Information Entropy of Shakespeare's Plays in the Light of Plurality in Translation: Cognitive Perspective

Yana Boiko

Abstract


The article offers a cognitive research of the reasons and manifestations of information entropy in the time-remote original texts, namely Shakespeare's plays, with regard to chronologically distant translations into Ukrainian performed by Panteleimon Kulish and Yurii Andrukhovych. It is assumed that any literary text transmits certain scope of the information which is represented in the fulfillment of the literary concepts and verbalised by the linguistic means chosen by the author. Examination of the source text and its Ukrainian retranslations allows determining that information entropy of the time-remote original text causes plurality in translations viewed as different interpretations of the source text by different translators. The difference in translators' personal worldview as well as different life experience and social backgrounds lead to different interpretations of the original and presentation of different scope of information in their translations, which is caused by the information entropy of the time-remote source text which is revealed in different explication of the concepts of the source text in the target language.

Keywords


information entropy, literary concept, plurality in translation, cognitive research, time-remote source text, Shakespeare's plays

Full Text:

PDF

References


Andriienko, T. P. (2014). Informatsiini kharakterystyky tekstu yak faktor realizatsii stratehii perekladu [Information characteristics of the text as a factor in the implementation of translation strategy]. Movni i kontseptualni kartyny svitu [Language and conceptual pictures of the world], 48, 25-36.

Angrist, S. W., & Hepler, L. G. (1967). Order and Chaos: Laws of Energy and Entropy. New York: Basic Books.

Boiko, Y., & Nikonova, V. (2021). Cognitive Model of the Tragic in Ukrainian Retranslations of Shakespeare’s Plays. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17 (Special Issue 2), 1034-1052.

“Buty chy ne buty” v perekladi Panteleimona Kulisha [“To be or not to be” translated by Panteleimon Kulish]. (2007). Retrieved from: https://translate-ua.livejournal.com/10577.html.

Chukovskiy, K. I., & Fedorov, A. V. (1930). Iskusstvo perevoda [The art of translation]. Moscow: Academia.

Dorofeieva, M., & Andrushchenko, T. (2019). Informatsiina entropiia u perekladi: psykholinhvistychni aspekty [Information Entropy in Translation: Psycholinguistic Aspects]. Psyholonhuistyka [Psycholinguistics], 26 (2), 91-113.

Farahzad, F. (1999). Plurality in Translation. Retrieved from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED429449.pdf.

Garbovskiy, N. K. (2007). Teoriya perevoda [Theory of translation]. Moscow: Moscow University Publishing House.

Hermans, T. (1996). Translation’s other. Retrieved from: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/1668908.pdf.

Holubenko, N. I. (2019). Kohnityvni osoblyvosti perekladu khudozhnoho tekstu [Cognitive features of literary text translation]. Naukovyi visnyk Mizhnarodnoho humanitarnoho universytetu. Seriia: Filolohiia [Scientific Bulletin of the International Humanities University. Series: Philology], 38 (1), 134-137.

Husak, S. (2013). “A Mans a Man For AThat” R. Bernsa i “Trotz Alledem” F. Freiligrata v perekladakh Mykoly Lukasha: do pytannia pro perekladatsku mnozhynnist [“A Man’s a Man For A’That” by R. Burns and “Trotz Alledem” by F. Freiligrat in translations by Mykola Lukash: to the question of translation plurality]. Inozemna filolohiia [Foreign philology], 125, 176-183.

Levin, Y. D. (1992). Problema perevodnoy mnozhestvennosti [The problem of translation plurality]. In Toper, P. M., & Ganiyev, V. H. (Ed.), Literatura i perevod: problemy teoriyi [Literature and translation: problems of theory] (pp. 213-232). Moscow: Publishing Group “Progress”, “Litera”.

Lotman, Y. M. (1998). Struktura hudozhestvennogo teksta [The structure of literary text]. Lotman, Y. M., Ob iskusstve [On the art] (pp. 14-288). St. Petersburg: “Art – SPb”.

Mikeshina, L. A. (2005). Filosofiya nauki. Sovremennaya epistemologiya [Philosophy of Science. Modern epistemology]. Moscow: Progress-Tradition, Moscow Psychological and Social University, Flinta.

Monoloh Hamleta u perekladi Yuriia Andrukhovycha [Hamlet’s soliloquy translated by Yurii Andrukhovych]. (2019). Retrieved from: https://dovidka.biz.ua/gamlet-buti-chi-ne-buti/.

Narashimha, R. N. (1994). Linguistic Entropy in Othello of Shakespeare. New Delhi: M D Publications Ltd.

Nikonova, V., Boiko, Y., & Savina, Y. (2019). Incongruity-specific British and American Humour from the Perspective of Translation Studies. Kalbų Studijos / Studies About Languages, 35, 89-103.

Ortega y Gasset, J. (2004). The misery and the splendor of translation. In Venuti L. (Ed.), The Translation Studies Reader (pp. 49-63). London and New York: Routledge.

Razumovskaya, V. A. (2011). Khudozhestvennyiy tekst v reshetkah kulturyi i perevode [Fictional text in culture grids and translation]. Vestnik Tyumenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Filologiya [Bulletin of the Tomsk State university. Series: Philology], 1, 206-213.

Rebrii, O. V. (2012). Suchasni kontseptsii tvorchosti u perekladi [Modern conceptions of creativity in translation]. Kharkiv: National University of Kharkiv.

Shakespeare, W. (2016). Romeo and Juliet. Retrieved from: https://learningstorm.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/RMEOJLET-1.pdf.

Shakespeare, W. (1899). To be, or not to be, that is the question. Retrieved from: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/56965/speech-to-be-or-not-to-be-that-is-the-question.

Shekspir Wiliam. Romeo i Dzhulietta. Bagato galasu z nichogo [Shakespeare William. Romeo and Juliet. Much Ado about Nothing]. (1998). Kyiv: Altpress.

Shekspir W. (2016). Romeo i Dzhulietta [Romeo and Juliet]. Kyiv: A-ba-ba-ha-la-ma ha.

Shennon, K. (1963). Predskazaniye i entropiya pechatnogo angliyskogo teksta [Prediction and entropy of printed English text].

Shennon, K., Raboty po teorii informatsii I kibernetike [Works on information theory and cybernetics] (pp. 669-685). Moscow: Foreign Literature Publishing House.

Sokolovskiy, V. (2014). O znachimosti kategorii entropii dlya lingvisticheskogo opisaniya protsessa sinhronnogo perevoda (propedevticheskie zamechaniya) [On the importance of the category of entropy for the linguistic descriptions of the synchronous translation process (propaedeutic notes)]. General and Specialist Translation / Interpretation: Theory, Methods, Practice: International Conference Papers (pp. 334-338). Kyiv: AgrarMedia Group.

Sytar, R. A. (2014). Mnozhynnist perekladiv yak variantnist vidtvorennia zhanrovo-stylistychnykh osoblyvostei chasovo viddalenoho pershotvoru [Plurality of translations as a variance of reproduction of genre and stylistic features of a chronologically distant source text]. Naukovyi visnyk Chernivetskoho universytetu: Hermanska filolohiia [Scientific Bulletin of Chernivtsi University: German Philology], 692-693, 237-240.

Tchaikovskiy, R. R., & Lysenkova, Y. L. (2001). Neischerpayemost originala. 100 perevodov “Pantery” R. M. Rilke na 15 yazykov [The inexhaustibility of the source text. 100 translations of “Panther” by R. М. Rilke in 15 languages]. Magadan: Kordis.

Vanroy, B., De Clercq, O., & Macken, L. (2019). Correlating process and product data to get an insight into translation difficulty. Studies in Translation Theory and Practice, 27, 924 941.

Wills, W. (1990). Cognitive aspects of the translation process. Language & Communication, 10 (I), 19 36.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies
ISSN 1305-578X (Online)
Copyright © 2005-2022 by Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies