Academic journal article Interactions

Anthroponym Translation in Children's Literature: Chasing E.H. Porter's Pollyanna through Decades in Turkish/Cocuk Yazininda Ozel Isim Cevirileri: Eleanor H. Porter'in Pollyanna Adli Eserinin Dort Farkli Surumu Uzerine Bir Incelme

Academic journal article Interactions

Anthroponym Translation in Children's Literature: Chasing E.H. Porter's Pollyanna through Decades in Turkish/Cocuk Yazininda Ozel Isim Cevirileri: Eleanor H. Porter'in Pollyanna Adli Eserinin Dort Farkli Surumu Uzerine Bir Incelme

Article excerpt

Introduction

Translation no longer comprises of "linguistic substitution or mere code-switching, but a 'cultural transfer'" (Snell-Hornby 319). In other words, text production across languages through translation is not just language, but social interaction between participants and cultures representing different, even incompatible worlds. Translated children's books as globalized products build bridges between different cultures. Not only linguistic, but also social, ideological, and pedagogical factors come into the foreground, since there exist text-specific challenges in the form of interplay of picture and words in picture books, cultural references, playful use of language; dialect, register, names, and the possibility of double addressing concerning both children and adults.

Children's literature, which is denoted to be a despised step child" in the literary field, differs from adult literature in many respects. Firstly, a book for children is expected to have different merits ranging from ability to educate and entertain, providing conformity with accepted norms and values in society to being able to attract both parents and children. Secondly, children's literature, on the one hand, espouses rigid constrains to be imposed on texts concerning topic, plot, norms and values inserted into texts, illustrations, the cross-cultural and cross-linguistic transfer, language control in the translations of children's literature in relation to simplicity vs. difficulty of language level and standard vs. nonstandard language use. According to Frank, "protecting children from 'negative aspect of life, such as violence, death and suffering, and form unrefined behavior in terms of language and manners, can reveal conventional language and literary translational norms of target culture" (17). Thirdly, on the other hand, this adult interventionism in parents, society and translator triangle leads to far more liberties to be taken in translation for children through adaptations (Frank 14-16). Adapting Barthes' (1974) notion of "readerly vs. writerly text" to children's literature, Frank mentions that literary experience of children influenced by such interventions paves the way either for a "readerly text" where a reader is located as the receiver of a fixed, pre-determined text or a "writerly text" which forces reader to be an active meaning producer (153, 181). Educational concerns give rise to readerly strategies of explicitation, didacticism and the imposition of norms of acceptability, whereas, attempts to develop aesthetic or literary quality of the text result in writerly text production. In this respect, text control through fidelity, and textual recreation through adaptation and composition are situated along the axis of two polarized textual interventions, which are domestication and foreignization creating readerly and writerly texts, respectively.

Considering the abovementioned tendencies, the difficulty of translating a literary text seems to be enhanced, if a text is for children. The translation of proper names is one of the most challenging activities, which becomes more complicated in children's literature, as proper names usually have polysemous nature indicating sex, age, geographical belonging, history, specific meaning, playfulness of language and cultural connotations.

There is no doubt that intertwining relations between the translation practices and socio-political conditions of a country will give rise to more refined studies to take place that in turn facilitates the understanding the various elements that interfere in the translational behavior. By virtue of this fact, the primary aim of this study is to shed light on the choices at work in anthroponym translations in four different versions of Eleanor H. Porter's Pollyanna (1913) into Turkish, representing over a four-decade period in Turkish socio-political life. Special emphasis will be upon the designation and interpretation of translation strategies in anthroponym translations within Poli Anna (1931), Pollyanna (1948), Pollyanna (1958), and Gulenay (1973), a cultural

adaptation of Pollyanna by Kemal Bilbasar with a nickname E. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.