Transmesis in Slavic Literary Postmodernism

Transmesis in Slavic Literary Postmodernism: Understanding Translation through Fiction by Roman Ivashkiv A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Slavic Languages and Literatures Department of Modern Languages and Cultural Studies University of Alberta ©Roman Ivashkiv, 2015 ii Abstract This dissertation examines the phenomenon of transmesis — the mimesis or portrayal of translation in fiction — in three postmodernist novels in Ukrainian and Russian and their English translations: Yuri Andrukhovych’s Perverziia (translated by Michael Naydan), Serhiy Zhadan’s Depesh Mod (translated by Myroslav Shkandrij), and Viktor Pelevin’s Generation “П” (translated by Andrew Bromfield). My objective is to explore the use and identify the purposes of transmesis in fiction, to investigate issues of untranslatability to which it gives rise, and to identify the implications of transmesis for translation theory and practice. Transmesis, a term coined by Thomas Beebee, stands for the representation in fiction of translation, both as a process and a product, as well as for the portrayal of the figure of the translator in a fictional text. In a larger historico-theoretical framework, the concept of transmesis stands at the juncture of the so-called cultural and fictional turns in translation studies. While the former has been pivotal in expanding our understanding of translation as a cultural rather than merely a linguistic act, the latter has unraveled the potential of fictional portrayals of translation, not just as metaphors for the construction of identity and truth, but also as a source for advancing theoretical knowledge about translation. My research has been driven by two overarching questions: How do translators render transmetic episodes in novels into English while operating from the position of “retranslating,” or translating what allegedly already is a translation? How can transmesis complement other sources of knowledge about translation in order to reinvigorate translation theory and contribute to a translation philosophy? iii Analysis of the three novels, selected because they are viewed as postmodernist, have stylistic similarities, and prominently feature a theme of translation, is carried out from both practical and theoretical perspectives. The discussion of how the transmetic episodes in the novels are translated into English suggests that translators have struggled with capturing the nuances of transmesis, at times resorting to footnotes or even to omitting entire passages. It is primarily by distancing themselves from the original text, taking poetic license, and assuming the role of author that Naydan, Shkandrij, and Bromfield have managed to find creative solutions to some of the formidable transmetic challenges. The resulting discussion of the theoretical implications of transmesis reopens issues and subjects that are central to translation from a new perspective. These range from the problematic notion of equivalence and the often parodied image of translator’s (in)fidelity, to the translator’s often underappreciated work and “(in)visibility,” and from the various translation dichotomies (e.g. source language/target language, original/translation, author/translator, domesticate/foreignize, etc) and their problems, to more philosophical questions of sameness and difference and the role of intertextuality in translation. A close reading of the transmetic episodes in the three novels leads me to contend that translation should be primarily conceived as a playful and creative act rather than a merely reproductive one, and that solutions to the problem of untranslatability will be more plausible if translators, rather than striving for illusory sameness or similarity and being governed by adequacy and fidelity, approach their task as an intertextual and interpretative language game predicated on creative transformation. iv Dedication Мамі і Татові / To Mom and Dad v Acknowledgements I would like express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Irene Sywenky and Dr. Natalia Pylypiuk and Dr. Oleh Ilnytzkyj, my professors and members of my supervisory committee, who have provided academic guidance, support, advice, care, and encouragement throughout my entire doctoral program. I am grateful for everything they have done for me and continue to do, in these uneasy times, for the fields of Slavic Studies, Ukrainian Studies, Cultural Studies, and Comparative literature. Without Irene, Natalia, and Oleh this project would have never been completed. I would like to thank the Department of Modern Languages and Cultural Studies, the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research at the University of Alberta, the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, and the Government of Alberta for supporting my education. My gratitude also goes to everybody who contributed to my growth as an academic and helped me mature into a researcher, educator, and translator. Especially, I am grateful to Professor Roksolana Zorivchak, head of the Hryhoriy Kochur Department of Translation Studies at the National University of Lviv, Ukraine, and my colleagues and friends from my alma mater. Prof. Zorivchak has been the greatest educator in my life. To her I owe my passion for translation and love of languages. I am also very grateful to my professors from Pennsylvania State University, where I obtained my master’s degree. I thank Dr. Michael Naydan and Dr. Linda Ivanits, my co-supervisors, as well as Dr. Adrian Wanner, Dr. Thomas Beebee, Dr. Djelal Kadir, and other professors whose courses I have taken. Dr. Naydan, one of the best and the most prolific translators of Ukrainian literature into English, has given me a personal example of productivity while Dr. Ivanits and Dr. Wanner have aroused my passion for Russian Literature. Dr. Kadir has introduced me to postmodernism, while to Dr. Beebee I owe the intellectual impetus for my project. I am also thankful to Dr. Donald Mason, my supervisor, and other colleagues at the English Language Program at the UofA Faculty of Extension. In addition, I thank my former colleagues from the Ukrainian Catholic University in Lviv, especially, Dr. Jeffrey vi Wilson and Mr. Mathew Matusczak. My thanks go to all of my friends and colleagues with whom I interacted over these years and whose support and encouragement I value immensely. Two persons whom I would like to thank separately, because I cannot imagine finishing my dissertation without them, are my friend and co-translator Erín Moure, Canadian poet, translator, and essayist, and my partner Dr. Yuliya Zabyelina, Assistant Professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, the City University of New York. Erín, who conducted a poetry translation workshop as the UofA writer in residence in 2013-2014, has been a true inspiration, an intellectual role model, and a true mentor. I have learned a tremendous lot from my collaboration and discussions with Erín as well as from her constructive feedback, perspicacious criticism, insightful remarks, and editing comments. To Erín I will always be indebted for helping me believe in myself and helping me “break on through to the other side.” Yuliya has been an incredible inspiration and an example of mental and moral strength, intellectual acuity, charisma, and determination. I am thankful that Erín and Yuliya are part of my life. Finally, I thank my Mother and my Grandmother whose love and faith have kept me going and, most of all, my Dad, who would have been very happy for me. “Dad, I dedicate this is to you!” vii Note on Transliteration The transliteration from Cyrillic in this dissertation follows a modified Library of Congress (LC) system. The apostrophe (’), indicating the soft sign in Ukrainian and Russian, and the quotation mark (”), indicating the hard sign in Russian, will not be used to avoid confusion because they serve different functions in English. The diacritics (except in proper names and titles) and ligatures will also be omitted. In some cases, exceptions will also be made to reflect more accurately the phonetic spelling or to follow a different but widely accepted spelling of proper names (e.g. Fyodor Dostoevsky) as well as the spelling used in published translations. For example, Andrukhovych’s first name, which according to the LC system should be spelled Iurii, will be transliterated as Yuri because it is the spelling used in Naydan’s translation. Similarly, the LC transliteration of Zhadan’s first name is Serhii, but I follow Shkandrij’s spelling Serhiy. viii Table of Contents ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................ II DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................................ IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................ V NOTE ON TRANSLITERATION .................................................................................................................. VII TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................................. VIII INTRODUCTION: TRANSLATION, FICTION, AND MIMESIS ......................................................................... 1 THE RESEARCH PROBLEM AND OBJECTIVE ..........................................................................................................

Load more