An examination of the extent of equivalence of an author’s literary stylistic features in two Turkish translations of a short story in English
Abstract
A distinctive personal literary style, unique to
every author, is the foremost characteristic that gives a literary work its
literary quality. Each style is a composite of syntactic and semantic
components that evidence the literary identity of an author. In Translation
Studies, style is the element that poses a great difficulty to translators with
regard to establishment of equivalence between the source text and its
translation. Readers who are able to read a text both in its original language
and its translation are well aware of this fact as they notice the degree of
losses of the stylistic features of the original text in its translated
version. Thus, inaccurate or inadequate transfer of stylistic elements leads to
a decrease in the flavor of the original literary work. The problem arises from
the fact that sometimes in the translation process, not all elements which
altogether create the exclusive style of an author, are given the due attention
by translators who do not primarily intend to achieve a reasonable level of
stylistic equivalence between the two texts. In this
study, two Turkish translations of a short story titled The Denunciation
by the American author Ernest Miller Hemingway will be compared with the
original text and with each other in respect to the level of stylistic
equivalence. The two translations and the source-text will be subjected to
a descriptive stylistic analysis to highlight the necessity of equivalent
transfer of stylistic features of a literary text in the translation process in
order to preserve the original literary savor.
Keywords
Kaynakça
- Aksoy, B. (2001). Çeviride eşdeğerlik kavramı. [The Notion of equivalence in translation]. Çeviribilim ve Uygulamaları Dergisi 11, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Mütercim-Tercümanlık Bölümü, 1-6. Aksoy, N. B. (2002). Geçmişten günümüze yazın çevirisi. [Literary translation from past to present]. (1st Ed.). Ankara, Turkey: İmge Kitabevi. Baker, M. (2018). In other words: a coursebook on translation. (3rd Ed.). New York, USA: Routledge. Bulut, A. (2000). Çeviri metnin değerlen(dir)mesi: metinsel (eş) değer(lik) anahtarları. [Evaluation of translated text: keys to textual equivalence]. Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Edebiyat Fakültesi, Çeviribilim ve Uygulamaları Dergisi, 10, 73-87. Carr, A. (2018). Write effectively! Use tone, style and pacing for focus and readability. Retrieved from: https://owlcation.com/humanities/How-to-Begin-Sentences-and-Paragraphs-for-Effect-Focus-and-Readability-Tone-and-Style-Vary-Pace-Beware-Repetition Catford, J.C. (1978). A linguistic theory of translation: An essay in applied linguistics. (5th Ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Hermans, T. (2009). Translation in systems: Descriptive and system-oriented approaches explained. Manchester, UK: St. Jerome Publishing. Hermans, T. (2013). What is (not) translation? In Millán, C. & Bartrina, F. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies (pp. 75-87). New York, USA: Routledge. Leech, G & Short, M. (2007). Style in fiction: a linguistic introduction to English fictional prose. (2nd Ed.) UK: Pearson Education Limited. Leech, G. (2013). Language in literature style and foregrounding. London, UK & New York, USA: Routledge. Malmkjær, K. (2013). Where are we? (from Holmes’s map until now). In Millán, C. & Bartrina, F. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies (pp. 31-44). New York, USA: Routledge. Nord, C. (2013). Functionalism in translation studies. In Millán, C. & Bartrina, F. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Translation Studies (pp. 201-212). New York, USA: Routledge. Önal, M. (2008). Edebî dil ve üslup. [Literary language and style]. Atatürk Üniversitesi Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü Dergisi, 36, 23-47. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.14222/Turkiyat749 Panou, D. (2013). Equivalence in translation theories: A critical evaluation. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(1), 1-6. doi:10.4304/tpls.3.1.1-6 Pym, A. (2014). Exploring translation theories. (2nd Ed.). Oxfordshire, UK & New York, USA: Routledge. Reiss, K and Vermeer, H.J. (2014). Towards a general theory of translational action: Skopos Theory explained. (Tr.) Christiane Nord. New York, USA: Routledge. Ricoeur, P. (2004/2006). On translation. (Tr.) Eileen Brennan. Oxfordshire, UK & New York, USA: Routledge. Rozakis, L. E. (2003). The complete idiot’s guide to grammar & style. (2nd Ed.). New York, USA: Alpha. Snell-Hornby, M. (1988/1995). Translation studies: An integrated approach. Amsterdam, Netherlands & Philadelphia, USA: John Benjamins. Snell-Hornby, M. (2006). The turns of translation studies: New paradigms or shifting viewpoints? Amsterdam, Netherlands & Philadelphia, USA: John Benjamins. Tanrıkulu, Lokman (2010). Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar’ın "Huzur" romanının Almanca çevirisi ("Seelenfrieden") örneğinde edebi çeviri eleştirisi. [Criticism of literary translation in the example of the German translation of the novel “Tranquility” by Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar]. (Doctoral Dissertation). No: 279801. Retrieved from: https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/tezSorguSonucYeni.jsp Toury, G. (2012). Descriptive translation studies – and beyond. (2nd Ed.). Amsterdam, Netherlands & Philadelphia, USA: John Benjamins. Wendland, E. R. (2012). Exploring translation theories: a review from the perspective of Bible translation. Journal of Northwest Semitic Languages, 38(2), 89-128. Wilss, W. (1982). The Science of Translation. Stuttgart, Germany: Gunter Nar.
Ayrıntılar
Birincil Dil
İngilizce
Konular
Dilbilim
Bölüm
Araştırma Makalesi
Yazarlar
İhsan Özdemir
*
Bu kişi benim
0000-0001-7410-0248
Türkiye
Yayımlanma Tarihi
21 Kasım 2019
Gönderilme Tarihi
6 Ekim 2019
Kabul Tarihi
20 Kasım 2019
Yayımlandığı Sayı
Yıl 2019