, A. N. (2007). Analysis of the Paratexts of Simone de Beauvoir’s Works in Turkish. Translation Research Projects I (pp. 59-68). Edited by Anthony Pym and Alexander Prekrestenko. Intercultural Studies Group-Taragona.
23. Oktar, L., Kansu Yetkiner, N. (2012). Different Times, Different Themes in Lady Chatterley’s Lover: A Diachronic Discourse Analysis of Translator’s Prefaces. Neohelicon, Acta Comparationis Litterarum Universarum, 39(2): 337-364.
24. Öztürk Baydere, H. (2019). Geçmişin Çeviri Yoluyla Anlatısında Güç Mücadeleleri [Power Struggles in the Narration of the Past Through Translation]. RumeliDE Dil ve Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, (15): 401-412.
25. Paker, S. (2009). Turkish Tradition. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (pp. 550-558). 2nd ed. Edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha. Routledge. London.
26. Tahir-Gürçağlar, Ş. (2002). What Texts Don’t Tell: The Uses of Paratexts in Translation Research. In Crosscultural Transgressions: Research Models in Translation Studies II: Historical and Ideologial Issues (pp. 44-60). Edited by Theo Hermans. St. Jerome Publishing. Manchester.
27. Tan, B. (2021). Nizâ’-ı İlm ü Dîn İslâm ve Ulûm Bilim ve Din Çatışması ve İslâm ve İlimler. Çizgi Kitabevi. Konya.
28. Yıldırım, M. (2018). Ahmed Midhat Efendi’nin Nizâ-ı İlm ü Din Adlı Eseri. Gece Akademi. Ankara.