Η Αντιγόνη του Σοφοκλή (Master thesis)
The object of this study is the systematic examination of Maronitis’ translation of Sophocles’ Antigone. Given the fact that every translation is already interpretation and that interpretation can be carried out by way of translation, we will try to focus -within the frame of Descriptive Translation Studies- on the description of the translation strategies used by the translator. Such a descriptive study starts from the empirical fact, i.e. from the translated text itself, and it does shift the emphasis to the target text as product without excluding consideration of the source text. His translation of Antigone into modern Greek appears in single-play edition and its publication in an editorial series with Brecht’s and Annouill’s Antigones contextualizes Maronitis’ translation as part of a continuing story. This paratextual feature, to some extent related to Maronitis’ translation, may make a difference in the reader’s perception of that relationship by suggesting an intertextual reading of the three plays. The reading of Maronitis’ Antigone in translation may be further conditioned by another paratextual element, the introductory material written by the translator himself. Maronitis, introducing his version, offers readers a brief analysis of some of the main interpretative problems of the play so that the reader will know how to read the translation. Tracing the reception of Sophocles’ Antigone the many different translations of the play reflect the varied political, philosophical, and psychological significances ascribed to it. Maronitis in his introductory note criticizes all these readings of the play as insufficiently nuanced, and he acknowledges that “conflict” and Antigone’s isolation are the heart of this work and of its interpretation. Having been instructed how they should read the Antigone, interpreters of the text find their understanding of Maronitis’ translation further conditioned in multiple respects by the translator’s programmatic statement. This study is intended to conduct a comparative analysis of source and target text, by describing translational phenomena in order to understand and explain them. In an effort to look more closely at the translator’s “poetics” the present study takes the form of an episode-by-episode examination of the play, giving special attention to issues 106 such as the rendering of the key terms of the play such as φίλος - ἐχθρός, φρόνησις-ἀφροσύνη. What follows it is a schematic overview of the conclusions reached throughout this study: 1) As we observed in examining the treatment of φίλος - ἐχθρός, φρόνησις-ἀφροσύνη Maronitis made efforts to render these cluster words consistently by the same word or group of words whenever they occur. 2) His general tendency is to maintain consistency in the translation of words with weighty significance such as key religious and political terminology in order to be followed by the readers in their manifold meanings as employed by Sophocles. 3) Maronitis tries to reproduce in the host language most of the effects and most of the fine points of style (such as word order, repetition, juxtaposition of images, the tonal level of the language of the characters) that the play has in the original language in order to produce a coherent whole. 4) Since all translations are refracted by the intent and interpretation of the translator, repetitions are deleted if the same word calls for different renderings in different lines. 5) Maronitis has benefited from the ancient scholia and in many cases he incorporated their interpretations into his translation in order to gain a better understanding of the original function of the text. 6) Some ambiguities or linguistic complexities of the ancient Greek cannot be easily inscribed in the translation without forcing the translator to deviate from the original text or to embed explanation. Maronitis always chooses the word closest to the meaning of ancient Greek term in its context and he does not hesitate to clarify the text by expansion. 7) Maronitis’ translation is emancipated from the original text and demands its linguistic and literary autonomy. Despite its autonomous typographical status (it does not present its own text along with the original) this translation keeps a balance between the imperatives of the source and the target language. In conclusion, despite the fact that Maronitis’ overall intention remains to get as close to the original text as he can, he allows himself a considerable amount of freedom in order to recreate the feel and the impact of the original as completely as he can in the target-language.
|Alternative title / Subtitle:||όψεις της ερμηνευτικής προσέγγισης και της μεταφραστικής ποιητικής του Δ.Ν. Μαρωνίτη|
|Institution and School/Department of submitter:||Πανεπιστήμιο Ιωαννίνων. Φιλοσοφική Σχολή. Τμήμα Φιλολογίας|
|Subject classification:||Σοφοκλής. Αντιγόνη|
|Appears in Collections:||Διατριβές Μεταπτυχιακής Έρευνας (Masters)|
Files in This Item:
|Μ.Ε. ΘΕΟΔΟΣΙΟΥ ΑΝΤΩΝΙΑ 2019.pdf||1.46 MB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:This item is a favorite for 0 people.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.