School of Humanities G3, Bachelor’s Course English Linguistics Course Code: EN3103 Supervisor: Ibolya Maricic Credits: 15 Examiner: Maria Estling Vannestål Date: September 2, 2009

Pippi Goes Abroad:

A comparative study of the British and American translations of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns in Pippi Longstocking

Madelene Moats Abstract The purpose of this study is to analyze two literary translations of Astrid Lindgren’s Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945) from Swedish into English. The study compares the British and the American English translations of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns. The primary data chosen for this study are the Swedish children’s book Pippi Långstrump (1945), written by Astrid Lindgren, and its 1954 British translation, by Edna Hurup, as well as the 1977 American English translation, by Florence Lamborn. The method used in this study is qualitative, and consists of an in-depth analysis of representative examples of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns. Three research questions aimed at finding out what translation procedures were used, whether there were any differences between the two translations, and whether there were any semantic changes in the two translations. The conclusion is that the most common translation procedure used is equivalence. The most distinguishing difference between the two translations is that the American English translation seems to stay more true to the original text, whereas the British translation has a greater respect for the target text reader, in the sense that it is more culturally adapted than the American English translation. There were no major semantic changes in the samples from the two translations, with the exception of a few examples. In conclusion, both translators manage to maintain the atmosphere of the original text.

Keywords: Astrid Lindgren, interference, literary translation, neologism, nonce word, proper noun, Pippi Longstocking, source text, target text, translation procedures Table of contents Page 1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Aim, scope and research questions...... 2 2 Theoretical background...... 3 2.1 Key concepts ...... 3 2.1.1 Translation...... 3 2.1.2 Source text and target text ...... 4 2.1.3 Neologisms and nonce words...... 4 2.1.4 Interference between ST and TT ...... 4 2.2 Translation theory...... 6 2.2.1 Literary translation ...... 7 2.2.2 Translation methods ...... 8 2.3 Translation procedures ...... 9 2.3.1 Transference...... 9 2.3.2 Addition and omission ...... 10 2.3.3 Equivalence ...... 10 2.3.4 Modulation ...... 11 2.3.5 Transposition...... 11 2.4 The translation of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns ...... 12 3 Material and Method ...... 12 3.1 Material ...... 12 3.2 Method ...... 13 3.3 Limitations and problems...... 13 4 Analysis ...... 14 4.1 The translation of neologisms ...... 14 4.2 The translation of nonce words ...... 18 4.3 The translation of proper nouns ...... 22 5 Conclusion...... 25 References 1 Introduction Now we’re going to make a pancake, Now there’s going to be a pankee, Now we’re going to fry a pankye (Lindgren, 1977:20, translated by Florence Lamborn)

The verse quoted above is taken from the tale of Pippi Långstrump (Pippi Longstocking), a story about a wild-spirited girl who has captivated the hearts of young and old alike around the globe. Pippi shouts the verse as she makes pancakes for herself and her two neighboring friends, Tommy and Annika. The verse is a depiction of a language filled with playfulness and innovation, characteristic of Pippi and therefore also of the book. Generations of children have followed Pippi on her journey of adventure, fun and curiosity, a journey that began in Sweden with the author of the trilogy, Astrid Lindgren, and later expanded across borders, oceans and cultures, thanks to the work of translators around the world. Lindgren was born in 1907, in Sweden, in a small town called Vimmerby, and her writing mirrors a spirit of love and respect for children, combined with a deep understanding of what it means to be a child. Lindgren once said that she writes for the child within herself (Metcalf, 1994:1-2). Her stories are imaginative, yet profoundly familiar to so many and seem to have the power to connect her with her readers, wherever they may be in the world. Pippi Långstrump was first published in 1945 and in Pippi, Lindgren created a character filled with vivid imagination, warmth and endless energy (Metcalf, 1994:63). Pippi Långstrump was written from a child’s point of view, and Metcalf (ibid:74) argues that the protagonist’s childishness is used as a literary device to criticize the hollow social conventions prevalent at the time the book was published. Pippi provides the reader with humor and irony, and much of this can be found in her playful manipulation of language, a language that mirrors fun and laughter presented with an explosive force (Metcalf, 1994:84). Edström (2000:114) discusses the phenomenon of Pippi as a ‘linguist’ and renames her “the linguistic acrobat”. Edström (ibid) points to the wordplay that is so apparent in Pippi’s language, suggesting that she “plays linguistic rules and inherent ambiguities as though they were musical instruments”. Pippi juggles linguistic concepts, and her imagination sees no limits to the deconstruction of language. When she invents words and expressions, she interprets the world from a new angle. “Sarkus” is different from “circus” and “meducin” is far more different and miraculous than “medicine” (Edström, 2000:115). However, what may not be simple is the task of translating such an idiolect. Humor may be a universal ingredient within most people, especially children, but the connotations embedded in Lindgren’s style of writing must undoubtedly cause difficulties for translators.

1 In fact, Metcalf (1994:85) notes how much of the richness of connotation in the Swedish version of Pippi Longstocking is lost in many translations. In addition, Surmatz (2007:24-5) also discusses how many translations of Lindgren’s works have been colored by target text adaptations which are not to be found in the original text, and that there are interesting differences in how her books have been translated. She exemplifies this in the translations of “flugsvamp” (1945), which is a kind of mushroom that Pippi finds during a picnic. Pippi wonders if it is edible and takes a bite of it to see what happens. In the French translations from 1951 and 1962 the translation is “un rouge, à taches blanches, de l’espèce la plus vénéneuse”, meaning a very poisonous mushroom, whereas the American English translation is “a pretty rosy one” (1977). Certainly, Lindgren’s ability to write from a child’s point of view is what makes her stories so identifiable for its young readers, but the role of the translator should not be dismissed. Klingberg (1986:10) discusses the complexity involved in translation, and highlights the difficulties in being able to convey the author’s original message and to maintain the story’s character and atmosphere. According to Klingberg (ibid), it is a matter of finding a balance between staying true to the original text and adjusting to the intended readers. The complexity involved in translation is mirrored in the fact that a translation is much more than just a translation, more than a mere exchange where lexical items are replaced between languages. A translation is a depiction of atmosphere and of culture. Throughout history, the translated works of great authors have contributed to increased knowledge of other cultures and translated literature has helped achieve greater understanding of other societies, with different traditions and customs than our own. Therefore, translators play an important role in the spreading of literature, enabling communication across borders.

1.1 Aim, scope and research questions The aim of this study is to analyze two literary translations of Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945) from Swedish into English. It is a comparative study of two translations from different countries, continents and cultures, one published in the USA in 1977, translated by Florence Lamborn and one published in Great Britain in 1954, translated by Edna Hurup. The focus of the analysis is on the translation of the innovative language use so prevalent in Pippi Långstrump, more precisely the translation of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns (for the definition of nonce words and neologisms, see Section 2.1.3). The scope of the analysis is limited to a selection of eighteen examples that are highlighted, in order to enable a more

2 penetrating analysis. Furthermore, the study explores the translation methods and procedures used by the two translators (for a distinction between these two terms, see Section 2.2.1). In order to achieve the aim of the study, the following research questions are examined:

1. Which translation procedures are used in the British and the American English translations of Pippi Långstrump regarding neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns? 2. What kind of cultural differences, if any, are there between the British and the American English translations of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns in Pippi Långstrump? 3. What semantic changes are there, if any, in the two translations of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns in Pippi Långstrump?

2 Theoretical background Firstly, essential definitions and explanations of key concepts are highlighted and clarified, to illustrate different aspects that translators need to be aware of when translating fiction. Secondly, a presentation of the theoretical background in the field of translation is given. Thirdly, a review of the most important translation methods and procedures is offered, as previous scholars present them.

2.1 Key concepts As mentioned above, this section presents the most relevant key concepts for this study. Important terminology is defined and relevant areas within translation are discussed.

2.1.1 Translation To begin with, the term translation is semantically wide and may have many definitions. Newmark offers one suggestion in claiming that translation “is rendering the meaning of a text into another language in a way that the author intended the text” (Newmark, 1988:5). Bassnett gives us a somewhat more detailed explanation of the word:

What is generally understood as translation involves the rendering of a source language (SL) text into the target language (TL) so as to ensure that (1) the surface meaning of the two will be approximately similar and (2) the structures of the SL will be preserved as closely as possible but not so closely that the TL structures will be seriously distorted” (Bassnett, 1991:2)

3 Bassnett’s definition may be somewhat more descriptive than Newmark’s, yet it lacks the element of attempting to respect the author’s original text, as well as trying to maintain the style and atmosphere the author may want to depict, something that is the focus of Newmark’s definition. Furthermore, Bassnett’s definition touches upon terminology that is explained in more detail in the following section.

2.1.2 Source text and target text It is impossible to discuss the process of translating a text from one language into another without mentioning the terms source text (henceforth ST) and target text (henceforth TT). The former concerns the original text, written in the original language, i.e. source language (henceforth SL). The latter is the text into which the ST has been translated, whereas the language used in the translated text is referred to as the target language (henceforth TL). A translation involves, on a very basic level, the process of changing the ST into the TT (Munday, 2008:5).

2.1.3 Neologisms and nonce words Following, this section offers definitions of linguistic features that may cause difficulties for translators. Neologisms and nonce words (see Section 1.1) are somewhat related in meaning, as they are both definitions of fabricated words. However, it can be said that a neologism is an invented word or phrase that has been coined, institutionalized, and perhaps even given a post in a dictionary, and is therefore on the verge of being introduced into a language (The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms [www]). Most people have heard of Scrooge in Charles Dickens’s A Christmas Carol (1843), but may not think about “scrooge” being a neologism for a mean and miserly person (The Oxford English Dictionary, 1996:916). A nonce word, on the other hand, is an invented word or phrase only used once and not institutionalized, i.e. a word used for a single specific occasion (Katamba, 2005:74). A well- known example of a nonce word is “tattarrattat”, found in James Joyce’s Ulysses (1922:732), meaning a knock on the door (Wikipedia [www]). Neologisms and nonce words are most common in literary texts, and literary translations differ from non-literal ones, as discussed in Section 2.2.1.

2.1.4 Interference between ST and TT In translation, there are several potential pitfalls for translators. The SL is often inclined to color the TL, and this influence on the TT is called interference (Ingo, 1991:68). Interference

4 exists on different levels, such as lexical, morphological, pragmatic, semantic and syntactic levels, and interference occurs when ST linguistic features are being copied in the TT (Munday, 2008:114). The term is most commonly used in negative associations in translation as in Newmark’s definition of the word: “Literal translation from SL or a third language that does not give the right or required sense [in the TT]” (Newmark, 1988:283). He claims that a translation may not produce the appropriate sense if the TL is not the translator’s language of habitual use. Furthermore, the appropriate sense may also be lost if the TL is a result of automatically accepted dictionary meanings, i.e. there may be a semantic loss if there is a direct translation in line with a dictionary (Newmark, 1988:285). An example of negative interference in a TT translated from Arabic into English is found in Hatim & Munday (2004:13):

(1) Today, we offer you to share this position.

In (1), the TL seems to defy comprehension. It is taken from an advert for a French wine purchasing company, where a better translation would have been: “Now you too can take advantage of this wonderful opportunity” (Fawcett 1997, in Hatim & Munday 2004:13). As stated by Ingo (1991:168), one of the biggest problems in translation is to take leave from the SL’s original structures and solutions. A translated text should have as little negative interference (see Example (1) above) as possible, in other words, it should breathe as much genuineness as the original text. However, interference can also be positive. Toury (1995:274-9) introduces the “law of interference” where interference is looked upon as a kind of default. Toury’s (ibid) view on interference is in some ways contradictory to Ingo’s (see above) in the sense that Toury recognizes the existence of positive interference as opposed to negative. A translation can benefit from interference if there are features in the ST that will be normal in the TT, as these are then most likely to be used by translators. Toury (ibid) claims that the tolerance of interference depends on the prestige of the SL or source culture; there is a greater level of acceptance if the SL has a higher status than the TL. An example that highlights the influence of culture is given by Toury (ibid) when he observes that Japanese haiku poems translated into western languages keep elements of the original model and adopt evident components of the ST into the TT. This is an example of positive interference in a TT. In sum, negative interference between ST and TT occurs when the TT does not reveal the appropriate sense, or when there is a semantic loss (see (1) above). Positive interference between ST and TT

5 happens when features in the ST are also normal in the TT, i.e. when the translation is as close to the original as possible. Positive interference in a TT also occurs when elements of the ST are visible in the TT, and by that maintain the culture of the ST, as in the example of the haiku poems (see above). Given the most fundamental key concepts of this study, the next section offers a presentation of translation as an academic subject.

2.2 Translation theory Historically, writings on the subject of translation go far back and the practice of translation is long established. Cicero and Horace discussed the study of translation as early as the first century BC (Munday, 2008:5-7). However, translation as an academic subject is, despite the long history of translation, a rather recent area of interest in the academic world. Translation studies have only been around for approximately 60 years (ibid). The US scholar James S. Holmes coined the term “translation studies” in 1972 and describes the study as being concerned with “the complex of problems clustered around the phenomenon of translating and translations” (Holmes, 2004:181, in Munday, 2008:6). Translation studies consist of a blend of ingredients from many different areas of research, such as literary studies, linguistics and even philosophy. The analysis of stylistic features in translation stems from the field of literary studies, and the notion of semantics from linguistics. Philosophy constitutes the ground on which the creation of general principles within translation has been created, and is also apparent in the discussion on whether translation is truly possible (Ingo, 1991:11-12). Even though there are millions of translated works in the world, it has been claimed that translation is an impossible task. Needless to say, if the demand is that both form and meaning be kept in a translation, at all times, without room for any variation in style, loss of information or addition of information, then translation is impossible (Ingo, 1991:15ff). However, according to Ingo (ibid), a translation is very rarely the exact mirror of the forms and meanings of the TL. A reason for this may be not only the linguistic features of a specific language, but cultural background also plays a significant role. Language mirrors who we are, and what we know. Language is closely tied to reality, and it is only possible to explain what is known. In other words, a degree of encyclopedic knowledge about the phenomenon that is mentioned in the ST is needed to be able to translate it into the TL. It can therefore be said that a translation is a transfer of semantic content, and some change of form and meaning may be inevitable. Yet, it is important to remember that striving for balance between the style and the form of the ST and the TT should always be present (ibid).

6 2.2.1 Literary translation In translation, it is important to decide which translation method to implement in the TT. Munday (2008:19) states that as far back as the beginning of translation there has been a debate on whether to use a “word-for-word” or a “sense-for-sense” translation, that is, a literal or a free translation. In literary translations, one of the most important goals is to reach a level of “equivalent aesthetic effect” (Levý, 1963, in Munday 2008:62). One way of achieving this is discussed by Hjørnager Pedersen (1988:64), with the help of Levý’s model of literary translation, a model that involves five equally important elements: author, SL text, translator, TL text and reader. In other words, it does not only concentrate on the texts involved, but also takes into consideration the author, the translator and the target reader. Hjørnager Pedersen (ibid) adds the concept of distance and reformulates Levý’s model as in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The existence of space between the ST author and the TT reader (based on Hjørnager Pedersen, 1988:64).

The model in Figure 1 depicts the distance between the author and the reader, and the space in-between, a space that consists of the translator and the TL text. Translators need to be aware of the distance “between the SL text and the situation in which reading of the TL version is to take place” (ibid), a gap that is prevalent due to various factors. Firstly, there is the notion of time. It may cause problems for translators if there is a distance in time between the original work and the translation. It is easier for a translator to understand the author’s point of view if they live during the same period in time (Hjørnager Pedersen, 1988:65). Secondly, place is another factor that may cause difficulties for translators. Hjørnager Pedersen (ibid) exemplifies the importance of place by comparing the publication of a British book in America and the publishing of a Finnish book in Sweden. The former may often contain added explanatory notes, despite the closeness in language and culture, whilst the

7 latter involves fewer difficulties despite the linguistic and cultural distance between Finland and Sweden. Thirdly, cultural distance is a very important aspect to be aware of in translation. This factor may be difficult to measure, but a potential cultural gap between SL and TL must be bridged to enable translation, something that, according to Hjørnager Pedersen (1988:66), is often neglected even in contemporary translations. Hjørnager Pedersen (ibid) argues that the aspect of cultural distance may be ignored by the implementation of a degree of adaptation of the SL message for the convenience of the TL reader.

2.2.2 Translation methods Newmark (1988:45-6) adds to the discussion on whether to use a literal or a free translation (see Section 2.2.1). He states that in literal translation, the emphasis lies on the SL, whereas in free translation it lies on the TL. Newmark (ibid) observes that a literal translation often means that the word order of the SL is kept intact and that words are translated into their most common meanings in the TL, and often out of context. In contrast, he suggests that in free translation “the spirit, not the letter; the sense not the words; the message rather than the form; the matter not the manner” (ibid) play a significant role. More recent research gives rise to additional methods and Newmark (1988:45-8) offers a wide range of various translation methods. He (ibid) claims that the main goal in translation should be to seek a balance between style and form (see discussion in 2.2), as well as staying true to the original text and adjusting to the target readers, as stated in Section 1. He suggests that in order to present a good translation, translators need to be economical and accurate. The two main approaches that, according to Newmark (ibid), fulfill the aims of economy and accuracy are semantic and communicative translation. A semantic translation concentrates more on aesthetic values, i.e. the beauty and the sound of the ST. This method of translation may compromise on meaning in order to avoid any kind of dissonance in the TT. Consequently, the semantic translation is in close relation with the author’s individual language, it is flexible and is characterized by the translator’s empathy with the ST. Cultural components may be translated intact, and this method is usually implemented in expressive texts, for example in texts that contain neologisms, metaphors, and words that are used in a noticeable way (Newmark, 1988:47). A communicative translation, on the other hand, focuses more on the actual message conveyed in the ST, i.e. the context, and attempts to find a solution where both content and language are readily acceptable to the target reader. Thus, the communicative translation is in

8 close relation with the reader, as opposed to the semantic translation. Here, cultural components are translated with respect to the target reader, which means that the components may be replaced with cultural equivalents in the TT. This method is mostly used for informative texts, such as public notices, instructions and tourist material. A communicative translation may be seen as more free than the semantic translation that follows the authority of the ST author (Newmark, 1988:47-50). What is important to remember is that translation methods are not synonymous with translation procedures, as Newmark (1988:81) clarifies by stating that while “translation methods relate to whole texts, translation procedures are used for sentences and the smaller units of language”. As this study concentrates on the translation of specific linguistic features, a presentation of the most fundamental procedures follows in the next section.

2.3 Translation procedures Naturally, the translator’s choice of translation procedure is context-dependent. Below is an explanation of selected procedures mainly taken from Newmark (1988:81ff), but also from other scholars, such as Ingo (1991) and Klingberg (1986). It is important to mention that there are a number of researchers who have presented additional procedures that this study does not disagree with. The presentation of procedures below is simply chosen to create a platform relevant for the upcoming analysis.

2.3.1 Transference Transference concerns “the process of transferring a SL word to a TL text” (Newmark, 1988:81). In other words, transference means that the translator uses the ST word as a loan- word and simply applies it, unchanged, in the TT. An example of transference is found in the American English (henceforth AmE) translation of the name Villa Villekulla in Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945), which is the house where Pippi lives. The name of the house has been transferred intact into the TL. Newmark (1988:82) points to the fact that cultural words are often transferred to add local color to the TT, and adds that transference sometimes occurs for “snob reasons”. In other words, some may claim that it is stylish to use a foreign word. Newmark (ibid) disagrees with this aesthetic touch on the TT, by emphasizing that a translator’s job is to translate and explain, not to mystify. Yet, some people may argue that transference shows respect for the culture of the SL (Newmark 1988:81-2).

9 2.3.2 Addition and omission The term addition may be self-explanatory and simply means that information that is non- existent in the ST is added in the TT. Supplying additional information in translation is most commonly performed to bridge cultural differences, and may be somewhat more frequent in children’s literature (see Klingberg, 1986). Indeed, the British English (henceforth BrE) translation of Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945) begins like this:

(2) Sw BrE I utkanten av den lilla, lilla staden låg en At the end of a little Swedish town lay gammal förfallen trädgård. an old, overgrown orchard. (1945:5) (1954:1)

In (2), the additional information Swedish in the TT has a clarifying effect and sets a cultural tone to the continuation of the story. Other reasons may be technical or linguistic, i.e. it may be necessary to make additions to be able to relate to the topic, or to explain the usage of certain words. Conversely, if a word or expression is left out in the TT, it is called omission. According to Ingo (1991:86), this procedure can be adopted when the context makes the translation of a word in the ST unnecessary in the TT. In other words, omission may be used when a word is not essential for understanding. An example of omission is found in (3), taken from the AmE translation of Pippi Långstrump (ibid):

(3) Sw AmE Villa Villekulla låg just där den lilla staden Villa Villekulla stood just at the edge of slutade och landet började och där gatan the little town, where the street turned into övergick till landsväg. (1945:53) a country road. (1977:62)

In (3), och landet började, meaning and the countryside began, is omitted without creating any dissonance in the TT.

2.3.3 Equivalence Ingo (1991:81) discusses the notion of equivalence. The main goal in translation is to find appropriate equivalents of the SL in the TL, and generally, the term concerns the problem of finding the closest natural equivalent to the SL message (Nida, 1964:166, in Ingo, 1991:81). For example, a word in the ST may need several words in the TT to achieve equivalence, as shown in (4), taken from the AmE translation of Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945). Here, Pippi attends a coffee party at her neighbors’ house.

10

(4) Sw AmE Damerna drack tretår. The ladies began on their third cups of (1945:108) coffee. (1977:127)

In (4), the translator chose to use several words to describe the word tretår, a procedure necessary to find the closest equivalence for the word in the ST.

2.3.4 Modulation This term was coined by Vinay and Darbelnet and is a super-ordinate term that covers basically everything that is not a literal translation (Newmark, 1988:88). Modulation is a variation of the form of the message, and is defined by looking at the sentence from a different point of view, such as turning a negative SL expression into a positive TL expression (Hatim & Munday, 2004:150). This translation procedure is useful when a literal translation is grammatically correct but unidiomatic (ibid). Example (5) is found in Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945) and illustrates how an expression can be seen from a different viewpoint in the TL. The example is taken from a passage in the book where Pippi is visited by two thieves.

(5) Sw BrE Du frågar så mycket […] Kan inte vi You ask so many questions […] få fråga lite också. Can we ask some too? (1945:93) (1954:87)

Here, the ST contains a negative expression, i.e: Kan inte vi få fråga lite också, meaning: Can we not ask some too. The negative word inte (not) is omitted in the TT, thereby shifting the sentence to a positive phrase.

2.3.5 Transposition Lastly, transposition is in close relation with modulation. This translation method involves a change of word class in the TT without changing the meaning (Ingo, 1991:180). An example of transposition is found in (6), taken from Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945), and is the title of chapter nine in the book:

(6) Sw BrE Pippi får besök av tjuvar. Pippi is visited by Thieves. (1945:88) (1954:82)

11 Here, the noun besök is translated with the verb visited without any semantic loss in the TT. As this study focuses on the translation of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns, below is a presentation of what is important when translating these aspects of language.

2.4 The translation of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns Hatim & Munday (2004:247) recognize that when a neologism is created in a language, it may be hard for translators to decipher its connotation, i.e. to translate the sense or feeling the word conjures up in the ST. In addition, Newmark (1988:140-3) suggests that neologisms may pose one of the biggest problems for translators. He argues that any kind of ST neologism should be recreated in the TT, but emphasizes that translators should always aim at achieving equivalent naturalness. This can be obtained by staying true to the morphology or the sound of the ST neologism. Klingberg (1986:69) argues that nonce words may be more common in children’s literature than in literature for adults. He also stresses that it is vital to reproduce the play upon words in the TT, in order to maintain the right sense of the ST. This can be done by adopting linguistic measures such as alliteration, translating a pun with a pun and trying to make sure that the humor in the ST is somehow retained in the TT. According to Newmark (1988:214-5), proper names are most commonly transferred, i.e. translated intact into the TT, in order to keep the ST culture intact. However, if the name has connotations in the ST, it may not be advisable to adopt transference as a translation procedure. Again, it is important to stay as close to a natural equivalent word as possible.

3 Material and method This section and the following subsections present the material chosen for this study, as well as the method used when carrying out the investigation. It also addresses the limitations and problems of the study.

3.1 Material The primary sources chosen for this study are the Swedish children’s book Pippi Långstrump (1945), written by Astrid Lindgren, and its BrE translation, translated by Edna Hurup in 1954, as well as the AmE translation, translated by Florence Lamborn in 1977. Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945) is a story with deep cultural roots, and contains connotations and an idiolect that may only be familiar to readers in Sweden, yet so many children and adults around the world feel familiar with Pippi and her adventures. In fact, the book has been translated into

12 64 languages (Astrid Lindgren [www]). The fact that Pippi is so easily recognizable worldwide made the book a natural choice for an analysis of translation. As mentioned above, this study presents an analysis of examples of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns found in the ST, i.e. Pippi Långstrump (ibid). These linguistic features may pose a problem for translators (see Section 2.4), and are therefore worthy of an analysis. In order to perform an in-depth study of the chosen linguistic features in the ST, a selection of six examples from each category is highlighted and analyzed.

3.2 Method The method used in this study is qualitative, and consists of an in-depth analysis of randomly chosen examples from each category selected for this study, i.e. neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns. The reason for selecting these features to analyze is that each represents a problem translators encounter and therefore seemed an appropriate challenge for analysis. A selection of six examples from each category was made, using the process of convenience sampling. The examples triggered a curiosity in how each have been translated into the TT, and which translations procedures have been used by the translators. The words also seemed to have something interesting to discuss in an analysis. The examples used in this study are analyzed comparing the translations of each word into the two TTs. Furthermore, in order to place the examples in the correct category the words were looked up in a dictionary, to distinguish whether it was a nonce word or a neologism.

3.3 Limitations and problems The scope of this study does not allow for an analysis of all neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns present in the ST, therefore it might be drastic to generalize and suggest that the results are valid for the entire ST. It is thus important to mention that the findings of this study are only valid for the examples chosen for the analysis. However, due to the focus of the chosen examples, the findings should still be indicative of the procedures used by the BrE and the AmE translators in both TTs. Using as little material as one book, and two of its translations, also makes it difficult to draw a conclusion of the translation of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns in general. Nevertheless, it gives the reader of this study a picture of procedures that can be implemented for STs similar to the one used in this analysis. At a later stage of this essay, it was pointed out that some of the examples of neologisms in the analysis may have existed before, and are therefore not an invention of Astrid Lindgren, such as the word skurlov. This problem could have been avoided by using an etymological

13 dictionary, to find out the history and evolution of the words used in the analysis. However, the discussion proceeding each example is still valid for the focus of the essay, therefore the words in each category remain unaltered.

4 Analysis The following sections present the analysis and findings of the translations of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns in Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945). These are linguistic features that all add to the inventiveness and the playfulness of Pippi’s language. However, they also pose a particular challenge for translators. Section 4.1 accounts for the translation of neologisms and Section 4.2 presents the analysis of the translation of nonce words. Lastly, Section 4.3 offers a report of the translation of proper nouns.

4.1 The translation of neologisms Below follow some examples of neologisms in the ST, i.e. Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945) that were chosen for analysis. One of the most well known neologisms Pippi has invented may be the word pluttifikationstabell, as seen in example (7). She is mispronouncing the word multiplication table on purpose, perhaps in an attempt to show the world what little interest she has for school, and particularly math, in general. In (7), Pippi is talking to two police officers who are visiting her. The police officers are trying to take her with them and place her in a children’s home, so that she can learn things that children learn in school (such as the multiplication table). Pippi is reluctant to their proposal and gives them the following answer:

(7) Sw BrE AmE Jag har klarat mig bra utan I’ve managed well enough I have got along fine without nån pluttifikationstabell i without any pluttification any pluttifikation tables for nio år. (1945:33) tables for nine years. (1954:28) nine years. (1977:41)

Here, the play on the word multiplication is translated in both TTs, i.e. both translators recreate the neologism in the TT, and therefore they aim at reaching a natural equivalent effect in order to maintain the atmosphere of the situation, as discussed in Section 2.4. Both translators stay true to the sound of the ST neologism. However, the translators do not render the Swedish term in the same way. In fact, the BrE translator adjusts the spelling of the word pluttifikation to English by replacing k with a c. What happens here may be seen as positive interference (see Section 2.1.5), as the translator keeps the Swedish word used in the ST, and

14 only moderates it slightly in respect of the TT reader. Swedish culture is therefore still present in the TT. The result is that the SL author and the TT reader are both taken into consideration. In other words, the BrE translator uses equivalence (see 2.3.3) in her translation of the ST term. In comparison, the AmE translator uses transference as a translation procedure (see Section 2.3.1). She uses the ST term as a loan word and applies it unchanged in the TT, apart from the change into a plural noun. The effect is that the local color of the ST is more apparent in the AmE translation than in the BrE translation. What is worth mentioning is also that plutt in Swedish hints at something being very little, which may conjure up connotations in the ST reader that are hidden to the TT readers. Perhaps Pippi’s neologism is a combination of a play upon words and her saying that, according to her, the multiplication table is insignificant and therefore not necessary to learn. If this be the case, there may be some semantic loss in both TTs. In conclusion, it can therefore be argued that both translators make a choice between staying true to the sound of the neologism and rendering the connotation entailed by the ST term. As seen in (7), both translators chose the latter. Example (8) is part of the title of the second chapter of the book, and here the translations differ slightly in meaning.

(8) Sw BrE AmE Pippi är sakletare. Pippi is a Pippi is a Thing-Finder. (1945:18) Turnupstuffer. (1977:24) (1954:12)

In the AmE translation (1977:27), when Tommy asks Pippi what or who a Thing-Finder is, she replies: “Somebody who hunts for things, naturally. […] The whole world is full of things, and somebody has to look for them.” The BrE translation (1954:15), however, takes on a different angle in Pippi saying that a Turnupstuffer is “[s]omebody who finds the stuff that turns up if only you look, of course. […] The whole world is filled with things that are just waiting for someone to come along and find them.” There is obviously a difference between actively looking for something and accidentally finding something. Therefore, the result is that this semantic difference offers the reader of each target culture a slightly different picture. The term sakletare means different things in the two TTs. Both translators use modulation as a translation procedure (see 2.3.5), looking at the word and its entailment from a different point of view. Lindgren’s description entails the notion of somebody looking for things, the BrE translator’s term hints at things turning up

15 (accidentally), whilst the AmE translator’s choice of word involves the action of finding things. In (9) below, the translators adopt different approaches to the translation of the word skurlov, a word that can also be seen as a proper noun since it is an (invented) name for a holiday arranged by Tommy and Annika’s school. Tommy informs Pippi that they have a day off from school, due to cleaning, and Pippi immediately points out how unfair it is that Tommy and Annika have a vacation when she does not have one. Therefore, she decides to scrub her floors as well.

(9) Sw BrE AmE Idag ska vi inte gå till skolan, We’re having a holiday from We don’t have any school today sa Tommy till Pippi, för vi har school today, said Tommy to because we’re having Scrubbing skurlov. (1945:64) Pippi, ’cause it’s closed for Vacation, said Tommy to Pippi. cleaning. (1954:57) (1977:75)

The BrE translator uses transposition in that she changes the word class (see 2.3.6), however it can be argued that she may miss the sense intended in the ST by simply translating the neologism into an existing word, i.e. cleaning. In parallel, the BrE translator also uses addition, a procedure discussed in Section 2.3.2, by adding that the school is closed. In this case, the additional information is needed for explanatory reasons. The AmE translator, on the other hand, uses equivalence (see 2.3.3) in the TT. She translates the word skurlov with a word that is a close natural equivalent, i.e. Scrubbing Vacation. In example (9), it could be argued that this is the most appropriate solution. The AmE translator also translates in line with Newmark (1988:140-3) by creating the neologism in the TT, as discussed in Section 2.4. The semantic meaning is unchanged in both TTs. The only difference is that the passage is slightly more wordy in the TTs than in the ST. Example (10) illustrates the humor so prevalent in and characteristic of Pippi’s language. The quote is taken from a section where Pippi and her friends are on a picnic and run into a cow that stands in the children’s way.

(10) Sw BrE AmE Tänk att kor kan vara så Imagine cows being as pig- How can cows be so bull- tjuriga […] Och vad blir headed as that! […] headed? […] följden? Att tjurarna And what’s the result? The (1977:79) blir koriga förstås! (1945:66) pigs get cow-headed of course! (1954:60)

16 The pun in (10) is based on the relationship of opposites, and Lindgren, as well as the two translators use pairs of words that are in some way opposites in their depiction of Pippi’s reasoning. In the ST we find ko versus tjur (i.e. cow versus bull), whereas the BrE translator uses cow versus pig, and the AmE translator uses cow versus bull. A cow and a pig may not be opposites semantically, but they work as opposites in the translation. However, as seen in (10), the pun of the SL is missing in the AmE translation, as the translator opts to omit (see 2.3.2) the continuation of the question Pippi asks herself. To an ST reader, it may seem drastic to choose semantic omission in this case, as it automatically omits two whole sentences. It would have been possible for the AmE translator to continue the play upon words, as in the BrE translation. The omission results in a semantic loss, which could have been avoided. The BrE translator’s solution to the word play in the ST is using pig as opposed to cow. This seems to be a logical solution to a feasible problem, as pig-headed is an already existing phrase in English. In deciding which translation procedure the BrE translator uses, equivalence lies closest (see 2.3.3). It is obvious that she attempts to find the closest natural equivalent in the SL message, and by that, she manages to render the humor in the TT. Even though she uses a different noun, i.e. animal, there is no semantic loss in the TT. The following example is taken from a passage describing a coffee party held by Tommy and Annika’s mother.

(11) Sw BrE AmE Damerna drack tretår. The ladies drank still more tea. The ladies began on their third (1945:108) (1954:100) cups of coffee. (1977:127)

In (11), both translators use addition as a translation procedure (see 2.3.2). The word tretår is an old-fashioned Swedish word created by analogy with the Swedish noun påtår, preceeded by tre. Påtår means having a second cup. Tre means three and the word tretår simply means a third cup of coffee. It is necessary to describe the noun in more words as the word påtår does not exist in English. Therefore, it is impossible for a TT reader to understand the neologism in the ST. Here, the AmE translator is more informative than the BrE one, and perhaps more successful in describing the true semantic meaning of tretår, meaning a third cup of coffee. The BrE translation does not reveal how many cups the ladies drank. Noteworthy is also that the BrE translator replaces the word coffee with tea. The assumption here is that she is making a cultural adaptation in respect of the TT reader. In other words, she is bridging the cultural gap between Sweden and Great Britain when it comes to the

17 custom of drinking coffee or tea. It is more common to drink tea than coffee in Great Britain. The cultural distance between the ST and the TT is also discussed in detail in Section 2.1.4. Another translation procedure used in both translations in (11) is equivalence. In fact, in Section 2.3.3, the same passage from the book is used to exemplify the notion of equivalence. The neologism is drawn from a word that does not exist in English; therefore, both translators use equivalence in order to find the closest natural equivalent to the SL message. Once again, it may be argued that the AmE translator is semantically closer to a fair description of the word used in the ST. In (12) below, Tommy tells Pippi what you can find on a circus. Tommy and Annika are both going to the circus that is in town, and they want Pippi to join them.

(12) Sw BrE AmE Hästar och pellejönsar och Horses and clowns and Horses and clowns and pretty vackra damer som går på beautiful ladies who walk ladies that walk the tightrope. lina! (1945:75) on a rope! (1954:70) (1977:90)

Here, both translators use equivalence (as discussed in Section 2.3.3) as a translation procedure. It seems as though the BrE translator, as well as the AmE translator, believe that the most natural equivalent to the word pellejöns is the word clown, which is an existing noun with a similar meaning. To a Swedish reader, pellejöns may conjure up an image of a funny person, or a joker. However, clown seems to be a natural choice, as it is used for a person who performs at a circus.

4.2 The translations of nonce words The usage of nonce words is a common feature in Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945) and adds to the playfulness and vividness of the ST. Repeating the quote from the very beginning of this study, the verse in (13) uttered by Pippi as she makes pancakes for her friends is an illustrative example of Pippi’s play upon words.

(13) Sw BrE AmE Nu ska här bakas pannekakas, Here pancakes will be baked Now we’re going to make a nu ska här vankas pannekankas, now, here pancakes will be pancake, now there’s going to be nu ska här stekas pannekekas. served now, here pancakes will a pankee, now we’re going to fry (1945:14) be fried now! (1954:9) a pankye. (1977:20)

18 As stated in Section 2.4 above, it is important for translators to reproduce nonce words in the ST as near the original as possible. An attempt at an appropriate equivalence is seen in the AmE translation, where pannekankas and pannekekas are translated with pankee and pankye. In other words, the AmE translator translates the nonce words with similar nonce words in the TT, with the exception of the first word where she instead uses a real word instead of a nonce word, i.e. pancake. Due to this attempt, it can be argued that the AmE translator uses equivalence (see Section 2.3.3) as a translation procedure in example (13). The BrE translator, on the other hand, chooses to ignore the word play, and instead translates the nonce words with the intended word in all three occurrences, i.e. pancake. The semantic content is the same in both TTs. However, the wordplay in the form of rhyming in the ST is completely missing in the BrE translation. Example (14) is drawn from an incident where Pippi sits on the floor in her house, counting her money, i.e. all her gold pieces, that she has poured out on the floor. When she comes to seventy (sjuttio in Swedish), she implies that she is getting tired of saying the numbers aloud as she is counting. The reason for this may be that in Swedish it can be tiresome to pronounce words beginning with sj-. The neologism sjuttig is the result of derivation by suffixation, which means that we have a case of word class change, i.e. the numeral sjuttio is turned into an adjective (i.e. sjuttig).

(14) Sw BrE AmE Usch, vad jag blir sjuttig i Pooh! […] (1954:83) Whew, it makes my throat feel halsen! (1945:88) like sixty! (1977:105)

The BrE translator clearly chooses omission (see 2.3.2) as translation procedure, by simply removing the nonce word, and actually the whole sentence, and replaces it with an interjection. Therefore, there is not only a semantic loss in the TT, but also a significant degree of the word play and humor is lost. The humor may be somewhat retained in the AmE translation. However, the word play is missing, perhaps due to the fact that the translator uses a completely different number, i.e. sixty, and that number is not turned into a nonce word. The reason the translator chose to use the number sixty instead of seventy may be that the former might be harder to pronounce in English in a repetitive manner. The translation procedure applied in the AmE translation is transposition (see 2.3.5) as the adjective translates into a numeral in the TT. It can also be argued that the AmE translator uses modulation (see 2.3.4). She looks at the ST word from a different angle and chooses a number that makes more contextual sense in the TT. The

19 semantic meaning changes in the AmE translation, as Pippi only counts up to sixty in the AmE TT. Furthermore, example (15) is taken from the same situation as in (14) and Pippi utters the sentence as she is counting her money, and implies that there must be other numbers that are easier to pronounce. Example (14) also poses a problem for the translators, as Pippi adds even more to the word play:

(15) Sw BrE AmE Det finns väl i all sin dar några There must be other numbers Goodness, there must be some andra nuffror i nuffreriet. to be had. (1954: 83) more numbers in the arithmetic. (1945:88-9) (1977:105)

In (15), the word play and humor is completely missing in both translations, as the nonce words nuffror and nuffreriet are not translated into nonce words in either the BrE or the AmE TT. Both translators use equivalence (see 2.3.3), in aiming to find a close natural equivalent in the TTs. The semantic content may be the same, or at least similar in both TTs. However the sense and the atmosphere of the ST are lost (see also the discussion in Section 2.4). The following example (16) is a passage describing an evening in Pippi’s house when two burglars visit her. In order to disguise the purpose of their visit, and the reason for walking into Pippi’s house without knocking, they simply ask her what time it is. After having asked the question, they simply turn around to leave again. Pippi, who is a very polite girl (in her own way, of course), gets annoyed with the two burglars leaving without saying thank you, and tells them off.

(16) Sw BrE AmE Jag begär inte att ni ska säga - (1954:84) I don’t demand that you say ’tack’ […] men ni kunde ’tack’ (thanks in Swedish), […] åtminstone kosta på er att säga but you could at least make an ’tick’. Ni har ju inte vanligt effort and say ‘tick’. You klockvett! (1945:90) haven’t even as much sense as a clock has. (1977:106)

Clearly, example (16) caused significant problems for both translators. The BrE translator makes the choice to omit the whole paragraph, i.e. she is using omission (see 2.3.2) as a translation procedure, and by that she does not capture the ST author’s intent. The paragraph is a clear mirroring of Pippi’s personality, something that is therefore lost in the BrE translation. Furthermore, Pippi says that she does not think that the burglars have any manners, something that due to the omission is not conveyed in the BrE translation. The

20 result is a loss in meaning, atmosphere and humor. To the ST reader, this choice of translation procedure may seem somewhat drastic and perhaps even avoidable. The AmE translator, on the other hand, attempts to stay as close to the SL as possible. As a solution to the problem of rendering the play upon words in the ST, she adds the information in the TT that tack means thank you in Swedish. In other words, here the AmE translator applies addition (see 2.3.2) as a translation procedure. Furthermore, the AmE translator also uses equivalence (see Section 2.3.3) in the translation of klockvett by describing the term in the TT, i.e. “the sense of a clock”. Tommy asks Pippi one day whether she wants to join him and Annika to a circus that has come to town. Pippi has never heard the word circus before, as indicated in (17):

(17) Sw BrE AmE […] om jag kan gå med på […] I don’t know if I can come […] whether I can go to the surkus vet jag inte, för jag vet to the sarcus, ‘cause I don’t surkus or not I don’t know, inte vad surkus är för nånting. know what a sarcus is. (1954:70) because I don’t know what (1945:75) a surkus is. (1977:89-90)

The mispronunciation of circus detectable in both the ST and the TTs creates a nonce word made by the ST author, and adds a somewhat childish atmosphere to the story. The word in the ST may simply just be a distortion of the existing word cirkus, however because the word is intentionally mispronounced it is here seen as a nonce word. In (17), the BrE translator uses equivalence (see Section 2.3.3) in her translation, by creating a nonce word in the TT. The AmE translator also applies a nonce word in the TT, however, she uses transference (see 2.3.1) as a translation procedure. She applies the ST word surkus unchanged in the TT. Thus, the sense and the childish atmosphere are retained in both TTs. As discussed in Section 2.4, it is important to reproduce the play upon words in the TT, in order to maintain the humor intended in the ST. Remaining at the circus, example (18) is taken from a passage where Pippi walks the tightrope, doing a trick in front of the audience.

(18) Sw BrE AmE Hon böjde lite på foten så She waggled her foot a little, She bent her foot a little att hon kom åt att kvillra sig to scratch behind her ear. so that she could tickle sig bakom örat med den. (1954:76) herself with it back of (1945:82) her ear. (1977:96)

In (18), both translators use an existing verb in the TTs, i.e. they are not translating the nonce word in the ST with a nonce word in the TT. The translation procedure used in both the BrE

21 and the AmE translation is equivalence (see Section 2.3.3). The context makes it possible for the ST reader to understand what the nonce word kvillra means, yet the exact meaning may not be obvious. In fact, kvillra may mean either to scratch or to tickle, even though the two translations differ in meaning. This is clearly a case where the translators interpret the word differently.

4.3 The translations of proper nouns In Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945), there are several proper nouns. Below follow six examples interesting for analysis, in that they all pose challenges for translators due to their peculiar nature. Pippi may be Pippi in both the USA and in Great Britain, but her full name differs. Her complete name is just as extreme and wild as Pippi herself.

(19) Sw BrE AmE Jag heter Pippilotta Viktualia My name is Pippilotta My name is Pippilotta Rullgardina Krusmynta Provisionia Gaberdina Delicatessa Windowshade Efraimsdotter Långstrump. Dandeliona Mackrelmint Efraim’s (1954:43) Ephraimsdaughter Daughter Longstocking. Longstocking. (1954:37) (1977:52)

In general, it can be said that both translators use equivalence as a translation procedure (see Section 2.3.3). However, by separating each name and analyzing its translation in the TTs, it may be possible to distinguish more translation procedures involved. Pippilotta is translated intact into both TTs, i.e. transference (see Section 2.3.1) is used as a translation procedure, treating the name in the ST as a loan word. This is the most common translation procedure when it comes to proper nouns, as discussed in Section 2.4. Viktualia on the other hand, is translated with different names in both TTs, i.e. Provisionia and Delicatessa, and therefore modulation (see Section 2,3.4) may be involved in this case, as both translators look at the name in the ST from a new viewpoint. Furthermore, Rullgardina, hinting at the meaning window blinds, both translate into names that suggest the same meaning, i.e. Gaberdina and Windowshade. Here, both translators aim at finding a close equivalent in the TTs. It seems as if both translators attempt to find cultural equivalents for all of the names, as both translations hint at the meaning touched upon in the ST. Equivalence is also a common procedure in translation, when the proper name has connotations in the ST (see 2.4). The exception may be the name Krusmynta that hints at a flower, just as Dandeliona in the BrE translation does, but where the AmE translation takes on a different angle in the translation Mackrelmint that

22 instead hints at a kind of fish. In other words, here, the BrE translator uses equivalence (see 2,3.3) as a translation procedure, whereas the AmE translator uses modulation (see 2.3.4), and there is a distinct semantic difference in the two translations. The two remaining names, Efraimsdotter and Långstrump translate similarly in both TTs and here the semantic meaning is left unchanged. Another interesting proper noun is Villa Villekulla. It is the name of Pippi’s house and known to most ST readers.

(20) Sw BrE AmE Villa Villekulla (1945:6) Villekulla Cottage (1954:3) Villa Villekulla (1977:13)

In (20), the AmE translation adopts the translation procedure of transference (see 2.3.1) in that the translator uses the name of Pippi’s house Villa Villekulla as a loan word and keeps the name intact. The BrE translator however, uses both omission and addition (see 2.3.2) in removing villa, and adding cottage, and thus creates a new proper noun. Villervalla in Swedish means disorder, a semantic feature that is missing in both translations. However, this may be a connotation that is difficult to reproduce in a translation without missing the sense of the ST. Furthermore, cottage indicates a much smaller house than villa, which also causes a semantic difference in the two translations. In (21) below, Pippi invents a name for a distant and exotic place that she had visited with her father.

(21) Sw BrE AmE Surabaja (1945:70) Sourabaya (1954:64) Arabia (1977:83)

The BrE translation adopts the word, but changes the spelling perhaps in order to make it easier for the TT reader to pronounce it, and also read it. This could be seen as a kind of transference (see 2.3.1), but with a change in spelling. The BrE translator renders the word keeping the TT reader in mind. The AmE translation, on the other hand, adopts a slightly different angle in replacing the proper noun with an already existing one, which immediately diverts the TT reader’s attention to the Middle East. It can be argued that the AmE translator uses both addition and omission (see Section 2.3.2) in removing the ST name and adding a new name. Example (22) is a proper noun teasingly used for Pippi by five boys, with the intention to hurt her feelings. They are punching another boy and when Pippi interferes to protect the

23 boy being punished, the five boys turn to Pippi instead. Pippi’s red hair has the color of a carrot and is braided in two tight braids that stand right out (Lindgren, 1977:15-6). Undoubtedly, she looks different from many other children and therefore the boys find a reason to tease her for her looks.

(22) Sw BrE AmE Rödluvan (1945:26) Carrot Top (1954:20) Redhead (1977:32)

Here, both translators may intend to find an equivalent, i.e. they both use equivalence in their translations (see 2.3.2). However, the true connotation and intention in the ST may have gone missing. Rödluvan is the Swedish name for the fairy tale Little Red Riding Hood. This parallel insinuation is absent in both translations. The reason for this may be that it would have made a rather awkward form of addressing Pippi, calling her Little Red Riding Hood. Despite the loss of intention, there does not seem to be any major semantic loss in the TTs, since both terms aim at describing someone with red hair. The following example (23) is taken from a passage in the ST where Pippi tells a story about a Chinese man from Shanghai and one of his children, whom he named Petter:

(23) Sw BrE AmE Han hade fler barn än han He had more children than he He had more children than kunde räkna, och den minsta could count, and the smallest one he could count, and the littlest hette Petter. (1945:55) was called Peter. (1954:48) one was named Peter. (1977:65)

In (23), both translations use equivalence (see Section 2.3.3) as a translation procedure, by using a proper name that is the closest natural equivalent in the TT language. Petter is a rather typical Swedish name, whilst Peter may be more common in Britain as well as in the USA. Therefore, there is also an example of cultural adaptation in both TTs. The translators fill the cultural gap between the ST and the two TTs, by changing the Swedish name Petter to a name that is more familiar to the TT reader. Lastly, example (24) is taken from the last chapter in the ST book, uttered by Pippi implying that the ghosts who live in her attic have gone missing to attend a society meeting.

(24) Sw BrE AmE Spök- och Gasteriföreningen The Society of Honourable The Ghost and Goblin (1945:133) Ghosts and Phantoms Society (1977:156) (1954:124)

24 Here, the BrE translator uses the translation procedure addition (see 2.3.2) by adding the word honorable. The aimed effect here may be to add a bit of solemnity to the context, without changing the semantic content. The AmE translator, on the other hand, uses equivalence as a translation procedure (see Section 2.3.3), i.e. the AmE translator aims to find the closest natural equivalent to the SL message. However, it is noteworthy that she translates Gasteriföreningen with The Goblin Society, as goblin may be seen more as some kind of troll than a ghost.

5 Conclusion The aim of this study was to analyze two literary translations of Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945), from Swedish into English. The focus of this analysis was the translation of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns, and a comparison between the two translations was made. The aim was fulfilled in the breakdown of the BrE and the AmE translations of Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945), where examples from each linguistic feature in focus of the investigation were studied and discussed. In order to achieve the aim of this study, the following research questions were asked:

1. Which translation procedures are used in the in the British and the American English translations of Pippi Långstrump regarding neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns? 2. What kind of cultural differences, if any, are there between the British and the American English translations of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns in Pippi Långstrump? 3. What semantic changes are there, if any, in the two translations of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns in Pippi Långstrump?

Complexity is involved in translation of any literary work, and the translation of neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns are no exception. There is no clear cut answer to which procedure is used for each linguistic feature analyzed in this study. However, the analysis reveals that the most common translation procedure in general is equivalence, based on the 18 examples chosen for analysis. Both translators seem to aim at finding the closest natural equivalent to the SL message in most occurrences in the TTs. When it comes to neologisms, addition also seems to be a common solution to any potential problems the translators may have had. Regarding nonce words, omission is another procedure

25 implemented alongside equivalence. When translating proper nouns, transference seems to be the most popular choice after equivalence. The solutions adopted by both translators go hand in hand with the suggestions offered by many previous scholars, perhaps with the exception of the omission procedure implemented in some of the occurrences in the TT. Omission may seem to be “an easy way out”, a solution to avoiding the problem, and may have been possible to circumvent. However, naturally, which translation procedure to adopt is context- dependent, and varies from situation to situation. It is also important to mention that all translation procedures mentioned in this study are used, i.e. transference, addition, omission, equivalence, modulation and transposition. It can be stated that both translators of Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945) aim at creating a balance between showing respect for the ST, and the TT reader. However, the most distinguishing difference between the BrE and the AmE translations is that the latter seems to stay more true to the ST, whereas the former translates with greater respect to the TT reader. An example of this is seen in (15), where the BrE translator uses the word tea instead of coffee as a cultural adaption, in view of the TT reader. In addition, in (19) there is a clear sign that the AmE translator aims at staying true to the ST author’s intention by adding information to be able to keep the play upon words intact. There are no major semantic changes in the two translations, with the exception of a few examples. In example (8), there is a semantic difference between the BrE and the AmE translations, found in the two words Turnupstuffer and Thing-Finder. As mentioned in the analysis, there is a difference between actively looking for something and accidentally finding something. Therefore, the result is that this semantic difference offers the reader of each target culture a slightly different picture. Furthermore, in example (15), the BrE translator chooses to omit the whole passage, whereas the AmE translator decides to include it. Consequently, this results in a semantic difference between the two TTs. Even though the semantic changes are rather few, this analysis shows that in some cases, the devil is in the details. Even the slightest of differences can entirely change the meaning. In conclusion, both translators were successful in their effort to maintain the atmosphere of the original text, with only a few exceptions. Having in mind Newmark’s definition of translation (see Section 2.1.1), it may be safe to say that both translators make the attempt to maintain the playfulness and therefore also the atmosphere that is so characteristic of Lindgren’s writing, and of Pippi Långstrump (Lindgren, 1945). In addition, following Bassnett’s line of thought (again, see 2.1.1), it can also be concluded that the meaning of the ST and the TTs is similar in most cases. However, there are several cases where the structure

26 of the TT diverts significantly from the ST, for instance in those cases were omissions and additions are used. As an analysis of a literary text, and having Levý’s model in mind (see 2.1.4), this study considered all five elements, i.e. author, SL text, translator, TL text and reader. The analysis demonstrated that Hjørnager Pedersen’s added concept of distance is also valid. There are obvious signs of cultural differences between the ST and the TT in some of the examples, such as the case of coffee versus tea in example (15). Furthermore, it is also evident that both translations are semantic translations (see Section 2.2.1), as they both concentrate on aesthetic values, i.e. the beauty and the sound of the ST. This study could have been carried out differently, for instance with the help of parallel corpora to compare how neologisms, nonce words and proper nouns are generally translated. The use of corpora would give a slightly broader picture of what is the default when it comes to the linguistic features analyzed in this study. A possible additional approach to this study is to find out more about the translators, as each translator is also an individual with his or her own values and experiences. Translators may filter out what they feel should be filtered out, and make additions according to their own individual taste and cultural background. Therefore, the translators’ backgrounds are worthy of further research. Lastly, this study is a useful tool for other students at Bachelor’s level, who aim at presenting a study within the same field. In addition, this paper may also be interesting for all literary translators and researchers in children’s literature.

27 Reference List

Primary Sources Lindgren, A. 1945. Pippi Långstrump. 28th ed. Stockholm: Rabén & Sjögren. Lindgren, A. 1977. Pippi Longstocking. 2nd ed. Translated by Florence Lamborn. New York: Puffin Books. Lindgren, A. 1954. Pippi Longstocking. 2nd ed. Translated by Edna Hurup. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Secondary Sources Astrid Lindgren: Official Site. Avalaible at: http://www.astridlindgren.se/varlden- runt/karaktarerna-i-andra-lander [Accessed: July 2, 2009] Bassnett, S. 1991. Translation Studies. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Edström, V. 2000. Astrid Lindgren: A Critical Study. Translated from Swedish by Eivor Cormack. Stockholm: Raben & Sjögren. Fawcett, P. 1997. Translation and Language: Linguistic Theories Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. Hatim, B. & Munday, J. 2004. Translation: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Routledge. Hjørnager Pedersen, V. 1988. Essays on Translation. Copenhegen: Nyt Nordisk Forlag Arnold Busck. Ingo, R. 1991. Från källspråk till målspråk. Lund: Studentlitteratur. Katamba, F. 2005. English Words. Structure, History, Usage. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Klingberg, G. 1986. Children’s Fiction in the Hands of the Translators. Malmö: CWK Gleerup. Metcalf, E-M. 1994. Astrid Lindgren. New York: Twayne Publishers. Munday, J. 2008. Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. 2nd ed. London: Routledge. Newmark, P. 1988. A Textbook of Translation. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall Europe. Surmatz, A. 2007. Barnboken. Tidskrift för barnlitteraturforskning. Journal of Children’s Literature Research. Nr 1-2, årgång 30 The Oxford Compact English Dictionary. 1996. Edited by Della Thompson. Oxford: Oxford University Press The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms. 2008. Chris Baldick. Oxford University Press. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. Vaxjo Universitet. Available at:

28 http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t56.e767. [Accessed: April 29, 2009] Toury, G. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies - and beyond. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. Wikipedia, 2001. Nonce Word. Updated March 12 2009. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonce_words. [Accessed: April 28, 2009]

29