by Zdeněk Rotrekl

The theory of translation, in my opinion, lacks the practical reflection of itself - detailed critiques of existing translations. That is why I have decided to try to do one and in the end on its bases suggest some more general topics.

Someone may say that it is a waste of time and that such a critique is absolutely useless. I do not think so, and to demonstrate my point I would like to use a simile from chess. In chess there exist theory, real games and comments on the real games. What purpose do the comments serve? They rise the awareness of the fact that the theory is important and that it works, supply new examples, which will make the theory more understandable, open new areas for theoretical research and, last but not least, suggest where the theory and reality do not correspond. The critique of translation could serve all these purposes as well and moreover it can inform the customer which translation is a waste of money and which one is worth buying.

Into this group I put the mistakes which cannot be found without the original. Here belong the words which the translator overlooked, wrongly interpreted or wrongly translated. Every translator makes these mistakes, but the criterium, which decides how good or bad the translator is, is not their number, but how much of the text should be changed to correct it. This criterium is counted in the table under the heading “text influenced.”

page 11 - bestirred himself x nechal … všeho (wrong translation)

page 15 - Each believed that he could destroy this noted wolf, the first by means of a newly devised poison, which was to be laid out in an entirely new manner x Každý z nich byl přesvědčen, že jemu se podaří toho proslulého vlka zničit; jeden spoléhal na nedávno objevený jed, který se má nastražit nějakým zbrusu novým způsobem. (wrong tense)

page 17 - (Cowboys are going to bed and suddenly they hear the wolf’s voice, but they cannot see it and one of them says) “There he is” x “Tamhle je.” (wrong interpretation)

page 25 - heart-whole x klidným srdcem (wrong translation)

page 31 - closely watching x z blízka prohlížím (wrong translation)

page 33 - They spent x strávili (wrong interpretation, aspect)

page 37 - He has hammered x Vtlouká (wrong interpretation, aspect)

page 44 - partly covered him x zakryla pečlivě (wrong translation)

page 44 - this strange sond without footfalls x zvláštního šramotu (missing information)

page 45 - those seedlings that would compete with them /pines/ for the worthless waste x semenáčkům, které by se s nimi chtěly dělit o tu jalovou pustinu (wrong translation)

page 47 - he could go all around the swamp by two different ways x mohl proběhnout celou mokřinu křížem krážem (wrong translation)

page 49 - cats, skunks, coons and men x kočky, skunkové a lidé (missing word)

page 58 - As they came together they leaped up and struck out x Jak se srazili, vyskočili do výšky (wrong interpretation)

page 62 - unfrozen mud x namrzlé bláto

page 68 - the scornful reply was x odpověděl jen tak na půl úst (wrong translation)

page 69 - semi-daily hunt x každodenní štvanici (missing word)

page 69 - Bingo would sally forth at racing speed over the plain and a few minutes later return, driving the unhappy yellow cow at full gallop before him. x už se vyřítil závodním tempem po pláni a chudáka Plavku hnal v plném trysku před sebou (missing information)

page 96 - Meanwhile Paddy x Irčan Paddy už se zatím (added word)

page 106 - not less than a score of mares x celou dvacítku klisen (limited interpretation)

page 109 - came back and instructed the cook … to make for Alamosa Arroyo x vrátil zpátky a poučil kuchaře… aby se pustil na jih k říčce Alamose (wrong interpretation)

page 109 - /he/ walked his horse quietly x Popojel tiše ke stádu (wrong translation)

page 115 - and it began to be very damp work before it was finished x a stálo je to hodně potu, než s tím skoncovali (wrong translation)

page 116 - each man was instructed x každý muž /dostal/ poučení (wrong interpretation)

page 117 - Jo’s dared not run his best x Joův kůn /si/ netroufal pustit se rovnou (wrong interpretation)

page 117 - Jo foresaw escape in this, and pushed his jaded mount at any cost to head him off x Jo už viděl, jak mu uniká, a štval svého uštvaného koně jak zběsilý, aby mustanga odehnal (wrong interpretation)

page 118 - his short half a mile of start x slabá míle dřívějšího náskoku (missing word)

page 119 - the matchless Pacer save and free x nedostižný Mimochodník živ a zdráv (wrong translation)

page 126 - The old shepherd, with all his faults, his continual striving after his ideal state - intoxication - and his mind-shrivelling life in general was rarely brutal to Wully x Starý ovčák se všemi svýmoi chybami a se svou věčnou posedlostí po pití, bez kterého se nemohl obejít a které mu pomalu zakalovalo jeho beztak už mdlý rozum, byl ještě na Wullyho neobyčeně surový. (wrong interpretation)

page 127 - The great factory chimneys were just starting up for the day and belching out fogbanks x Vysoké tovární komíny právě zahájily nový den a se hřmotem ze sebe chrlily (added information)

page 130 - Nature meant him for a frontiersman x Přírodní podmínky mu určily úděl hraničáře (wrong interpretation)

page 132 - I stepped around past his nose and walked on x odbočil jsem do trávy a přitom jsem mu lehce zavadil o čumák. (wrong translation)

page 133 - lying on some planks x vyhříval na slunci na skládce prken (added information)

page 134 - Aye, we’s seen summat o’ that in last night’s work x Povídali! Však sme to včera v noci viděli na vlastní voči (wrong translation)

page 143 - blue rows of fat blood-quills x modravé řádky krvavých brků (missing word)

page 146 - He had no wealth, no taxes, no social pretentions x Netížilo ho ani bohatství, ani daně a společenské postavení (wrong translation)

page 150 - they redoubled their optimistic announcements to the world in an “I told you so” mood x své optimistické hlásání do světa ještě zdvojnásobily. (missing words)

page 151 - And there he mounted the very log where first he had drummed x Tam vyskočil na touž kládu, na které bubnoval vždycky (wrong translation)

page 153 - /Redruff/ was just a little dashed to find the brood with claims far stronger than his own x a trošinku ho zamrzelo, že si na ni ta drobotina dělá mnohem větší právo než on sám (wrong interpretation)

This group of mistakes probably should belong to the previous group because the problems discussed here are mistakes in translation. However, I decided to create a separate group because these mistakes are different. They can be spotted by the reader without knowing the original. Into this group belong such mistakes as wrong FSP and unidiomatic usage of a word.

page 13 - a proto na něho líčili jed ve všelijakých nenápadných podobách, ale on ho pokaždé objevil, a tak mu unikl.

page 19 - couval po své stopní dráze (unidiomatic)

page 20 - u ní jsem nastražil dvoje silná železa, důkladně zbavená jakéhokoli pachu a obzvlášť pečlivě zamaskovaná. (strange construction - it seems as if the traps were of such a coulour that they could not be seen)

page 21 - Nevím, jestli ho vedla naděje, že ji tam najde, nebo touha po pomstě, ale nakonec se pomstil, protože překvapil chudáka našeho hlídacího psa venku a roztrhal ho na cucky necelých padesát yardů od prahu.(FSP)

page 30 - havran je pořád ve službě, pořád na válečné noze (unidiomatic expession)

page 39 - po jeho stopní dráze (unidiomatic expression)

page 46 - ale proti Světlance s chundelatým pírkem se musí jít všichni schovat (unidiomatic expression, this should mean that the cottontail is the best)

page 47 - Tak se šípkový keř ocitl na válečné noze (unidiomatic expression)

page 49 - Vždycky dej na sojčí varování,” říkala Světlanka, “je to sice takový kazisvět a klevetník zlomyslná a zloděj nad zloděje, ale nic jí neujde. S chutí by se do nás pustila, ale díky šípkovému keři je na nás krátká; a má stejné nepřátele jako my, takže se vyplatí si jí všímat. (influence of the source language, the correct word was “ale”)

page 50 - ale před ní se musí jít schovat (see above)

page 57 - u něhož se Trhoušek vždycky stavíval na paty (unidiomatic expression)

page 78 - /pes/ Do konce zimy zchroml a nakonec mu odpadly dva prsty. (unidiomatic expression)

Liška

page 89 - hnízdo liščat (unidiomatic expression)

page 94 - a klusal po mělčině podél břehu tak dvě stě yardů daleko (influence of the source language)

page 107 - Ale když jsme druhý den přebrodili říčku Alamosa Arroyo a stoupali zas ke zvlněné prérii, přitiskl se najednou Jack Burns, který jel první, těsně k šíji svého koně a prudce se ke mně do vozu otočil se slovy: “Vyndejte pušku, tady je ten - hřebec!” (FSP)

page 118 - ale z ničeho nic, snad na to vnitřní varování, Mimochodník odbočil (wrongly used pronoun)

Ohnivák

page 142 - a na písčině, pěkně stíněné ostružiním, se pak provalovali celé odpoledne (may be a printing mistake)

page 148 - až najednou shledal, že nevědomky bubnuje (unidiomatic expression, the same problem appears on the pages 151, 152, 153, 156, 158 )12

page 159 - soják (strange word)

The translation of interjections is quite an interesting problem. Levý says that

This statement can be interpreted as: If it is a common and widely used interjection in the source language then it should be translated by a common interjection in the target language. If the interjection is not common then it should be only phonetically transcribed.

There is no problem with the translation of the crow’s calling craw, cacacaca caw as krá, however I hesitate when the horned owl gives “a guttural grrr-oo” and it is only transcribed into Czech as grrrú. The owls are in Czech commonly known to make the sound húú and the book “Ptačí svět” claims that they make a sound buhu-uhu-uhu. As I was not able to decide in such cases what was right, I decided not to regard such cases as mistakes. However I still think that there should be made some research which would make the relationship between the English and Czech interjections clearer.

Even though I say above that I will not regard the translation of interjections as mistakes, I have to make three exceptions. In the story Natrhouško we can read on the page 54 “pěl nafouklý skokan kvákavě chválu na ´džbán piva´.” This does not make any sense in Czech, because it is a wrong translation of a very difficult onomatopoeically motivated sentence “a bloated bullfrog was singing the praises of a ´jug o´ rum´. Here the translator should use a substitution.

I found another case where the translator made a mistake with an interjection in the story about Bingo. On the page 79 the translator writes “ozvalo se pronikavé ´bink´ - a železné čelisti třetí pasti mi sevřely levou nohu.” This is a translation of the following passage: “there was a sharp ´clank´ and the iron jaws of trap No. 3 closed tight on my left foot.” Here it is, in my opinion, an obvious case of a common interjection and therefore it should have been translated by the interjection “cvak” which is commonly used for traps. The same case of a common interjection can be found on the page 86 where a dog makes “halasné ´bau, bau´” which is obviously just an onomatopoeic transcription of a common interjection. Here the substitution should have been used.

The fact that an animal story deals mostly with animals could lead someone to a claim that the cultural features are not important. But it is not so. Although the features I am going to discuss are different to the ones which are usually dealt with, they are not less important.

As I write above, the cultural problems which I encountered in these stories were of a different kind than usually. As the stories deal with animals and plants which very often cannot be found in this country and which are well known to the readers in the source language, there sometimes appears the problem that the Czech reader does not know what the author is talking about. For example on the page 37 it is written: “Poznají pach střelného prachu a jižní stranu tsugy.” Here the Czech reader does not know what “tsuga” while the English reader knows that a “hemmlock tree” is a kind of coniferous tree. Of course, in such a story the translator must not use a substitution, therefore they should use an inner explanation. And as it is a story which should be read by children, the translator should use the inner explanation more often than usually.

Another cultural feature are the measures. Korelusová in her translation uses the English measures all the time. This is nowadays regarded as a mistake. However, as I did not follow closely the usage of the measures in the translation, I only guess the number of occurrences.

The last issue which I would like to mention here is the problem of the geographical names. Sometime in the past there appeared a strong tendency to translate the geographical names, for example Diamantové prameny (p.18), Cedrová hora (p.18) and Bahnitý potok (p.139). Surprisingly enough, it does not disturb the Czech reader in this case, but it is hardly a recommendable practice. This approach is possible in this case because the tradition of the translation of this kind of literature allows it. Moreover, when the name is translated the translator does not have to add the inner explanations. However, this translation is possible only in this case because the places are only local and the tradition of this genre allows it.

Style and other issues

The translators of the literature for children are very often blamed for oversimplifying the texts and for using weaker expressions than are used in the original. In my opinion Korelusová does not do any of these.

The last thing I would like to mention are the names of the characters - in this case animals. They very often remain the same in Czech as they were in English, because there is no obvious motivation behind them. If this is the case then there is no problem. But at the moment when the name is somehow motivated, I think, the translation is not very good. The names like Mimochodník and Natrhouško are too long and their meaning is too obvious. However, I do not dare to claim that this is a mistake. Such a claim would have to be supported by a study of similar original Czech texts which could be altogether different research.

The table clearly shows that the translation by Eva Korelusová is exceptionally good. Even though there are some mistakes, they are not serious because they do not influence too much of the text.

This detailed analysis of the translation can serve as a stepping stone for any further studies of children literature. It confirmed that the translation “Divoké děti lesů” made by Eva Korelusová is exceptionally good and at the same time it highlighted some theoretical problems, such as the translation of interjections and motivated names, which was its purpose.

Books used:

Seton, Ernest Thompson. Wild Animals I Have Known. Toronto, McClelland and Stewart Limited, 1977.

Seton, Ernest Thompson. Divoké děti lesů. Trans. Eva Korelusová. Praha, Mladá fronta, 1968.