Literary Translations of Aiaz Gilyazov's Play “Three

TATARICA: LANGUAGE LITERARY TRANSLATIONS OF AIAZ GILYAZOV’S PLAY “THREE ARSHINS OF LAND” INTO THE KHAKAS LANGUAGE Viktoriia Alekseevna Karamasheva, N. F. Katanov Khakas State University, 90 Lenin Pr., Abakan, 655000, Russian Federation. [email protected]. The article presents the results of a comparative analysis of “Pyrom Tasta, Chirim” (“Forgive Me, Land”), the Khakas production created by Tatiana Mainagasheva and based on A. M. Gilyazov’s story and drama “Och Arshyn Zhir” (“Three Arshins of Land”). The target text of the drama in Khakas by T. Mainagasheva demonstrates the translator’s literary and culturological approach to the original: she manages to preserve the artistic concept in the text, being not limited to the “theatre idiolect” of one director, and she successfully reflects the linguistic and cultural features of the original text. Key words: cultural linguistics, translation, Tatar literature, Khakas language, A. M.Gilyazov, “Three Arshins of Land”, “Forgive Me, Land”. The works of the famous Tatar writer A. M. search is the specifics of reflecting the linguistic Gilyazov have already attracted attention of schol- and cultural features of the original text in the ars (see e.g. [Kurakova], [Khabutdinova, 2009], translation to the Khakas language. [Khabutdinova, 2010], [Khabutdinova, 2011], The purpose of the research is to reveal the etc.). Some of his works have been translated into most characteristic elements of the translator’s lin- the languages of the peoples of the Russian Federa- guistic world view in the dramatic discourse. tion and the CIS, into English, Hungarian, Turkish The studies of the language ethno-cultural spe- and Czech. The study of the writer’s work with re- cifics reflected in the idiolect of its speaker are still gard to translation was very promising relevant today, which, in its turn, determines the [Khabibullina]. relevance of this study. Tatiana Mainagasheva translated A. M. Gilya- Today, the issue of translation of drama is one zov’s drama “Three Arshins of Land” into the of the least studied aspects of translation studies. Khakas language in 2015. The object of our re- As L. L. Babaeva correctly notes, the analysis of search was the text of the production of “Pyrom contemporary literature on the problem convinc- Tasta, Chirim” (“Forgive Me, Land!”) based on A. ingly demonstrates the insufficient study of theatre M. Gilyazov’s story “Och Arshyn Zhir”(“Three translations. Almost all the research on the transla- Arshins of Land”) and the drama of the same name tion of drama published since the beginning of the [“Pyrom Tasta, Chirim”]. The subject of the re- 1990s start in the same way: translators and phi- 7 V.A.KARAMASHEVA lologists whose work is connected with the theatre play differently than it was done in translation will have received little attention from the researchers need significant changes in the text and consider- until now” [Babaeva, p. 71]. This was also pointed able efforts made by the troupe. Therefore, canoni- out by other researchers [Schultze, p. 178], [Bass- zation of a single, standard and exemplary transla- nett, p. 119]. tion can be justified for the drama less than for any Among the main reasons why the translation of other genre [Levyi, p. 216]. drama has not received a comprehensive theoreti- When translating a dramatic text, the translator cal justification yet, the researchers point out the should achieve the “speakability” of lines. M. following ones: the ambiguous nature of drama, Snell-Hornby explains “speakability” (German – difficulty in determining characteristics of drama, “Sprechbarkeit”) as the properties of the language the connection between the translation of drama and organization of the text of the play which al- and its interpretation on the “other” stage. low actors with their voice and breathing as “in- I. Levyi, a representative of the translation struments” to reach every person in the audience. school in former Czechoslovakia, was one of the To achieve this, the rhythm of sentences in transla- first people to define the potential purpose of tion should coincide with the natural rhythm of the drama for the stage as a separate problem of trans- actor’s breath [Snell-Hornby, p. 107]. P. Pavis, a lation and to give it a scientific justification. His French theatre theorist, and A. M. Wachsmann, a conception proceeds from the basic characteristics German researcher, argued against this primitiviza- of the stage dialogue, which requires the immedi- tion of the translation [Pavis, p. 224], ate attention of the translator working on the text [Wachsmann, p. 51]. of the play [Levyi, p. 188–196]. According to D. A. The key idea of Pavis’s concept is to subordi- Olitskaia, the key idea in the Levyi’s concept is to nate the translated text to the production, since perceive the target text of the play not as the ulti- only in this case it will be connected to the situa- mate goal, but as a means to create scenic images tion of the stage statement: “This property of the in interaction with the rest elements of the play on theatre translation allows the actor to substitute the its basis [Olitskaia, p. 20]. Such interaction re- text with all kinds of acoustic, plastic, mimic and quires a certain degree of flexibility from the text, body language techniques” [Pavis, p. 224]. so I. Levyi denotes a specific measure of accuracy The German theatre critic E. Fischer-Lichte in the dramaturgic translation as “uneven”. It is addresses the issue of drama translations in an even caused by the translator’s flexible attitude to the broader context, notably in the context of a cultural text, as sometimes the most important thing is to transfer: the theatre “interprets” the drama trans- convey the subtlest connotation accurately; and lated from a foreign language into one’s own lan- sometimes it is vital to preserve the style, or into- guage, from another culture (source) into one’s nation [Levyi, p. 209]. However, in general, the own, embodying it on the stage in the conditions in translator should translate and artistically recreate which the theatrical processes take place in the re- the entire text of the drama. ceiving culture [Fischer-Lichte, p. 129]. As D. A. Olitskaia notes, I. Levyi includes not As D. A. Olitskaia points out, the presented only the stage of interlingual transformation of the points of view on the problem of the translation of text of the play in the process of theatre translation, drama demonstrate diversity of approaches (liter- but also the possible prospect of its further trans- ary, linguistic, pragmatic, theatrical, and cultur- formation into a theatrical text. At the same time, ological) merged into one and thus revealing its in- direct interference appears between the translation terdisciplinary nature. Firstly, it is caused by the and the production: on the one hand, taking every “borderline” position of drama between literature specific decision, the translator should be guided and theatre, on the other hand, by the status of the by his conception of the principle idea of the play. theory of translation itself. Secondly, contempo- On the other hand, the interpretation of the play is rary studies describe the specifics of translation of of direct practical importance for the production, drama at the intersection of translation and theatri- and sometimes it can be crucial, for example, when cal (stage) discourse. In this common space, trans- interpreting the characters on the stage. However, lation and production converge organically based these relations can remain quite free due to the on such concepts as transformation, interpretation, phenomenon of translation plurality, which Levyi concretization, and adaptation. Thirdly, when considers the best alternative to the method of translating a drama, the translator views the target stage interpretation [Olitskaia, p. 20]. I. Levyi em- text as an a priori given goal in two different ways: phasizes that a director who wants to interpret the the first one presupposes the preservation of a po- 8 TATARICA: LANGUAGE tential set of stage implementations in the transla- of the Year of Literature, gave a new impetus to tion included in the original text (e.g. as “theatrical the strengthening of friendship between two related potential”); in the second case, the target text is fo- peoples. The play was favourably received by both cused on the “theatrical idiolect” (E. Fisher- ordinary spectators and experts [Kilchichakova, Lichte’s term) of a specific director, that is, it con- Sagataeva], [Kashapova], [Tatar klassigy…], tains one of their own “ideal” productions [Olit- [Tolmashova], [Khabetdinova, 2016]. skaia, p. 23]. Thus, it is obvious that the controver- Among the first people to respond to the pro- sial issue of theatricality as “the quality or integral duction were the staff of the “Khakas publishing nature of the text”, or as “the pragmatic use of the house”. In her response, N. A. Tolmashova notes stage tools” plays an important role in the theory of the universal aspect of the theme of A. M. Gilya- drama translation [Pavis, p. 366]. zov’s work: “The tragic story narrated in the play Tatiana Mainagasheva’s “Pyrom Tasta, and the fate of the main characters are relevant not Chirim” is a dramatic text generated to be staged. only for the Tatar people, but also for the Khakas In Khakassia, she is known as a translator of W. and many other peoples living in Russia”. The Shakespeare (“King Lear”), G. Figueiredo (“Ae- methodologist of the publishing house believes that sop”), Ch. Aitmatov (“The Day Lasts Longer than Tatiana Mainagasheva managed to convey “the a Century”, “Mother’s Field”, “Mankurt”), S. Zlot- main idea of the work, which is that the land of an- nikov (“A Man Came to A Woman”), F. Buliakov cestors, the language and the faith should not be (“Old Women Got Married”, “You Love Me –You betrayed, sold or destroyed.

Load more