<<
>>

2.7 Scheme in front - behind and its combination to the scheme the caused movement

The metaphors based on the scheme in front - behind, transfer hierarchical relations between the original and transfer. The main consequence of these metaphors - that located behind often is worse located in front as located behind usually it is not intended for consideration.

The metaphor of an underside of a gobelin was used for expression of traditional perception of transfer as less qualitative product, than the original. As marks T.Hermans, this metaphor appears for the first time in history about Femistokle (told Plutarhom) which did not wish to talk to the Persian king through the translator because as it was expressed, «transfer is not better than a gobelin underside» [tsit. On: Hermans 1985: 114]. Later this image was used also by other writers (including Cervantes) and translators [Ibid.]. As specifies J. Hauell (1632), some compare transfers to an underside of a Turkish gobelin: « Some hold translations not unlike to be | The wrong side of a Turkey tapestry »[Howell 1907 v. 2, 55]. As it uses this metaphor in a laudatory poem (devoted to transfer of J. Hauarda), it will transform it to more positive image, noticing, that he yet did not see a cloth at which would be less than the underfulfilled ends of threads, than in a gobelin created Hauardom:« Yet I ne’er saw a piece from Venice come | Had fewer thrums set on our country loom »[Ibid.].

J. Kolman (1765) uses a similar metaphor for the description of prose translations of poetry: «If to admit, that all transfers as Quixote [...] has caustically and witty noticed, are similar to an underside of a Flemish gobelin, those who transfer poetry prose, it is possible to tell, intentionally turn out a cloth of the original seams outside» («If it be true of translations in general, according to the severe and witty censure of Don Quixote [.] that they are like the wrong side of the Flemish Tapestry [...]; they, who render verse by prose, may be said purposely to turn the pieces of the original the seamy side without» [Colman 1975: 124]). In this case the scheme in front - is behind combined with the scheme the caused movement. We will notice, as Hauell, and Kolman disagree completely with understanding of transfer as gobelin underside: they use a metaphor very cautiously («some hold translations not unlike to be.»; «if it be true.»).

Many modern translators often agree that transfers usually have lacks (errors, and also stylistic errors, such as style standardization - see [Chesterman 1997: 71 - 72]). However modern translators use a metaphor of an underside of a gobelin for judgement not only negative, but also positive aspects of transfer. According to J. Erdal (2007), «it is necessary to see even a gobelin seamy side, with all its hanging down threads» [Erdal 2007: 69]. D.Krem (2011) formulates a metaphor of an underside of a gobelin in poststrukturalistskih terms: « To understand, that such and that it represents a gobelin, the poststructuralist just would develop its underside outside and would look, where at it all threads - so to say, would spread out it to components »[Krem] (« If you want to understand what a tapestry is and what it represents, what a poststructuralist would do is precisely turn it over and see where all the threads are: as it were, decompose it »). From this interpretation of a metaphor follows [In the same place], that« consideration of a seamy side of a gobelin is an exclusive sight "(" looking at the wrong side of the tapestry is a privileged view ») as transfer does the text clearer, allowing the translator it is better to understand it.

The poststructuralism is connected with a deconstruction. The term a deconstruction has entered Z.Derrida in work «De la grammatologie» [Derrida 1967]. By definition of J. Rejnoldsa, the deconstruction is an analysis, «which overturns dichotomies» («reversing dichotomies») for the purpose of blasting of the settled hierarchies [Reynolds URL: http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida/1. As marks G.C.Spivak in the foreword to its transfer «De la grammatologie» Derridy, «if we are for ever adhered to our points of view, we, at least, can turn intentionally our points of view» («If one is always bound by one’s perspective, one can at least deliberately reverse perspectives» [Spivak 1976: xxviii]). The concept perevorachivanija («reversal») is connected with an underside (the reverse side), therefore the deconstruction is logically applicable to understanding of transfer which was traditionally comprehended within the limits of the hierarchical metaphors based on the scheme in front - behind.

Besides, the literary aspect of a deconstruction means «interpretation of the text and search of the latent alternative values in the text» [Reynolds URL: http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida/]. The statement, that transfer gives «an exclusive sight», is based on the scheme in front - behind which consequence is that the underside is usually hidden from a sight. Therefore this scheme allows to tell thought that the translator finds the latent values in the text of the author and expresses them in transfer.

So, the metaphors based on the scheme in front - behind, traditionally promoted judgement of transfer as less qualitative text, than the original. It is connected by that the given scheme assumes a negative estimation of the subjects located behind, and a positive estimation of the subjects located in front (forward places at theatre, forward position of the participant in races or jumps etc.). However traditional hierarchical relations between the original and transfer have been rethought by some translators from deconstruction positions. It is a good example of how the theory can hide already settled consequence of an image-scheme and to pay attention to other consequences, namely that the underside is hidden from a sight and consequently something can represent interesting and new. This consequence corresponds to thought that transfer allows to understand the original and its values it is better, than reading on a source language.

<< | >>
A source: SHATALOV Dmitry Gennadievich. METAPHORICAL JUDGEMENT of TRANSFER. 2014

More on topic 2.7 Scheme in front - behind and its combination to the scheme the caused movement:

  1. 2.6 Scheme close - its combination to schemes the INDEPENDENT MOVEMENT, the CAUSED MOVEMENT, FROM - To
  2. 2.1 Scheme independent movement and its combination to the scheme from - to
  3. 2.8 Scheme above - below and its combinations to schemes independent MOVEMENT, FROM - To and the CAUSED MOVEMENT
  4. 2.4 Scheme inside - outside and its combinations to schemes the INDEPENDENT MOVEMENT, the CAUSED MOVEMENT, FROM - To
  5. 2.5 Scheme a part-whole and its combinations to schemes the caused MOVEMENT and FROM - To
  6. 2.11 Scheme communication and its combinations to schemes independent MOVEMENT and the BARRIER
  7. 2.10 Schemes a barrier and removal of a barrier and their combination to the scheme INSIDE - OUTSIDE
  8. 2.9 Combinations of schemes imposing, in front - behind, above - below, is close - FAR and INDEPENDENT MOVEMENT
  9. 2.12 Scheme expansion
  10. 2.2 Scheme a cycle
  11. 4.2 Kinematic scheme of the mobile robot
  12. 2.3 Schemes the CAUSED MOVEMENT, resistance and FROM - To
  13. the Scheme of share building.
  14. the drawing upon a credit Scheme
  15. the scheme of scientifically-economic experience
  16. The purposes, problems, hypotheses, the scheme and the research program