)ORULGD6WDWH8QLYHUVLW\/LEUDULHV 2019 In Search of Lost Meaning: Exploring Lexical Lacuna in English Translations of Indiana Lindsay Anne Fieger Follow this and additional works at DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS & SCIENCES IN SEARCH OF LOST MEANING: EXPLORING LEXICAL LACUNA IN ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF INDIANA By LINDSAY ANNE FIEGER A Thesis submitted to the Department of Modern Languages and Linguistics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with Honors in the Major Degree Awarded: Spring 2019 Fieger 1 The members of the Defense Committee approve the thesis of Lindsay Anne Fieger defended on April 12, 2019. Dr. Marie-France Prosper-Chartier Thesis Director Dr. Rafe Blaufarb Outside Committee Member Dr. Lisa Ryoko Wakamiya Committee Member Fieger 2 Table of Contents General Introduction: ............................................................................................................. 4 Chapter One: Theoretical Framework ..................................................................................... 5 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5 I. Lexical Gaps: ................................................................................................................... 5 II. Untranslatability .......................................................................................................... 7 Chapter Two: Methodology for Translation ............................................................................ 9 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 9 I. Direct Translation ......................................................................................................... 11 i. Borrowing ..................................................................................................................................... 11 ii. Calque ........................................................................................................................................... 12 iii. Literal Translation ....................................................................................................................... 13 II. Oblique Translation ................................................................................................... 13 i. Transposition ................................................................................................................................ 14 ii. Modulation ................................................................................................................................... 14 iii. Equivalence ................................................................................................................................... 15 iv. Adaptation .................................................................................................................................... 16 Chapter Three: Lexical Analysis of Indiana .......................................................................... 16 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 16 Note on the Editions .............................................................................................................. 17 I. Equivalence and Borrowing: Cultural References and Idiomatic Expressions............... 17 i. Cultural References ..................................................................................................................... 18 1. Soubrette ................................................................................................................................................... 18 2. Grisette ..................................................................................................................................................... 20 3. Culotte de peau ......................................................................................................................................... 22 4. Femmelette ............................................................................................................................................... 24 5. Pastiche ..................................................................................................................................................... 25 6. Bourgeoisement ........................................................................................................................................ 26 ii. Idiomatic Expressions .................................................................................................................. 28 1. Il saisit […] l’occasion aux cheveux ........................................................................................................ 28 2. Il la tutoyait .............................................................................................................................................. 29 3. A la mode ................................................................................................................................................. 31 4. En goûtant les délices d’un amour vrai ..................................................................................................... 32 5. Ivre de bonheur ......................................................................................................................................... 33 II. Translating sentiments and emotions ......................................................................... 34 Fieger 3 i. Le rêve and other derivations ................................................................................................................... 35 ii. Chagrine ................................................................................................................................................... 38 iii. Ennui ........................................................................................................................................................ 40 III. Glance vs. Look: Regard and L’œil ............................................................................ 42 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 46 Works Cited ........................................................................................................................... 48 Fieger 4 General Introduction: Translation is not merely a task, but a complex union of both artistry and linguistic methodologies in order to arrive at the desired outcome: an accurate translation (Vinay and Darbelnet 7). Translating is artistic in that it is up to the translator’s creative mind to determine whether or not a particular translation is the most appropriate, or if an alternative should go in its place. It is the translator’s job to be an expert on manipulating words and their meanings; they must think critically and creatively in order to convey concepts from one language to another precisely and accurately. Moreover, theories and processes have been established and are used by translators to facilitate their work. One can then pose the question of how to communicate ideas and emotions originally conceived in the source language, shaped by the original author’s perspective and culture, to another? My research focuses on the field of literary translation, which consists of translating a literary work from its source language to the target language. Because of the many complexities involved in translation, a literary work may be translated in several versions into one language. I have decided to center my lexical analysis on Indiana, a novel written by the French female author George Sand and first published in 1832. I will attempt to apply the theories of untranslatability and lexical gap to two English translations of Indiana; by George Burnham Ives1 (1900) and Sylvia Raphael2 (1994) respectively3. In a comparative study, the two translations will be analyzed for differences and similarities in lexicon. I will then be able to determine if the two translation theories I have selected are applicable to Indiana. In other words, 1 George Burnham Ives will be referred to by his last name from this point forward. 2 As with Burnham Ives, Sylvia Raphael will be referred to using her last name throughout the course of this analysis. 3 Note on the translations chosen for this analysis: “George Burnham Ives’s early-twentieth-century translation has seen many iterations, including one as recent at 2011. Today, the most commonly used translation is by Sylvia Raphael….[the translation by Sylvia Raphael] is the most modern and the most available…” (Powel and Prasad Fieger 5 what lexical gaps are apparent in the two English translations of Indiana? And consequently, do these lexical gaps result in untranslatability? Chapter One: Theoretical Framework Introduction In the following section, I will discuss two theories, lacuna and untranslatability, that will form the theoretical framework of this thesis. The literature which has been done on the topic will be briefly discussed, in order to provide context for how these theories have been used in the past, and how my research differs from the literature that currently exists. I will explain not only the background of the two theories