AURELIJA LEONAVIČIENĖ

Kauno technologijos universitetas

Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas

R. GARY EUROPEAN UPBRINGING: NORMATIVE TRANSLATION EQUIVALENCE

Every year, an increasing number of works of fiction and nonfiction are published in translation in Lithuania. Translations of literary texts open up diverse cultures to readers and carry aesthetic thought forward in another linguistic environment. The language of translated texts cultivates readers’—especially children’s and adolescents’—feel for language and sense of style; therefore, translating literary texts is first and foremost a cultural act, and only then a commercial one. This claim is supported by an observation made by literary scholar Vytautas Kubilius at the inaugural meeting of the Translators’ Center: books in translation, rather than original works, had a decisive influence on Lithuanian ways of thinking and possibilities of literary expression¹.

In 2008, an international academic conference, “Romain Gary – A Man of Eastern and Western Europe: Writer-Resister, Lyrical Jester, Seer,” devoted to the work of R. Gary (E. Ajar), one of the most renowned French writers of the twentieth century, was held at Vytautas Magnus University. Literary scholars and critics from various countries (D. Bellos, N. Gelas, N. Rocton, V. Skrupskelytė, and others) discussed the distinctive style of R. Gary’s works, the diversity of their themes, genres, and motifs, and the relevance of his work to contemporary society². The writer’s work did not go unnoticed by Lithuanian publishers either, who quickly brought out translations of many of his works within a relatively short time: Life Before Us (La vie devant soi), 1992, 2008, 2009; Promise at Dawn (La promesse de l’aube), 1999, 2009; European Upbringing (Éducation européenne), 2001; Your Ticket Is No Longer Valid (Au-delà de cette limite votre ticket n’est plus valable), 2008; Woman’s Light (Clair de femme), 2009; Kites (Les Cerfs-volants), 2010, and others.

This article examines the translation of the first novel that made the writer famous, European Upbringing, which reached Lithuanian readers one of the

¹ Kubilius V. 2003: Vertėjai kelia didelę kultūros naštą. Kalba, pasakyta per steigiamąjį Vertėjų centro susirinkimą. – Literatūra ir menas, 2003 11 07.

² For more details, see Works and Days 51, 2009, 61–249.

A. LEONAVIČIENĖ. R. Gary Europietiško auklėjimo norminis vertimo ekvivalentiškumas

257

the first (the translation of the book Life Before Us had been published several years earlier). The aim of the study is to analyze the normative equivalence of the 227-page translation of this novel and, by comparing it with the original text, to determine whether translator Algirdas Krančiukas’s translation enabled R. Gary’s European Education to speak to Lithuanian readers in a semantically and stylistically equivalent way—that is, to convey the text’s aesthetic communication and the distinctive features of its individual artistic style. In keeping with this aim, and with the expression of the aforementioned work and its translation selected as the object of study, several tasks are set: 1) to discuss theoretically the equivalence of a translated text and one of its types—normative translation equivalence; 2) to examine the research material (the translation and the original text) in terms of normative equivalence, collect data for analysis, and assess them quantitatively and qualitatively; 3) to examine and summarize the findings of the study. The study employed comparative, quantitative, and linguistic analysis, as well as descriptive methods. The theoretical section of the article draws on the foundational and recent works of representatives of various translation theories (E. Nida, W. Koller, P. Newmark, B. Osimo, M. Baker, et al.), stylistics researchers (K. Župerka, V. Žilinskienė, et al.), and language-culture specialists (A. Pupkis, R. Miliūnaitė, et al.). The study is relevant because of the great popularity of R. Gary’s works in Lithuania, the considerable attention literary critics have paid to this author’s writing and language, and the need to promote the development of translation criticism in the country and improve translation quality.

1. GENERAL CONCEPT OF TRANSLATION EQUIVALENCE

Translation theories seek to establish and define certain criteria for a good translation that corresponds to the original text; the question of translation equivalence therefore inevitably arises. The concept of equivalence depends on what a given translation theory considers to be the unit and object of translation, how it treats the translation process and its purpose, and which philosophical position (Aristotelian or Platonic) it adopts when discussing language. The theory of regular correspondences in translation (J. I. Recker), long established in Lithuania, and the theory of translation based on structural linguistics (A. V. Fiodorov, G. Mounin, W. Koller, et al.) regarded a text as an equivalent translation if its individual linguistic units had been equivalently translated from the source language, taking into account the characteristics of the translation culture and the style of the text. In these translation theories, textual equivalence was understood as the sum of all equivalent units of the translated tex-

258

KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83

t. The structuralist approach to translation did not always make it possible to convey the meaning and spirit of the whole text, or its additional meanings, and posed the risk of taking an excessively formalized approach to translation.

E. Nida, creator of the theory of dynamic translation equivalence, who emphasized the importance of semantic components and provided a theoretical basis for the transformational model of translation and the method of componential analysis, believed that an equivalent translation is a text that renders the original through the closest natural equivalents, first semantically and then stylistically, taking the addressee and their response into account (1989: 229–231). Translation equivalence is described somewhat differently in situational translation theory: the equivalence of the original and translated texts is based on the equivalence of linguistic situations across different cultures, with attention paid to the importance of the linguistic and non-linguistic (extralinguistic) situation (J. P. Vinay, J. Darbelnet, V. G. Gak, J. C. Catford). Representatives of sociolinguistic translation theory (M. Pergnier, et al.) worked from the premise that the historical and social conditions of communication participants’ language, as well as their speech codes, differ; consequently, achieving equivalence between an original and its translation requires ensuring that the social codes of the message coincide—that is, that the reader understands and recognizes the translation appropriately. In this theory, translation equivalence was based on the identity of social language codes.

Interpretive translation theory (M. Lederer, D. Seleskovitch, et al.), unlike earlier translation theories based on Aristotle’s theory of signs, in which translation is regarded as proceeding from means to ends, drew on a hermeneutic conception of language and viewed language as a creative activity (logos) in the Platonic sense; it therefore treated translation as the interpretation and recreation of a text. Representatives of this theory raised—and continue to raise (F. Israël, F. Herbulot)—questions of translation equivalence, the importance of textual meaning, and textual interpretation. They consider an equivalent translation to be an original text conveyed through cognitive and emotional equivalents (Lederer 1994: 50–55).

A different conception of translation equivalence was put forward by communicative translation theory (O. Kade, P. Newmark, et al.). Its representatives, as it were, regrouped all translation theories into two categories: a) semantic translation theories, influenced in one way or another by E. Nida’s theoretical thought, and b) communicative translation theory. In the latter, equivalence between the original and translated texts is associated with the aim of achieving effective communication and the channel linking addresser and addressee, which makes it possible to clarify the meaning of the text and anticipate the response of an addressee in a particular period and society. This view indicates that, in communicative translation theory, equivalence is based less on semantics than on

A. LEONAVIČIENĖ. R. Gary Europietiško auklėjimo norminis vertimo ekvivalentiškumas

259

rhetorical equivalence. A similar approach is adopted in other pragmatic translation theories, which focus on the text’s internal and external reality and various levels of context: a) the context of the circumstances of communication, b) the situational context, c) the interactional context, d) the epistemic context, and so on. Translation equivalence in these theories is described using certain pragmatic criteria. For example, in skopos translation theory (K. Reiss, H. J. Vermeer, et al.), the basis of translation equivalence is the fulfilment of the purpose of the original text.

However varied the concept and interpretation of textual equivalence in translation theories may be, a text is always realized through particular linguistic means. The issue of language quality therefore inevitably becomes important. Translation criticism often raises questions about the suitability of linguistic and stylistic (register and genre) devices, compliance with standard-language norms, and the appropriateness of choosing a social language code, among other matters. In evaluating the overall equivalence of a translated text, contemporary translation criticism examines the text as a whole, its purpose and communicative content, pragmatic aspects, sociocultural context, semantic content, and language quality. This makes it possible to consider together several types of textual equivalence: 1) content, 2) functional, 3) communicative, 4) pragmatic, 5) situational, 6) formal, and 7) normative (Leonavičienė 2010: 16–20).

2. NORMATIVE EQUIVALENCE – ONE OF THE TYPES OF TRANSLATION EQUIVALENCE

The term normative equivalence needs to be examined in greater detail. Translation theory has long discussed the fact that translating a text is not merely a linguistic act, that a text cannot be regarded as an objective given, nor the reader as an independent subject. The aim of translation and, as phenomenological philosophy maintains, “interpretation involves a dialectical process encompassing the interests of the reader and the autonomy of the text. To sacrifice either pole of this continuum is to misunderstand the text. <...> However, the task of interpretation is not to try to reconstruct the world of the text, but to allow the text to speak to the reader’s interests” (Mickūnas, Steward 1994: 173). In order for the text to speak to the reader and be properly understood, the translator must use the most important tool—language. Its use cannot be chaotic or an end in itself, disregarding the rules of the translation language system, its norms, usage tendencies, and the language

260

KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83

use of stylistic and genre-specific means of expression. Observing all these considerations helps foster effective communication with the reader (addressee) and meet their expectations, which in turn determines normative translation equivalence.

One of the most important criteria for normative translation equivalence is adherence to language norms. Some language norms are codified (established by scholars), while others are uncodified (certain established rules and patterns of language use—the actual usage of the language). A violation of codified language norms is considered an error in the translation language. Such violations may result from the influence of sociolects, professional dialects, dialects, and the foreign source language. Errors of the latter kind—the transfer of elements of the source language’s formal system into a translation-language text—have been discussed by E. Nida, a classic of translation theory. Drawing on extensive translation practice, the creator of dynamic equivalence theory argued that elements of the source language’s formal system most often appear in translated texts when: 1) translators are “foreigners who do not know the translation language sufficiently well” and therefore, being unfamiliar with its structures, inevitably transfer into the translation source-language structures they know; 2) a translator may be linguistically biased: out of excessive respect for the source language, “they try to include too many formal correspondences in the translated text,” so that “the result is a translationese text”; 3) a translator has a penchant for the exotic and gives preference to a source language that took great effort to learn, and therefore, by assigning undue importance to the source language’s form and expression, also transfers a considerable number of formal elements (Nida 1989: 232). The formal elements mentioned by E. Nida, or formal correspondences, are calques at various linguistic levels adopted from the source language that do not conform to the norms and usage of the translation language.

Normative translation equivalence encompasses not only the norms of the standard language but also those of individual styles and their variants (substyles and genres). “Style norms are the linguistic habits of a society in particular spheres of communication, involving the use of the means and devices of the relevant functional style. They are internal, partial norms of the standard language: they differentiate that language in greater detail and define the domains in which its units are used.” (Župerka 2001: 95). The stylistic norms of individual substyles and genres are variants of the norms of a given functional style, concrete realizations of a variant of the style norm. The norms of styles, substyles, and genres are not as strict as language norms; they are understood as tendencies in the use of certain distinctive stylistic devices, a more frequent quantitative distribution of marked and unmarked linguistic means, which determines the stylistic features of language (Žilinskienė 2005: 28–44; Leonavičienė 2007: 85–96).

A. LEONAVIČIENĖ. R. Gary Europietiško auklėjimo norminis vertimo ekvivalentiškumas

261

The language requirements of all functional styles include norms governing the use of certain lexical and grammatical features. The stylistic norm for lexis is generally easier to define than tendencies in the use of grammatical forms, constructions, and sentence types. As L.-J. Calvet (1994) states, styles and registers of speech do not have separate syntactic systems; consequently, in a particular realization of language, grammatical (morphological and syntactic) means are selected from the general language system, with only their selection and frequency of use differing. Dictionaries, grammars, and works on stylistics and language culture codify more frequent usage tendencies, or stylistic norms. Adherence to these tendencies enables translators to render a text in a stylistically equivalent way. Conversely, failure to observe partial language norms (stylistic requirements) disrupts the style of the text and prevents normative translation equivalence from being achieved; over time, carelessly changing any partial language norm may damage the entire standard-language system.

Whether a translated text is normatively equivalent or non-equivalent can be judged from the linguistic quality of the entire text or a substantial part of it. This is the view of German translation theorist W. Koller (2001), who examined normative translation equivalence. In his opinion, normative equivalence is just one type of equivalence in a translated text, enabling the assessment of the text’s overall equivalence. The question of conformity to norms in the translation language is also raised by the well-known translation theorist M. Baker (1993, 1999). Applying corpus-linguistic methods and examining multilingual corpora, she found that translated texts are often clearer and less ambiguous than the source text, and conform more closely to grammatical norms than texts in the source language. Translation quality is also emphatically highlighted by Italian translation theorist B. Osimo in his book Translation and Quality. Translation in Academic and Professional Settings. Among many other requirements, he raises the question of preserving the author’s style, urging translators to carefully assess a text’s grammar and syntax, recognize its spelling and graphic features, and render them appropriately in translation (Osimo 2004; cited in: Klioštoraitytė, Mažeikaitė 2009: 105).

3. NORMATIVE TRANSLATION EQUIVALENCE OF THE ARTISTIC-STYLE TEXT UNDER STUDY

Artistic style is not a social language stereotype, so its relationship with the norms of the standard language and its subnorms is somewhat different. Individuality and the aesthetic function of language sometimes allow departures from language norms and disregard for some customary rules of language use, without necessarily—

262

KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83

—observing certain customary rules of language use. K. Župerka argues: “Individual style is not subject to standardization. In general, it is difficult to define the norms of the sphere of artistic language.” (2001: 96). How, then, can one establish one type of textual translation equivalence—normative equivalence? If it is impossible or inappropriate to expect it, does that mean that translators of literary texts may translate as they see fit and, unlike translators of specialist texts, need not set themselves high standards of language proficiency? Translation theories help answer these questions: the translator is not the creator of an autonomous text; they must convey the author’s style by means of another language and maintain the same stylistic level. It is therefore useful to distinguish between copying the expressive devices of the source language—that is, striving to convey the author’s style and enrich the stylistic resources of the target language—and unmotivated errors in the target language: copying foreign-language grammatical structures, disregarding the semantics of a linguistic unit or units, and lack of proficiency in the target language. Of course, incorrect language may serve as a means of characterisation or perform another function, so foreign words, dialect forms, slang, swear words, and the like may be used deliberately in a literary text. When examining the linguistic quality of a translated text, one should always refer to the original and assess whether, in a particular passage and in the text as a whole, there are deliberate deviations from the norm that perform a stylistic function. If there are no such deviations in the original, there should be none in the translation either.

In examining how R. Gary’s work European Education has been rendered in Lithuanian and what kind of language it teaches its readers, more than fifty errors in standard language and style were found. The translation was examined in terms of normative equivalence, so each nonstandard usage was considered in the broader context of the work, compared with the original, and assessed for its appropriateness. The language errors found fall into several groups: lexical, grammatical (morphological and syntactic), and stylistic errors.

3.1. Lexical translation errors

The material under study yielded predominantly lexical translation and usage errors, accounting for about 40 percent of all observed linguistic and stylistic inaccuracies (in the textual examples, these are highlighted in bold).

Reading the translation raises many questions about the reasons for choosing nonstandard vocabulary (foreignisms, semantic calques, and calques). It is unclear why standard lexical items in standard French are rendered with nonstandard vocabulary in the translation:

A. LEONAVIČIENĖ. R. Gary Europietiško auklėjimo norminis vertimo ekvivalentiškumas

263

(1)

He wiped his feet, and with a biblical gesture showed them to the people gathered there, and said, pointing his huge big toe at Dobranski:

“You see... I am entirely innocent of this righteous man’s death!” (81)

He wiped his feet, with a gesture worthy of the Bible, showed them to those present, and said, pointing an enormous toe at Dobranski:

“Look... For I am not responsible for the death of this righteous man!” (103)

(2)

The partisan, his head swathed in bandages, said gravely:

“We will be strict, but fair.” (52)

The partisan, his head covered in bandages, said gravely:

“We will be severe, but just.” (68)

The French noun geste and the phrase couverte de bandages are stylistically neutral and are used in the original in the author’s (not the character’s!) stylistically unmarked language. Therefore, the foreignisms used by the translator, žestu and subintuota, should be considered unmotivated: to achieve stylistic equivalence between the original and the translation, standard lexical items should be chosen instead: gesture or motion, and bandaged or wrapped. The Italian writer and translation critic Umberto Eco argues that translators should not try to “restore” or improve the original text or take the author’s place. Readers should feel and see the original as it is when reading a translation. “If the work being translated is poor and badly written, let it remain so, so that readers of the translation can judge for themselves the worth of the author’s work.” (Eco 2003: 118).

We could also regard the use of the international word diskretiškas as lexically unmotivated:

(3)

Janekas discreetly coughed; immediately a tall young man appeared from the bushes and walked toward him. Janek recognized him. (45)

Janek coughed discreetly; at once a tall adolescent figure emerged from the bushes and came toward him. Janek recognized the young man. (59)

(4)

The door discreetly closed. Young Krylenko turned to his father and began in a conciliatory voice:

— All right, don’t shout like that. You’ll wake everybody up. Of course, I’m very happy to see you... (178)

The door closed discreetly. Young Krylenko turned to his father and began, conciliatory:

264

KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83

— So, don’t yell like that. You’ll rouse everyone. Naturally, I’m very happy to see you... (220)

The Dictionary of Contemporary Lithuanian defines the meaning of the word diskretiškas as follows: “worthy of trust, keeping a secret: D. person, behavior” (2000: 126). It is common in Lithuanian. The French adverb discrètement has a broader meaning and is used in more varied contexts: “in a discreet manner, one that does not attract attention. Do something discreetly (Cf. colloq. in secret, on the sly, quietly). Look at someone discreetly: furtively. Discreetly allude to something. <...> Dress discreetly. See: soberly. <...>” (Le petit Robert 1978: 550). The bilingual French–Lithuanian Dictionary gives the following meanings for discrètement: “restrainedly, modestly; do something ~ do something secretly, quietly” (2004: 291).

In the translation examples under consideration, ordinary Lithuanian words would be more suitable, allowing the nonverbal situation to be rendered semantically equivalently: the door closed secretly or quietly, while Janek coughed softly or coughed. Languages describe the same nonverbal situation differently, using the lexicon customary in each. The content and meanings of international words often differ across languages, so they cannot be transferred directly into a translated text without regard to semantic content and customary usage. In literary texts, international words are often too weighty; therefore, in general usage, competition between native and international words, when they are equivalent (i.e., when no nuances of meaning or other special purposes are involved), should be resolved in favor of native words in literary texts” (Miliūnaitė 2006: 128).

A considerable number of the lexical errors in the material under study are calques—disapproved codified loan translations. These words and phrases, which are uncharacteristic of Lithuanian, are used to reproduce the expression of a foreign language (in this study, French):

(5)

His companions waited respectfully, holding their caps in their hands and from time to time spat to maintain their dignity. (33)

His companions waited for him respectfully, caps in hand, spitting from time to time, to give themselves something to do. (44)

(6)

From time to time he would look at his friend’s body and begin to weep like an unhappy, aggrieved child. (129)

From time to time, he looked at his friend’s body and began to sob, with all the abandon of an unhappy child. (159)

A. LEONAVIČIENĖ. R. Gary Europietiško auklėjimo norminis vertimo ekvivalentiškumas

265

(7)

– Wolves! – against his will the corporal Libling said in a hoarse voice. (163)

– Wolves! said in spite of himself Corporal Liebling in a hoarse voice. (199)

(8)

The young men exchange hoarse sounds and begin searching the apartment. (74)

The two young men exchange hoarse sounds and begin searching the apartment. (95)

Copied lexical expressions harm the language of the translation, prevent the proper conveyance of the work’s meaning and aesthetic function, and deprive readers of the pleasure of reading the text. The calque from time to time should have been replaced by the translator or editor’s pen with sometimes, occasionally, from time to time, at intervals or some other expression; against his will – unwillingly; exchange hoarse sounds – mutter something to one another (or mumble), and so on.

Calques were found being used inappropriately in sentences that were poorly formulated, for example:

(9)

– As for being hanged, – a grumbling voice is heard – then, my friend, among the reeds you will have to content yourself, I think, with drowning! (188)

– As for being hanged, a grumpy voice says, in the reeds, I think, my friend, you’ll have to content yourself with being drowned! (232)

(10)

The old man grew terribly angry. “To study and become somebody,” he grumbled, “a ge-ne-ral!” And, in a rage, he hurled a pair of boots at his Cossack friend Bogorica [=Bogorodica – A. L.], who had smiled to his misfortune, immediately wiping the smile from the unfortunate man’s face. (177)

The old man was extremely sarcastic. “Study and become somebody, he grumbled, a ge-ne-ral!” and, in disgust, he threw a pair of boots at his Cossack friend Bogoroditza, who had had the misfortune to smile, which promptly drove the smile from the unfortunate man’s face. (218)

The French sentence (9) is emphatic: it stresses the words pour ce qui est d’être pendu, which signal a syntactic connotation that could be conveyed in Lithuanian by means of information structure. Thus, the translator could have creatively sought other ways of emphasis: You won’t be hanged, my friend,… or the like. And how is the reader to understand the sentence: among the reeds you will have to content yourself, I think, with drowning!? In this case, where the meaning of a sentence constituent is unclear, it is difficult to justify the translation even on the grounds of the literary style, to which

266

KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83

The norms of the standard language are not rigid; there is freedom. Some translation examples show that unrestrained freedom in translating a literary text completely “liberates meaning,” until none remains.

Having read example (10), one wonders how throwing a shoe can remove the smile from the unhappy man’s face? A theoretical understanding of lexical-semantic translation transformations would help translate this sentence correctly. The lexical renaming that should have been applied here—and the smile disappeared from the unhappy man’s face—is generally based on causal and consequential relations between concepts; thus, a source-language word or phrase denoting a cause may be replaced by a target-language word or phrase denoting an effect, and vice versa (Leonavičienė 2010: 20–24). Such a choice is determined by semantic motivation and customary usage in the target language.

A separate group of lexical errors consists of words used with an inappropriate meaning—semanticisms. Most were found in the characters’ speech, so a translator might justify them by the need to characterize a character and their speech. But is that necessary when the corresponding passages in the French text use neutral, standard French lexical items?

(11)

– This is my son, may cholera take him! – Krylenko shouted, and his moustache bristled again. – I’ve told you that twenty times. If next time you forget... (176)

– This is my son, may cholera take him! Krylenko shouted, his moustache immediately bristling. I’ve told you twenty times. The next time you forget... (217)

(12)

– After the next highway robbery, five people will be hanged! Hanged, boys. Hanged, short and sweet! (121)

– At the next highway robbery, five citizens will be hanged! Hanged, boys. Hanged, summarily! (150)

The semanticisms in the cited translation examples did not arise from the influence of the source language. They reflect the translator’s personal decision to choose nonstandard Lithuanian vocabulary. The question, however, is whether this helps achieve semantic and normative equivalence between the source and translated texts.

3.2. Morphological and syntactic errors

Lexicon is considered the most dynamic layer of language, prone to change and renewal and the quickest to respond to non-linguistic changes. The grammatical system of a language, however, is much more stable. Grammatical features reflect the expressive plan of language

A. LEONAVIČIENĖ. R. Gary Europietiško auklėjimo norminis vertimo ekvivalentiškumas

267

without which it is impossible to convey the content plan properly and in a way that everyone can understand. For a text from a foreign culture and language to express its full communicative and aesthetic content in another cultural environment, it must be conveyed equivalently to the addressee through forms of expression belonging to the grammatical system of the target language that the addressee understands. Therefore, translators, especially those translating literary texts, are unconditionally required to know the language and culture of both the original and the translation.

In examining the normative equivalence of the translation in the research material, many instances were observed in which the grammatical system of the target language (morphology and syntax) was disregarded. Morphological and syntactic errors together account for about 37 percent of all errors, while stylistic errors account for about 23 percent.

A more frequent morphological error in translation is the disregard of grammatical categories of parts of speech, for example, failing to use cardinal numerals with plural nouns:

(13)

– You shouldn’t have left. No one left. Neither the Zborovskis nor Jankelis. There were only a few hours left to wait.left to wait.And we waitedthreemonths.(225)

– You shouldn’t have gone out. Nobody went out. Neither the Zborowskis nor Yankel. There were only a few hours left to wait. And we waited three years. (279)

The thirteenth example also shows a lack of gender agreement in the participle likę. This dialectal feature, often encountered in translations, should not be considered a morphological error and may be used in informal styles as a secondary variant of the norm; however, comparing the original and translated texts raises doubts as to whether the translation needed to create the impression of dialectal speech:

(14)

Play a game you cannot lose. Don’t lose your head. Don’t clench your fists. Let your hands be relaxed, your faces calm. Smile. Have no doubts. Know this: they will come, they are getting ready. They will certainly come, as surely as tomorrow comes. (80)

Play the game. Don’t lose your head. Don’t clench your fists. Let your arms be relaxed, your faces calm. Smile. Don’t doubt. And know this: they will come, they are getting ready. They will come as surely as tomorrow comes. (101)

Syntactic errors are considerably more common: there are numerous inaccuracies in the use of adverbial participles, cases (especially the locative), and postpositions. When using an adverbial participle, its semantics are often disregarded: in Lithuanian, an adverbial participle should express a secondary action whose agent differs from the subject of the sentence, but in the translated text this is not the case:

268

KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83

(15)

Abbot Burak was arrested while he was praying in the small chapel of St. Francis in Wierki and shot on the spot. (174)

Abbot Burak was caught while praying in the small chapel of Saint Francis at Wierki and shot on the spot. (214)

(16)

Their arrival always dampened the partisans’ spirits, because the Germans were constantly listening to transmissions and, thanks to new technical equipment acquired a few months earlier, thanks to had gained the upper hand by tracking down the transmission posts. (26)

Their presence always put the partisans in a bad mood, because the Germans were constantly listening in and, for several months, had become experts at locating transmitting stations by means of new technical devices; <...> (36)

Although, when reading the French sentence (15), it is perfectly clear that Abbot Burak was praying (alors qu’il priait...), the inappropriate use of the adverbial participle jam besimeldžiant in the Lithuanian translation creates ambiguity: or was someone else praying at that moment? A grammatically more correct form can be found, for instance, Abbot Burak was arrested while praying in the small chapel of St. Francis... (or The praying Abbot Burak was arrested...).

Language errors in example (16) cannot be justified either: the French direct sentence, with the parenthetical phrase depuis quelques mois, conveys the information that, by using (or having installed) new technical equipment, the Germans gained the upper hand and tracked down the transmission posts. In the translation, however, the use of the adverbial participle susekant seems to introduce another agent, that is, it changes the semantic content, making it unclear who tracked down the transmission posts.

Among the errors in the use of Lithuanian cases in the translation under study, locative errors are the most frequent:

(17)

All that Janek could make out in this man was a head wrapped in bandages, an aquiline nose, and a very gaunt face.

“That’s Peš,” Dobranskis explained. “Nobody here pays any attention to him; everyone is fed up with him.” (51)

All that Janek could see of the man was a head covered in bandages, an aquiline nose in a gaunt face.

“That’s Pech,” said Dobranski. “Nobody here pays any attention to him; everyone couldn’t care less about him!” (67)

A. LEONAVIČIENĖ. R. Gary Europietiško auklėjimo norminis vertimo ekvivalentiškumas

269

(18)

For more than an hour, the partisans, several of whom had walked more than ten kilometers, listened to these sounds, to what is best in a person, as if to calm themselves. (52)

For more than an hour, the partisans, some of whom had walked over ten kilometers to come, listened to the voice, to what is best in man, as if to reassure themselves <…>. (67)

(19)

The child came running.

– Here he is,in good conditionand with his violin! Pestka, you carry the sack. (139)

The child arrived running.

– Here he is,in good conditionand complete, with his violin! Pestka, you will carry the bag! (171)

In the examples presented, by copying the expression of the source language, the translator failed to take into account the meanings of the Lithuanian locative case and the fact that this case is not used to express the experiencer of a state (žmoguje) or manner (gerame stovyje). Moreover, sentence (17) in the original is emphatic; it uses an emphatic segmented construction (see Leonavičienė 2010: 173–176), which foregrounds the rheme over the theme. Therefore, the sentence could have been translated into Lithuanian with additional segmental markers to emphasize the rheme, for example: Looking at this man, Janek hadnoticed onlya bandaged head, a nose like an eagle’s beak, and a gaunt face.

Reading the translated sentences with morphological and syntactic errors raises doubts as to whether they help convey the aesthetic function of R. Gary’s work. Why does the translation fail to follow the norms of the Lithuanian grammatical system and normative translation equivalence, when the corresponding passages in the original contain no grammatical deviations from French, and the language is fluent and clearly understandable? Analysis of the style of the translated text does not help answer these questions either.

3.3. Stylistic shortcomings of the translated text

Some stylistic shortcomings of the material under study were discussed when examining sentences that were inappropriate in terms of lexis, morphology, and syntax (9, 15, 16, etc.). The stylistic analysis took into account R. Gary’s style in the original, the stylistic features of his expression, and the question of whether the linguistic devices used in the translation were purposeful and appropriate and conveyed the stylistic function. In examining the translated text and considering aesthetic communication and the stylistic equivalence of the translation and the original, a considerable number of stylistically weak passages were found:

270

KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83

(20)

That was the road to Vilna; he followed it as far as Sucharki… The town was shrouded in a thick fog. But this fog stung the eyes, as in the hideout, when the stove drew badly. That was smoke. Part of the town had burned down. There were no flames anymore, only smoke, heavy smoke, motionless in the still air, and a foul smell that hurt the throat. (16)

It was the road to Wilno. He followed it as far as Sucharki… The village was enveloped in a thick fog. But this fog stung the eyes, as in the hideout, when the stove drew badly. It was smoke. Part of the village had burned down. There were no more flames, only smoke, heavy smoke, motionless in the still air, and a foul smell that hurt the throat. (23–24)

(21)

The potatoes puffed up and cracked merrily over the embers, and the men took off their sheepskin coats and unbuttoned their jackets: it was warm. This was not just the warmth of the fire, but also the cozy, brotherly warmth of the crowd, pleasant to the unfortunate, but unwelcome to the fortunate. (186)

The potatoes puffed up and cracked merrily over the embers, and the men had thrown off their sheepskins and unbuttoned their jackets: it was warm. It was not only the warmth of the fire, but also the humble and brotherly warmth of the crowd, pleasant to the unfortunate, but from which the happy turn away in disgust. (229)

In the examples cited, the form būti of the verb buvo ‘to be’ is used unstylistically. When reading the French text excerpts, no stylistically emphasized monotony of any one verb stands out. The question arises as to why this monotony appeared in the translation and what its purpose is. To achieve equivalence between the translated text and the original, an individual element of the translated text’s microstructure is important as part of a larger passage (macrostructure) and of the text as a whole. It must be related to the context, taking into account situational, pragmatic, and communicative equivalence and, of course, the criterion of style. The sentence in example (20), Le village était enveloppé dans un épais brouillard, could have been translated as Miestelį gaubė tirštas rūkas (‘A thick fog enveloped the town’). Replacing the passive form était enveloppé with the Lithuanian active voice in the simple past gaubė would have avoided repeating the same word.

The sentences Tai buvo dūmai (20) or Tai nebuvo šiluma vien nuo ugnies… (21) could also have been translated differently. Translation theories note that non-linguistic situations are rendered differently in texts in different languages, with images created through different words. In French, a language of greater abstraction, general-meaning verbs (être, avoir, faire, aller, etc.) are used more often to describe various situations; in Lithuanian, however, verbs with more specific meanings are chosen in corresponding situations. Taking account of situational translation equivalence and knowing that French lacks a detailed semantic range of stylistically more varied verbs (cf. Leonavičienė 2009:

A. LEONAVIČIENĖ. R. Gary Europietiško auklėjimo norminis vertimo ekvivalentiškumas

271

25–30), the translator could have been more specific. Many instances of the stylistically awkward use of the verb was could be replaced with spread, lingered, and so on (for example, It was not warmth solely from the fire... (= Warmth spread not only from the fire...). In the cited and other translation examples, such changes would prevent the text from being stylistically impoverished, help convey the author's style equivalently, and conform to normative translation equivalence.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the language of literary style is not subject to standardization, the principle of normative translation equivalence in literary texts should not be dismissed. It can be understood more broadly than in administrative or scholarly texts and treated as fidelity to the individual author's linguistic style, as the responsible use of target-language resources to convey meaning and the sense of the text.

The results of the translation study show that the Lithuanian translation of R. Gary's European Upbringing cannot be considered normatively equivalent to the original text. The lexical, morphological, syntactic, and stylistic errors found are not stylistically or otherwise motivated, since the corresponding passages and contexts in the original contain no errors in the French language system or style made by the author. Thus, the errors in the target language did not arise from the source text.

Of all the errors in the target language, the most frequent are lexical (40%) and grammatical-system errors (37%). They not only convey expression inappropriately but also distort content: errors of expression change sentence meaning and create ambiguities. In conveying the source text, target-language expression copied from the source language changes its content. No theory or methodology of translation anticipates these changes in content arising from the level of expression. When translating an author's individual style, semantic combinations of components must be of greatest importance to the translator; therefore, particular meanings may be changed only for pragmatic or communicative reasons, in view of the situational context, or through cultural adaptation of the text. Lexical and grammatical errors in the target language show that the translator fails to take into account the different nature of naming in French and Lithuanian.

The study results allow us to state that the original text, compared with the translation, is more fluent and more stylistically refined in its use of linguistic resources. It can be concluded that errors in the target language of a literary text hinder aesthetic communication and prevent the text from performing its most important function.

The translation of a literary work is a cultural act, the creation of a world library of translations, and an opportunity to expand the stylistic resources of the target language; however,

272

KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83

the errors of language and style in the Lithuanian translation of this work by R. Gary partly deprive it of the possibility of being understood equivalently and properly received in a new communicative environment—in Lithuanian culture.

ŠALTINIAI

Gary R. 1956: Éducation européenne, Paris: Gallimard.

Gary R. 2001: Europietiškas auklėjimas. Vertė A. Krančiukas, Kaunas: Vada.

LITERATŪRA

Baker M. 1993: Corpus linguistics and translation studies: Implications and applications. – M. Baker, G. Francis and E. Tognini-Bonelli. Text and Technology: In honor of John Sinclair, Amsterdam: John Benjamin, 17–45.

Baker M. 1999: The Role of Corpora in Investigating the Linguistic Behavior of Professional Translators. – International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4 (2), 281–298.

Calvet L. J. 1994: L’argot, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Eco U. 2003: Dire quasi la stessa cosa: esperienze di traduzione, Milano: Bompiani.

Klioštorait ytė R., Mažeikaitė I. 2009: Apie grožinio teksto vertimo kokybę. A. Baricco romano „Šilkas“ vertimas į lietuvių kalbą. – Vertimo studijos 2, 104–116.

Koller W. 2001: Einführung in die Übersetzungswissenschaft. 6. Auflage, Wiebelheim: Quelle und Meyer.

Leonavičienė A. 2007: Publicistinio ir šnekamojo stiliaus sandūra dabartinėje spaudoje. – Kalbos kultūra 80, 85–96.

Leonavičienė A. 2009: Lietuvių kalbos stilistiškai žymėtos leksikos semantika ir vertimas į prancūzų kalbą. – Kalbų studijos / Studies about languages 15, 25–30.

Leonavičienė A. 2010: Vertimo atodangos: teorija ir praktika (prancūzų–lietuvių kalba), Kaunas: Technologija.

Mickūnas A., Steward D. 1994: Fenomenologinė filosofija, Vilnius: Baltos lankos.

Miliūnaitė R. 2006: Būrimas ramune: pateisinama – nepateisinama... – Apie kalbą ir mus, Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos instituto leidykla, 124–132.

Naida E. 1989: Vertimo mokslas. – Atodangos, Vilnius: Periodika, 215–234.

Osimo B. 2004: Traduzione e qualità: la valutazione in ambito accademico e professionale, Milano: Hoepli.

Pupkis A. 2005: Kalbos kultūros studijos, Vilnius: Gimtasis žodis.

A. LEONAVIČIENĖ. R. Gary Europietiško auklėjimo norminis vertimo ekvivalentiškumas

273

Žilinskienė V. 2005: Vardažodžių, įvardžių ir jų gramatinių formų vartojimas lietuvių kalbos stiliuose. – Lituanistica 64 (4), 28–44.

Župerka K. 2001: Stilistika, Šiauliai: Šiaulių universiteto leidykla.

Gauta 2010 11 03

TEXT NORMATIVE TRANSLATION EQUIVALENCE OF R. GARY’S ÉDUCATION EUROPÉENNE

Summary

Translation theories often bring up the issue of translation quality – the equivalence of the text to the original. One type of text equivalence is text normative translation equivalence, which permits a judgement about the quality of the translation in the target language.

This article offers a theoretical discussion of the relationship between normative equivalence and the overall equivalence of a translation followed by an examination of the normative equivalence of the Lithuanian language translation of R. Gary’s work, Éducation européenne. The analysis based on the data from the material under examination allows to evaluate the concept of literary normative translation equivalence more accurately, to highlight the actual use of language norms and to consider the importance of the style of an individual author when selecting literary means in the target language.

A quantitative and linguistic examination of the target language text has revealed numerous translation errors in lexicon, morphology, syntax and style. The results of the analysis of the translation suggest that there are deficiencies in aesthetic communication and application of translation methodology arising from the failure to take into account differences in the French and Lithuanian nominative and the nature of the grammatical systems. The performed examination, which was based on empirical data, casts doubts on the equivalence of Europietiškas auklėjimas to the original text (Éducation européenne) and raises the question of whether this translation could be publicly presented as a good example.

AURELIJA LEONAVIČIENĖ

Kauno technologijos institutas Gedimino g. 43, LT-44240 Kaunas [email protected]

Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas Donelaičio g. 52, LT-44244 Kaunas [email protected]

274

KALBOS KULTŪRA | 83