The Treatment of Geographical Dialect in Literary Translation from the Perspective of Relevance Theory

Izabela Szymańska

doi:10.1515/rela-2017-0004

Authors

Izabela Szymańska University of Warsaw, Poland

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1515/rela-2017-0004

Keywords:

cognitive environment, communicative clue, dialect translation, processing effort, translation strategy, „The Secret Garden”

Abstract

This paper discusses problems involved in the translation of literary works that apply linguistic varieties, especially geographical dialects. It surveys selected approaches to the functions of dialects in literature and to the strategies of dealing with linguistic variation in translation, arguing that the understanding of the issue may be deepened and systematized by applying notions drawn from relevance theory. The use of dialect in literary texts is interpreted as a communicative clue and the translators’ approach to its rendering is described with reference to the cognitive environment of the recipients and the balance of processing effort and communicative gain. Examples are drawn from the Polish translations of The Secret Garden by F.H. Burnett, the oldest coming from 1917 and the newest from 2012, which highlight the translators’ changing assumptions on the recipients’ cognitive environment reflected in the choice of the strategy of dialect rendition.

References

Adamczyk-Garbowska, Monika. 1988. Polskie tłumaczenia angielskiej literatury dziecięcej: problemy krytyki przekładu. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.
Google Scholar

Balma, Philip. 2011. From Standardization to Dialect Compilation: A Brief History of Italian Dialect Poetry in English Translation. Translation Studies Journal 3(1). 1-13. [Online] Available from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5r18r9dx [Accessed 2 November 2016]
Google Scholar

Berezowski, Leszek. 1997. Dialect in Translation. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.
Google Scholar

Bonaffini, Luigi. 1997. Translating Dialect Literature. World Literature Today 71(2). 279-288.
Google Scholar

Burnett, Frances H. 1993. The Secret Garden. Ware, Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Classics.
Google Scholar

Burnett, Frances H. 1996 [1917]. Tajemniczy ogród. Translated by Jadwiga Włodarkiewicz. Warszawa: Pruszyński i S-ka.
Google Scholar

Burnett, Frances H. 1997. Tajemniczy ogród. Translated by Bogumiła Kaniewska. Poznań: Podsiedlik-Raniowski i Spółka.
Google Scholar

Burnett, Frances H. 1998. Tajemniczy ogród. Translated by Zbigniew Batko. Warszawa: Kama.
Google Scholar

Burnett, Frances H. 2005 [1995]. Tajemniczy ogród. Translated by Anna Staniewska. Wrocław: Siedmioróg.
Google Scholar

Burnett, Frances H. 2011. Tajemniczy ogród. Translated by Saskia Milaneau de Longchamp. Poznań: Vesper.
Google Scholar

Burnett, Frances H. 2012. Tajemniczy ogród. Translated by Paweł Beręsewicz. Kraków: Skrzat.
Google Scholar

Catford, John C. 1965. A Linguistic Theory of Translation. London: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar

Dębska, Karolina. 2009. Neutralizacja różnorodności językowej a usuwanie obcości z przekładu. In Jerzy Brzozowski and Maria Filipowicz-Rudek (eds.), Między oryginałem a przekładem XV.Obcość kulturowa jako wyzwanie dla tłumacza, 53-72. Kraków: Księgarnia Akademicka.
Google Scholar

Fawcett, Peter. 1997. Translation and Language. Linguistic Theories Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Google Scholar

Federici, Federico M. (ed.) 2011. Translating Dialects and Languages of Minorities. Challenges and Solutions. Bern: Peter Lang.
Google Scholar

Gutt, Ernst-August. 2000. Translation and Relevance. Cognition and Context. 2nd edn. Manchester: St. Jerome.
Google Scholar

Hatim, Basil and Ian Mason. 1990. Discourse and the Translator. London: Longman.
Google Scholar

Hejwowski, Krzysztof. 2010. O tłumaczeniu aluzji językowych. In Roman Lewicki (ed.), Przekład – język – kultura. Tom II, 41-56. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej.
Google Scholar

Klemensiewicz, Zenon. 1955. Przekład jako zagadnienie językoznawstwa. In Michał Rusinek (ed.), O sztuce tłumaczenia, 85-97. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich.
Google Scholar

Korzeniowska, Aniela. 2004. The Challenge of the Non-standard and the Notion of Untranslatability in Reference to Three Scottish Writers: Tom Leonard, James Kelman and William McIlvanney. In Olga Kubińska and Wojciech Kubiński (eds.), Przekładając nieprzekładalne, volume II, 93-100. Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego.
Google Scholar

Korzeniowska, Aniela. 2013. James Kelman’s Polish 2011 Début with Jak późno było, jak późno (How late it was, how late) and its Position within the Polish Literary Polysystem. In Aniela Korzeniowska and Izabela Szymańska (eds.), Scotland in Europe/Europe in Scotland. Links-Dialogues-Analogies, 129-140. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Semper.
Google Scholar

Kurzowa, Zofia. 1983. Polszczyzna Lwowa i kresów południowo-wschodnich do roku 1939. Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Google Scholar

Newmark, Peter. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. New York: Prentice Hall.
Google Scholar

Oittinen, Riitta. 2006. No Innocent Act. On the Ethics of Translating for Children. In Jan Van Coillie and Walter P. Verschueren (eds.), Children’s Literature in Translation. Challenges andStrategies, 35-45. Manchester and Kinderhook: St Jerome.
Google Scholar

Ramos Pinto, Sara. 2009. How important is the way you put it? A discussion on the translation of linguistic varieties. Target 21(2). 289-307. doi: 10.1075/target.21.2.04pin
Google Scholar

Shavit, Zohar. 1986. Poetics of Children’s Literature. Athens, Georgia: University of Georgia Press.
Google Scholar

Szymańska, Izabela. 2011. Mosaics. A Construction-Grammar-Based Approach to Translation. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Semper.
Google Scholar

Tabbert, Reinbert. 2002. Approaches to the Translation of Children’s Literature: A Review of Critical Studies since 1960. Target 14(2). 303-351. doi: 10.1075/target.14.2.06tab
Google Scholar

Wojtasiewicz, Olgierd. 1992. Wstęp do teorii tłumaczenia. 2nd edn. Warszawa: TEPIS.
Google Scholar