2019_12_03_11 - XLinguae

Go to content

Main menu:


Open access Issues > Issue n_3_2019 > section n_3_2019
Dendrocentric mythopoeic paradigm in the poem “Italy – to Lord” by Jane Draycott and the specificity of the translation into Russian
[Дендроцентрическая мифопоэтическая парадигма в стихотворении Джейн Дрейкотт «Из Италии – к Господу»  Italyto Lord») и специфика перевода текста стихотворения на руcский язык]
Nataliya A. Kindrya – Andrei V. Mitichkin
DOI: 10.18355/XL.2019.12.03.11
The article is devoted to the problem of faithful translation of a poetic piece with mythopoeic subtext. If one requires doing a comprehensive analysis and comparison of mythologemes in different Indo-European languages in order to find unapparent affinity of words in distantly related languages (for instance, English and Russian), lexico-semantic universals distinguished by M.M. Makovsky are very much applicable. At the moment, the concept of lexico-semantic universals is mostly used for scientific purposes. However, the practice of using such concepts for applied purposes is quite uncommon.
The purpose of our research is to make an appropriate translation of J. Draycott’s “Italy – to Lord” with careful consideration of mythological subtext, using the lexico-semantic universals in order to adequately reflect the mythological semantics and the meaning implied by the author.
In order to do so, we’ve distinguished the conceptual base behind the Draycott’s poem – the World tree myth. Beyond that, we’ve singled out the lexis group associated with this mythologeme: oak, tree, forest, wood (wooded). Afterward, we've translated the poem into Russian, trying to abide by the associated lexis group. Based on Makovsky's comparative dictionaries of the Indo-European languages and supplementary literature, we've brought together the nine metaphorical meanings of the World Tree mythology, identified them in the associated lexis of the original text and the text of our translation and compared them.
We have concluded that, having underwent the process of translation, the text still maintains the semantics of the World tree as a metaphor for the Vertical of Fire, Periphery, Other World, Deity, phallic symbols and actions, Old Age and their loss due to barbaric extermination of forests; however, the semantics of The Middle as a symbol of holiness and the starting point, and also the semantics of the Divine Mind and the Universe are lost.
To recover the lost layer of meaning in the translation we used the following methods: additional manifestation of the lost meanings through the associated lexis group (The Snake is a symbol of power, but also a symbol of the Universe); applying the lost meanings to lexemes not associated with the World tree mythologeme (Eng. Logic > Russian razum > Bozhestvennyy  razum (Divine Mind); actualization of cultural symbolism (the cross is a crossing point of the Vertical, represented by Russian lexemes les (forest, wood), derevo (tree)  and the Horizontal, represented by Russian lexemes Bezdna (Deep), Mater’ (Mother); the cross is meant to represent the lost meaning of The Middle; introduction of the lexis alluding to the cultural symbolism (the symbol of Universe is a circle with a dot, hence the usage of a Russian lexeme krugom (all around); verbalization of the unverbalized metaphorical layer of the original text (Russian lexemes dom (house), shum (noise), poseredi (amidst), utroba (womb) > The Middle.
Keywords: translation, English language, Russian language, Indo-European etymology, mythopoeic paradigm

Pages: 139 - 161

Full Text
Back to content | Back to main menu