Cover not available
Discussion published In:
Target
Vol. 21:2 (2009) ► pp.333–357
Discussion

The translator’s immobility

English modern classics in Italy

| University of Bologna
Translations are facts of target cultures, but the perceived status of source texts has a bearing on how these are reflected or refracted in the target language. This proposition is particularly evident in the case of classics: when translators have to work on literary creations occupying a pivotal position in the source/target cultures, they adopt strategies of literalness and ennoblement which betray a quasi-religious awe—on the one hand, a desire to ruffle the surface of the revered original as little as possible; and on the other, a determination to reproduce the supposed ‘classical qualities’ of the classic even when they are not present in the source. In the following article, I examine how the ‘idea of classic’ influences translation theory and practice, substantiating my theoretical observations by looking at Italian translations of English classics. A marked—and historically determined—disparity between source and target readerships, and the translators’ reverence for their prestigious originals, conspire to produce Italian versions which are much more ‘wooden’ and ‘elegant’ than their English counterparts.
Keywords: descriptive translation studies, comparative literature, translation norms, religious literature, literary classics, history of reading
Article outline
  • 1.English classics in Italian translation
  • 2.What is a classic? The classic as a “sacred” text
  • 3.English writers, Italian readers, and immobile translators
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 16 December 2009
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.21.2.06ven
References (50)
References
Altick, Richard D. 1957. The English Common Reader. A Social History of the Mass Reading Public 1800–1900. Chicago-London: Phoenix Books-The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Austen, Jane. 1816/1998. Emma. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2002. Emma. Trans. Anna Luisa Zazo. Milano: Mondadori.Google Scholar
Bassnett, Susan. 1997. “Text Types and Power Relations”. Anna Trosborg, ed. Text Typology and Translation. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 87–98.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benjamin, Walter. 1961. Illuminationen. Ausgewählte Schriften. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Berman, Antoine. 1995. Pour une critique des traductions : John Donne. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
. 1999. La traduction et la lettre ou l’auberge du lointain. Paris: Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Bly, Robert. 1983. The Eight Stages of Translation. Boston: Rowan Tree Press.Google Scholar
Brisset, Annie. 1990. Sociocritique de la traduction. Théâtre et altérité au Québec (1968–1988). Longueil: Les Éditions du Préambule.Google Scholar
Bruni, Leonardo. 1996. Opere letterarie e politiche. Torino: Utet.Google Scholar
Cavallo, Guglielmo. 1995. “Tra ‘volumen’ e ‘codex’. La lettura nel mondo romano”. Cavallo and Chartier 1995 . 37–69.Google Scholar
Cavallo, Guglielmo and Roger Chartier, eds. 1995. Storia della lettura nel mondo occidentale. Bari: Laterza-Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Chapdelaine, Annick and Gillian Lane Mercier, eds. 2001. Faulkner. Une expérience de retraduction. Montréal: Presses de l’Université de Montréal. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Detti, Ermanno. 1987/2002. Il piacere di leggere. Firenze: La Nuova Italia.Google Scholar
Dimitriu, Rodica. 2006. “From Robinson Crusoe to Robinson in Wallachia.The intricacies of the reception process”. Anthony Pym, Miriam Shlesinger, Zuzana Jettmarovà, eds. Sociocultural Aspects of Translating and Interpreting. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 73–82.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eco, Umberto. 1979. Lector in fabula. Milano: Bompiani.Google Scholar
Eliot, George. 1871–72/1965. Middlemarch. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
. 1995. Middlemarch. Trans. Michele Bottalico. Milano: Mondadori.Google Scholar
Eliot, T.S.. 1975. Selected Prose of T.S. Eliot. London: Faber & Faber.Google Scholar
Even-Zohar, Itamar. 1978/2004. “The Position of Translated Literature within the Literary Polysystem”. Lawrence Venuti, ed. The Translation Studies Reader. New York-London: Routledge. 199–204.Google Scholar
. 1990. Polysystem Studies. Tel Aviv-Durham: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics-Duke University Press. [Poetics Today 11:1]Google Scholar
Fish, Stanley. 1980. Is There a Text in this Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities. Cambridge (Mass.)-London: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
Folena, Gianfranco. 1991. Volgarizzare e tradurre. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
Gilmont, Jean-François. 1995. “Riforma protestante e lettura”. Cavallo and Chartier 1995 . 243–75.Google Scholar
Grafton, Anthony. 1995. “L’umanista come lettore”. Cavallo and Chartier 1995 . 199–242.Google Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K. and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Iser, Wolfgang. 1978. The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Julia, Dominique. 1995. “Letture e controriforma”. Cavallo and Chartier 1995 . 277–316.Google Scholar
Lefevere, André. 1982/2004. “Mother Courage’s Cucumbers: Text, System and Reflection in a Theory of Literature”. Lawrence Venuti, ed. The Translation Studies Reader. New York-London: Routledge. 239–255.Google Scholar
Machiavelli, Niccolò. 1984. Lettere. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
Marco, Josep. 2004. “Translating style and styles of translating: Henry James and Edgar Allan Poe in Catalan”. Language and Literature 13:1. 73–90.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Montanari, Franco. 1991. “Tradurre dal greco in greco”. Salvatore Nicosia, ed. La traduzione dei testi classici. Teoria prassi storia. Napoli: D’Auria. 221–36.Google Scholar
Morini, Massimiliano. 2006. Tudor Translation in Theory and Practice. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Plath, Sylvia. 2002. Opere. Trans. Anna Ravano. Milano: Mondadori.Google Scholar
Robinson, Douglas, ed. 1997. Western Translation Theory from Herodotus to Nietzsche. Manchester: St Jerome.Google Scholar
Salmon, Laura. 2003. Teoria della traduzione. Storia, scienza, professione. Milano: Vallardi.Google Scholar
Scarpa, Federica. 2001. La traduzione specializzata: Lingue speciali e mediazione linguistica. Milano: Hoepli.Google Scholar
Schleiermacher, Friedrich. 1816. “Über die verschiedenen Methoden des Übersetzens”. Abhandlungen der philosophischen Klasse der Königlich-Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften aus den Jahren 1812–1813. Berlin: in der Realschul-Buchhandlung. 143–72.Google Scholar
Smith, James Harry ed. 1951. The Great Critics. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
Steiner, George. 1975. After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. New York- London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tompkins, Jane. 2001. “Masterpiece theater: The politics of Hawthorne’s literary reputation”. James L. Machor and Philip Goldstein, eds. Reception Study. From literary theory to cultural studies. New York-London: Routledge. 133–54.Google Scholar
Toury, Gideon. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and beyond. Amsterdam- Philadelphia: John Benjamins.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1998. “A Handful of Paragraphs on ‘Translation’ and ‘Norms’”. Current Issues in Language and Society 51. 10–32.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traniello, Paolo. 2002. Storia delle biblioteche in Italia dall’Unità a oggi. Bologna: il Mulino.Google Scholar
Venuti, Lawrence. 1995. The Translator’s Invisibility. A History of Translation. London: Routledge.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1998. The Scandals of Translation. Towards an ethics of difference. London-New York: Routledge.   DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. “Translation, Community, Utopia”. Lawrence Venuti, ed. The Translation Studies Reader. New York-London: Routledge. 482–502.Google Scholar
Wolff, Erwin. 1971. “Der interdierte Leser: Oberlegungen und Beispiele zur Einführung eines literaturwissenschaftlichen Begriffs”. Poetica 41. 141–66.Google Scholar
Woolf, Virginia. 1927/1987. To the Lighthouse. London: Grafton Books.Google Scholar
. 1992. Gita al faro. Trans. Giulia Celenza. Milano: GarzantiGoogle Scholar
Cited by (10)

Cited by ten other publications

Vetri, Valentina
2023. “Falstaffian” Partisans: Fenoglio’s Translation of Shakespeare’s Henry IV Part 1 and Fenoglio’s Original Writings. In Poetics, Ideology, Dissent, ► pp. 135 ff. DOI logo
Cipriani, Anna Maria
2022. The translator’s presence in (re)translations ofTo the Lighthouseinto Italian: a corpus-driven study. Corpora 17:3 ► pp. 423 ff. DOI logo
Cipriani, Anna Maria
2023. Conclusive Remarks. In Literary Digital Stylistics in Translation Studies [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Cipriani, Anna Maria
2023. To the Lighthouse in Italian (Re)translations. In Literary Digital Stylistics in Translation Studies [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 73 ff. DOI logo
Cipriani, Anna Maria
2023. Empirical Results. In Literary Digital Stylistics in Translation Studies [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 93 ff. DOI logo
Cipriani, Anna Maria
2023. Extending the Study of Style of Literary Translation to Extra-Linguistic Features. In Literary Digital Stylistics in Translation Studies [New Frontiers in Translation Studies, ], ► pp. 29 ff. DOI logo
Amenta, Alessandro
2021. Między „szarym przebraniem” a „trudnym znojem”. O włoskich tłumaczeniach „Italii” Marii Konopnickiej. In Przekład jako aneksja kulturowa dzieła, DOI logo
Morini, Massimiliano
2013. Virgil in Tudor Dress: In Search of a Noble Vernacular. Neophilologus 97:3 ► pp. 591 ff. DOI logo
Morini, Massimiliano
2014. Translation, stylistics and To the Lighthouse . Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 26:1 ► pp. 128 ff. DOI logo
Morini, Massimiliano
2020. Kirsten Malmkjær.Translation and Creativity. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 32:2 ► pp. 384 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.