Godlerifikacija

Za vse, ki vas zanima moje razmerje z dotičnim romanom. Tukaj je moj leto star članek.

On storyline transparency in translations or transpositions of Finnegans Wake by James Joyce

By Jure Godler

The everlasting problem of Finnegans Wake in my view is not the dream language but the dream storyline, which by far stands out as the most complicated element of the book. The question is; how can we transpose rather than translate the book into another language keeping the story intact for the recipient of the transposition. I do not believe that the solution to this problem is worth looking for in transferring the book to a different cultural background, namely that corresponding to the language in which we are transposing it, but all the attention should be diverted to the storyline itself, and any linguistic action should find its counterpart in the basis of the storyline. Such course of action, however, leads to different problems. We are confronted with a choice; keeping the story intact or choosing to pay more attention to the puns and allusions, which to a great extent form the story of the novel by themselves. In a translation or a transposition we cannot profit from both, for it is the language, one of a different origin than the language of the translation or transposition, which does not allow obvious similarities between them. Furthermore, we are confronted with the onomatopoetic characteristics of the text. Considering the fact that we have two (possibly more) choices of transferring FW into another language, translating or transposing, the first thing that comes to mind is an equation, which would generally specify a norm according to which we could tackle such a task. It is essential that we know the definition of transposition as opposed to translation. As in music transposition, in our case literary, should stand for a piece of linguistic material remote from its “natural environment”, yet unchanged in all other aspects. Since the “natural environment” of FW is its dream language, in the case of transposition another dream language must be invented in order to accommodate the needs of our transpository demands. However, the apparent differences between English (regarded as the root language of FW) and in our case Slovene, may not allow such a simple transposition to take place (N.B. the differences regarded here are those of morphological and grammatical structures). The new dream language-background cannot function unaffected and independently of the laws of the source dream language. The solution to this problem should be solved if we incorporate into our translation attempt different means of translation methods. Therewith we should not only be transposing it into a different environment but we would employ methods of making the book “Slovene” as well - a very common expression in Slovene is “posloveniti”, which literary means: making something Slovene. Again, to only “posloveniti” FW will result in a dead end. Here is an example why:

deepbrow fundigs 006.25

Let us listen to this pronounced. We get very close do “de profundis”, psalm 130. And that is only a piece of the puzzle in this case. We will call this “implied meaning”. The phrase has four roots or morphemes; deep, brow, fun and dig, morphemes that will not yield “de profundis” in another dream language. So any traditional translation in this case is bound to be off by miles - there are absolutely no phonetic or written similarities between deep and “globok”, brow and “obrv”, fun and “zabava” or dig and “kopati, jama”, nor do these counterparts in Slovene offer any chance of implying “de profundis” in any way imaginable. What is there to do? Hard to say. It would seem fair that a native English speaker should have to consult the dictionary an equal amount of times as the reader of the translation would. The answer lies in the invention of a special type of translator’s matrix.

Finnegans Wake should be considered as a whole - an absolute entirety which will give a message, meaning, story, concept, plot, idea or anything else you might want to name the fall, HCE, ALP, the awakening, the washerwomen etc. With regard to this whole, this is where any attempt at translation or transposition should begin. Any approximation or partial displacement of FW into another language environment is surely not going to yield a transparent solution with regard to the story. The problem is how can we achieve this effect of the general whole if we are stuck with the inability to translate even as little as phrases consisting only of two words like the one given earlier. The first thing that comes to mind is a standard literary translation equipped with as many notes as possible which would eventually prove to be a satisfactory work but the notes would certainly exceed the translation itself in length and the translation would become superficial and unnecessary and in all regards hardly needed by anyone wanting to study the book - notes would certainly do the trick. The other option, by far the worst choice, would be a normal translation without notes. In such a case all storyline transparency is lost and all we get is a semiotic blunder that fails to satisfy any reader apart from the seemingly intellectual one. What could be suggested at this point is the aforementioned special translator’s (transpository) matrix according to which approximations with encapsulated unchanged meanings derived through the intact storyline transparency would be conveyed in the corresponding language. Why is this an elegant solution? Because we satisfy the grammar and semiotics of the text in an unobtrusive attempt at transferring the text to a different environment. With such a method there can be place for creativity, much needed in any translation, and one can omit a majority of notes, bringing a foreign reader to one and the same spot with a native reader, thus equalizing them in terms of the need of consulting other books as means of reading assistance.

DESCRIPTION OF THE MATRIX To employ our universal matrix we have to categorize the language used in FW grammatically. It is quite difficult to determine or to distinguish between the roots (morphemes of all types), prefixes, infixes and suffixes in FW for all of them could be interpreted in as many ways as one could imagine and we could hardly reach a mutual agreement on a unified nominal definition of grammatical and syntactical means. The language of FW is indeed in a state of flux. It is never static and it is never absolute in its own manifestation. It has proved unhandy and most difficult to define something that is not static and subjected to constant change in the nature of itself. It is not our place here to discuss why Joyce decided to take the language into such obscurities and everlasting metamorphosis. Joyce once remarked that one should hear the book rather than reading it, which only confirms the fact that he was concentrating on the phonetic and onomatopoetic value of the text more, though it is not seldom that a word pronounced will not yield the allusion Joyce wanted to convey hence only the reader will notice it and not the listener. Again we are confronted with a problem: translate to achieve the visual or the phonetic effect? The answer: we will translate it in a way, which will enable the reader to piece together, the idea (not harming any of the allusions, puns and allegories). Pertaining the sections of FW written entirely in a language different than English, we are to assume no direct attempt at translation but rather seek any ties to the base of the dream language (English) and replace them with the other base language (the base language of our translation). The matrix, as a means of assistance, is comprised of several methods, which will enable us to transfer the story and all it may factually represent into our language of choosing. First we will analyze every meaningful unit of FW and establish the work-ground. Since this unit is not (or is very rarely) a lexical morpheme, we will assume our place with “the word”, consisting of various morphemes in various morphological states, meaning that not all morphemes may belong to the same language or its corresponding point of development. In all such words one must define the [literary meaning], not considering the implications of its insinuative meaning. Since defining the [literary meaning] will not be possible at all times in all cases, one will employ the [composite meaning] consisting of various types of morphemes or eventually figures of speech. Every such [composite meaning] definition will be recorded and treated as a [source composite] as a unified name for the grammatical and syntactic material, which forms FW. The [implied meaning], always located in every [composite meaning] are not to be discarded because our transposition solution may be imbedded in it. Here is an example:

penisolate war 003.07

“War” in this case does not pose a problem however “penisolate” is more interesting and worthy of our attention. There are basically two ways to interpret its [composite meaning]; with the assumption of two lexical morphemes - “pen” and “isolate”, the [implied meaning] in this case being “peninsular”. The second meaning would entertain the prospect that we are dealing again with two morphemes, this time with a lexical morpheme “penis” and a derivational morpheme “-olate”, the [implied meaning] is again “peninsular”. The phonetic value of these two interpretations differs as well. This difference is conditioned to the [implied meaning] and should be chosen and employed in the translation only through finding the [implied meaning]. If no implied meaning can be found, one is to assume the morphological characteristic of the word in question by choosing the longest morpheme or the one, which is considered to be of most significance. Throughout the course of FW one encounters countless composites consisting only of syllables or, what may at first glance appear as, random letters. In such cases searching for either of the meanings will result in a failure unless there is an undisputedly obvious morpheme present in which case one should translate it directly. In all other cases one should treat these bouts of “lettery” outbreaks strictly phonetically, directly transposing it using the phonetic characteristics of the language of translation.

FORMULAIC REPRESENTATION In FW the [composite meanings] or initial meanings are always complex in concordance with almost any of the translation methods apart from a new, creative one. This method is inconsistent with all traditional syntax and allows for a free maneuvering space devoid of rules and conventions. As a direct result of this we can employ our matrix, which can be formulaically represented in the following manner:

source: composite¹3 or (composite (i,D)4 + compensative transposition)

In doing so, we have given the author a fair chance to mirror his storyline into another language with hardly any loss of important information.

JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS METHOD No novel has ever demanded a more thorough preparation for translation than FW. Never before have our means of translation and the material itself been put into question. It is a unique situation demanding a unique solution. Translating FW freely, according to judgment may quickly pervert itself into chaos, because as said, conventional syntax plays hardly any role in this constant flux of inconstant grammatical means, syntactic constructions and onomatopoetical effects. If a structure is established before embarking upon such a strenuous task as translating FW, our circumstances unconditionally improve, providing us with a stable work-ground with established means of translation methods to assist us. There are instances, however, where our solution will prove weak and will not give results. Those instances will be identified with our inability to chose between the two or more literary meanings or in cases of absolutely no possible space for a compensative transposition. In such cases we will employ the tested and welcome, if sparingly used, technique of footnotes. With this we will surely be able to give a clear picture of the astounding story of FW in a language different from English.

June 28, 2006 Jure Godler

1. L),I)1 = value (P,M)2

   In which case all subsequent composites and values are independent of each other, though in a literary composite there is almost no doubt that its value is morphological unless we are dealing with a complex literary composite. In translations, however, we will stumble upon a problem of a different kind. If we can find no morphological value, the meaning must be conveyed in another way to ensure the communication of the storyline. In the case of the translation we will come up with an incomplete composite, which will require an addition to convey the implied meaning. This will be made up by adding an extra compensative transposition in the word to come.

   translation: (composite (D, P-M[back]

Objavljeno dne 23.05.2007 ob 23:23 Zapisano pod: Aktualno, Knjige, miks. Vse odgovore na ta vnos lahko spremljate preko RSS 2.0 vir. Lahko pustite komentar, ali trackback iz vaše lastne strani.