Mona Baker & Gabriela Saldanha. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies (2nd edition)

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

Page323

immigration,thetotalwaswellover31millionforeignnationals,mostlyfrom

Germany,Ireland,Italy,Poland,Russia,theScandinaviancountriesandthe

UnitedKingdom.Approximately5,000immigrantsperdaypassedthroughEllis

IslandinNewYorkharbour,wherenoticeswereprintedinninedifferent

languages.Toprocessthemassesofpeople,theAmericangovernment

employedastaffofinterpreterswhowerecertifiedbycivilserviceexaminations

andcommandedanaverageofsixlanguages(Heaps1967:68).In1907,when

over11,000peoplewereprocessedinoneday,theinterpretersincluded

FiorellaLaGuardia(1882–1947),anItalianimmigrant’ssonwhohadworked

intheconsularserviceinEuropeandwassubsequentlyelectedmayorofNew

York.ForinterpretingonEllisIsland,LaGuardiawaspaid$1,200peryear.In

sofarastheimmigrantsweremainlyagriculturalandindustrialworkers,the

diversekindsoftranslationtheyrequiredandperformedcontributedtothe

enormouseconomicgrowththattheUnitedStateswitnessedduringthe

twentiethcentury.

Buildinganationalculture(1640–1954)

TranslationhasbeenindispensabletothedevelopmentofauniquelyAmerican

culture,evenifthelinguisticandethnicdiversityofthecountryguaranteedthatit

wouldconsistofvariousculturalconstituencies,eachwiththeirowndialectsand

discourses,valuesandbeliefs.

ThefirstEnglishlanguagebookwrittenandprintedinNorthAmericawasin

factatranslation,TheWholeBookeofPsalmesFaithfullyTranslatedinto

EnglishMetre(1640),commonlyknownasTheBayPsalmBook.A

collaborativeworkproducedbyagroupofPuritanministers,thishymnal

offeredaveryliteralrenderingoftheHebrewtext,andsinceitwasintendedfor

singing,thetranslationwascastinballadmetre.Inapreface,translatorJohn

Cotton(1584–1652)explainedthattheliteralstrategyconformedtoaPuritan

aesthetic:‘Ifthereforetheversesarenotalwayssosmootheandelegantas

somemaydesireorexpect,letthemconsiderthatGod’sAltarneedsnotour

polishings’(Haraszti1956:A4v).Thereligiousvaluesofthetranslationcarried

politicalimplications.TheBayPsalmBookexpressedthePuritans’dissent

fromtheliturgyoftheAnglicanChurchandtheliteratureoftheroyalcourt.The

avowedly‘plain’languagerejectedthe‘poeticallicense’thatcharacterized

ThomasSternholdandJohnHopkins’sversetranslation,whichhadbeenbound

withtheBookofCommonPrayersince1562(ibid.).Andtheballadmeter

linkedthenewversionstothepopularsongtraditioninoppositiontothe

metricalrefinementsofaristocraticpoetry,includingthetranslationsofthe

PsalmsmadebysuchcourtiersasSirPhilipSidneyandThomasCarew.

AstranslationincreasedtheculturalautonomyoftheAmericancoloniesfrom

England,italsocontributedtothedecisivepoliticalbreakbyimporting

revolutionarypoliticalideasfromabroad.Inthiscase,thetranslatingtook

diverseforms.TheworksofFrenchEnlightenmentthinkerssuchasVoltaireand

RousseauwereavailableineighteenthcenturyAmerica,althoughinFrench

editionsandinEnglishlanguageversionsfirstpublishedinLondonand

Edinburgh(May1976:41).LearnedpoliticianssuchasBenjaminFranklinand

ThomasJeffersonwereabletoreadtheseworksinFrench,incorporatingthe

ideastheyfoundthereindocumentsliketheDeclarationofIndependence

(1775–6).AndduringthepoliticalcrisisthatprecipitatedtheRevolutionary

War,pamphleteersusedtheirownandothers’translationstodisseminate

EnlightenmentthinkingandtoswaypublicsentimentagainstEngland.InThe

RightsoftheBritishColoniesAssertedandProved(1764),JamesOtis

offeredademocraticcritiqueoftheBritishmonarchythatquotedhisown

renderingsfromRousseau’sSocialContract(Bailyn1965:II,436).

WhiletheUnitedStateswasemergingasaninternationalpoliticalpower,

translationwasenlistedinnationalistprojectstodevelopanAmericanculture

thatcouldviewithEurope.Perhapsthemostambitiousoftheseprojectswas

SpecimensofForeignStandardLiterature,a14volumeanthologyof

translationseditedbyGeorgeRipley(1802–80).Thefirsttwovolumes

consistedofRipley’sowntranslationsofseveralFrenchphilosophers,Benjamin

Constant,TheodoreJouffroy,andVictorCousin.Insubsequentvolumes,he

reliedonthetranslatingskillsoftheNewEnglandTranscendentalists,

intellectualssuchasMargaretFuller(1810–50)andJohnSullivanDwight

(1813–93)whohad

Page324

beeninspiredbyFrenchandGermanliteratureandwhosetranslationsinturn

inspiredothers,notablythequintessentialAmericanphilosopherRalphWaldo

Emerson.

Ripleyfeltthattranslationcouldcontributetothecreationofanationalculture

thatrespecteddemocraticprinciples.‘Thebestproductionsofforeigngenius

andstudy’,heargued,‘shouldnotbeconfinedtothefewwhohaveaccessto

theoriginallanguages,butshouldbediffusedamongenlightenedreadersof

everyclassandcondition’(Ripley1838:xi).Yetthe‘standard’thatguidedhis

selectionofforeigntextsconformedtotheculturalvaluesoftheeliteintellectual

minoritywhocomposedhisprimaryreadershipaswellashisstableof

translators.Therewasindeedamassaudiencefortranslationsduringthe

nineteenthcentury,butitstastesfavouredmelodramaandromance,notpoetry

andphilosophy.WilliamDunlap(1766–1839),aNewYorkplaywrightand

theatremanagerwhoseownworksfailedtodrawattheboxoffice,successfully

stagednumeroustranslationsfromthesentimentaldramaoftheGermanAugust

vonKotzebue.HenryWilliamHerbert(1807–58),anEnglishimmigrantwho

publishedfiction,historyandsportswriting,reachedmanymorereadersby

translatingsensationalisticFrenchnovels,includingsixbyEugèneSue.During

the1840sHerbertwasearning$3,000peryear.

Suchtranslationpatternspointnotonlytotheheterogeneitythatlaybeneathany

notionsofanationalAmericanculture,butalsotothedependenceofAmerican

culturaldevelopmentsonencounterswithforeignliteratures.Evenwhen

respectedAmericanpoetstranslatedthecanonicalworksofWesternliterature,

theirstrategiesreflectedtranslationtheoriesthatfirstemergedinforeigncultural

traditions.WilliamCullenBryant(1794–1878),whoseearlypoetrygainedhim

anationalreputation,wroteaversionoftheIliad(1876)thatfollowedthe

prescriptionsfortranslatingHomerpresentedbytheBritishcriticMatthew

Arnoldsometenyearsearlier.Bryantwantedtorenderpreciselythosequalities

ofHomericversethatArnolddefinedastheprevailingscholarlyreadingofthe

Greektext:‘simplicity’,‘fluentnarrative’,‘dignity’(Bryant1876:iv–vi).The

resultwasastronglydomesticatingtranslationthatadheredtocurrentEnglish

usage,avoidedarchaicsyntaxanddiction,andemployedtheLatinnamesfor

theGreekgodsbecause,Bryantobserved,they‘havebeennaturalizedinour

languageforcenturies’(ibid.:vii).TheforeignoriginsofBryant’sstrategycanbe

detectedeveninhischoiceofmeter:liketheBritishpoetWilliamCowper,he

usedblankverse,‘thevehicleofsomeofthenoblestpoetryinourlanguage’,

althoughunlikeCowperhehadinmindShakespeareratherthanMilton(ibid.:

vii,v).

BayardTaylor(1825–78),ajournalistandtravelwriterwhosepoetryearned

hiscontemporaries’praisebutlaterfellintoneglect,producedaversionof

Goethe’sFaust(1871)influencedbytheGermantranslationtradition.

FollowingGoethe’sviewthatinthe‘highest’translating‘thetranslator…

attacheshimselfcloselytohisoriginal’(Lefevere1992b:76),Taylorwrote‘a

nearlyliteralversionintheoriginalmetres’(Taylor1871:xi).Andjustas

Goethefeltthat‘thetasteofthemultitudemustfirstbeshapedtoaccept’literal

translations,TaylorsawhimselfissuingachallengetoAmericanreaders,whose

‘intellectualtendencies’,heargued,‘havealwaysbeensomewhatconservative’,

makingthem‘suspiciousofnewmetresandunaccustomedformsof

expression’(Lefevere1992b:77;Taylor1871:x).Taylor’sGermaninspired

translationstrategyundoubtedlyworkedtobringaboutalastingchangein

Americanliterarytaste,atleastasfarastranslationsofGoethewereconcerned:

hisversioncontinuedtobereprintedaslateas1950,whenthecommercial

pressRandomHousepublisheditinthenotedseriesofclassicworkscalled

‘TheModernLibrary’.

Withtheadventofthemodernistmovement,theAmericantranslationtradition

enteredaperiodofstrikinginnovationthatcentredonthetranslationofpoetry.

ThemostimportantfigureinthisdevelopmentwasEzraPound(1885–1972).

Poundsawtranslationasameansofcultivatingmodernistpoeticvalues,

providedthatthetranslatorchosecertainforeignpoetriescapableofsupporting

thosevalues;hisgreatestsuccessesoccurredwiththeAngloSaxonlamentThe

Seafarer(1912),thethirteenthcenturyItalianpoetGuidoCavalcanti(1912,

1932),theChinesepoetLiPo(1915),andtheProvençaltroubadourArnaut

Daniel(1920).Poundexperimentedwitharangeofdialectsanddiscourses,

assimilatingtheforeigntextstopreexistingculturalforms:AngloSaxonpatterns

ofaccentandalliteration,pre