Lingual-Stylistic Peculiarities of G. Byron's "The Prisoner of Chillon" and "Sonnet on Chillon", and Their Reproduction in the Translations by P. Hrabovs'kyi, V. Mysyk, M. Kabaliuk and V. Zhukovs'kyi

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND RESEARCH OF UKRAINEIVAN FRANKO NATIONAL UNIVERITY IN L`VIV


Hryhoriy Kochur DepartmentTranslation StudiesContrastive Linguistics


Lingual-Stylistic Peculiarities of G. Byron`s The Prisoner of Chillon and Sonnet on Chillon, and Their Reproduction in the Translations by P. Hrabovs`kyi, V. Mysyk, M. Kabaliuk, and V. Zhukovs`kyi


by:

_____________fourth-year studentthe group Inp-42by:

______________


L`VIV 2008

CONTENTS


INTRODUCTION1. THE NOTION OF AUTHOR`S AND TRANSLATOR`S STYLE AND THEIR INTERRELATION IN THE TARGET TEXT

.1 Style as a literary notion and its reproduction in translation

.2 Stylistic peculiarities of G. Byrons poem The Prisoner of Chillon as a literary work

1.3 Translation methods and translation styles of V. Zhukovs`kyi, P. Hrabovs`kyi, and M. Kabaliuk as translators of G. Byrons poem The Prisoner of Chillon

1.4 Translation methods and translation styles of P. Hrabovs`kyi, V. Mysyk and D. Pavlychko as translators of G. Byrons Sonnet on Chillon. 2. THE REPRODUCTION OF STYLE-CREATING MEANS OF DIFFERENT LEVELS IN THE TRANSLATIONS OF THE PRISONER OF CHILLON AND SONNET ON CHILLON

2.1 The peculiarities of graphical expression as the style-forming means and their rendering

.2 Alliteration, assonance, consonance and onomatopoeia as phonetic style-creating means

.3 Morphological style-creating means and their reproduction

.4 Lexical means in poetic style-creating and their transference

.5 Syntax as a style-creating means and its rendering

.6 Lingual-stylistic peculiarities of the prosodic means and their rendering


INTRODUCTION


The words of M. Arnold, a prominent English poet and essayist, who claims that it is time for Byron to take up the place he deserves [2: 160], may be as well applied to the Ukrainian translators and literary scholars: it is time to introduce the heritage of the famous English poet to the Ukrainian reader in its full scope. The first steps in this direction were accomplished by M. Kostomarov, who translated 6 poems by G. Byron into Ukrainian in the year 1841. Since that time G. Byrons works aroused interest of such translators as P. Kulish, I. Franko, Lesya Ukrainka, P. Hrabovs`kui, V. Samiylenko, V. Mysyk, D. Zahul, Ju. Korets`kyi, D. Palamarchuk and M. Kabaliuk. According to L. Herasymchuk, up till the year 1985 into Ukrainian there have been translated and published about 100 printer's sheets of G. Byron`s works [7: 159], such poems as Mazeppa and Cain being among them. Among the more recent publications of G. Byron`s works one may name the collection George Gordon Byron. Works [27]. Some of the poems included into the book were translated into Ukrainian by Valeriya Bohuslavs`ka, the translator of the majority of the works presented, for the first time.. Franko once named Byron and Shakespeare the two giants who generally started literature [qtd. in: 6: 157]. Despite the fact that Byronism as a trend was not very popular in Ukrainian original poetic works, Ukrainian poets were familiar with G. Byron`s works; at first, via the Russian translations by V. Zhukovs`kyi, M. Lermontov and F. Tiutchev, and later - in Ukrainian translations, of which the most prominent were those done by I. Franko [6: 155-156]. It is not uncommon for a translator to generally study the creativity and personality of the author whom he translates, thus among the G. Byron`s researchers one may name I. Franko, Ju. Korets`kyi and M. Kabaliuk [11]. A great contribution to the research of G. Byron and Ukrainian Byroniana was made by such representatives of Literature Studies as K. Shakhova, L. Herasymchuk [6], I. Lozyns`kyi [16], O. Tsishchyk [20], D. Kuzyk [14], [15], M. Novykova and M. Tiutiunnyk [17] as well as R. Zorivchak [10] and O. Dzera [8]. Their studies encompassed a variety of aspects, beginning from the study of the great poets both personality and biography in the correspondence with their influence on his works, or history of G. Byron`s translations and their contrast and comparison, to the study of the main themes and topics broached in poets creativity, and his style.paper researches the lingual-stylistic peculiarities of the formal aspect of style reproduction: the way the authors style is created via the combination of different artistic means at all levels of language; and its reproduction by rendering or compensation of the latter. The aim of the research is to study the possible methods and procedures which may be applied for the reproduction of specific formal means and the influence of each separate translators decision in this respect on the style of the translation generally. Poetic works by G. Byron are the object of the research; and lingual-stylistic peculiarities of G. Byron`s The Prisoner of Chillon and Sonnet on Chillon, and their reproduction in the translations by P. Hrabovs`kyi, V. Mysyk, M. Kabaliuk, and V. Zhukovs`kyi are its subject.work rests on the following assumptions:

1.Style of a literary work is a combination of content-defining (style-creating factors: imagery, themes, problems touched upon in the text, genre norms) and form-defining (style-creating means: lingual expressive means with their lexical and syntactic structures and acoustic peculiarities) elements, which are interrelated and influence each other;

2.Translators cannot but express their interpretation, views and beliefs in their translation, thus their personality influences translation choices, and correspondently, the style of the translation;

.Translators style can be considered a style within the style with the variations and small differences within the authors style;

.To achieve such a result, translator has to reproduce both, the content-defining and the form-defining elements in their interconnection, paying attention not only to the general mood of the work and the problems discussed by the author, but also to the formal lingual means of their expression, diverse and numeral they may be, as it is the latter that shape the style the way the tiniest pieces of mosaic shape the picture.present work concentrates mainly on that second part of style reproduction and researches what formal elements create the style at different levels, ways of their rendering and their overall influence on the style reproduction.aim of this paper is to contrast the style of the poem and the styles of its translations, finding the convergent and divergent features in their building elements and defining their impact at the correspondent level as well as generally at the level of a poem. Special attention is dedicated to the graphical level and prosody, which are discussed separately from the other levels of language, as well as to the study of compensation by the means of other levels.the course of research different methods were used, quantitative, comparative, contrastive and oppositional being among them.the material for the research, it was decided to take poem The Prisoner of Chillon and Sonnet on Chillon by G. Byron in the translations by V. Zhukovs`kyi, P. Hrabovs`kyi, M. Kabaliuk, (The Prisoner of Chillon) and P. Hrabovs`kyi, V. Mysyk, and D. Pavlychko as the variety of artistic means at all the language levels provides a rich base for the study. Moreover, the Ukrainian translations of The Prisoner of Chillon and Sonnet on Chillon are a good example of diachronic multiplicity, which is the usual case for the Ukrainian translated literature. Each of the translations discussed above met the requirements of its time, having its purposes and the means of their achievement. The evolution of translators` aims and their methods may serve as a basis for the study of methods evolution in Translation Studies in general.introduction focuses upon the theoretical premises of the research, its topic and objectives.first chapter covers the study of theoretical problems discussed in the research, outlines the stylistic peculiarities of the G. Byron`s works studied, and describes the translation methods of V. Zhukovs`kyi, P. Hrabovs`kyi, V. Mysyk, D. Pavlychko and M. Kabaliuk as their translators.second chapter discusses the peculiarities of the style-creating means reproduction of G. Byron`s The Prisoner of Chillon and Sonnet on Chillon at all the language levels.results of the research are summarised in the conclusions.

Chapter 1. THE NOTION OF AUTHOR`S AND TRANSLATOR`S STYLE AND THEIR INTERRELATION IN THE TARGET TEXT


1.1 Style as a literary notion and its reproduction in translation


The notion of style in general and of the style of the particular author is rather vague and ambiguous. A New English Dictionary on Historical Principles lists in this entry 28 definitions divided into three main groups: I) stylus, pin, stalk; II) writing; manner of writing (hence also of speaking); III) Manner, fashion [36:1205-1206]. As this paper studies lingual-stylistic peculiarities, that are those which are connected with language, we will focus on the semems of the second group. It includes 7 points, one of them being obsolete and two more not related to the belles-lettres. The remaining four are the following:, sb. <…> 13. The manner of expression characteristic of a particular writer (hence of an orator), or of a literary group or period; a writer`s mode of expression considered in regard to clearness, effectiveness, beauty and the like. <…>

. In generalized sense: Those features of literary composition which belong to form and expression rather than to the substance of the thought or method expressed. <…>

. A manner of discourse, or tone of speaking, adopted in addressing others or in ordinary conversation.

. A form of words, phrase, or formula, by which a particular idea or thought is expressed. [36:1206]Dictionary of the Ukrainian Language in 11 volumes is far less detailed and provides four semems, the first two relevant to the Literature Studies:. 1. The combination of the features characteristic of the art in definite time and of definite trend or distinctive of individual manner of artist as to his idea and artistic form. <…>

. The combination of methods in linguistic means usage, characteristic of particular writer, or literary work, trend, genre, etc. // The combination of peculiar features in discourse organisation, manner of linguistic expression. // The discourse organisation as to the syntactic norms and rules of word usage [35].Literature Studies Dictionary gives rather similar definition of the style, as well as The Comprehensive Dictionary of the Modern Ukrainian Language [33], but it also emphasizes the notion of authors style:`s style - is a combination of the particular features of author`s creativity, which make his works different from the works of other authors [34:642].we can see, the definitions are rather broad and ambiguous, NED speaks of clearness, effectiveness and beauty of writers mode, while the Ukrainian dictionaries say nothing of the kind, but concentrate on the usage of expressive means, discourse organization and grammatical rules. V. Vinogradov explains this ambiguity in understanding of the notion of style by the fact that different researchers choose different principles as a basis for definition [4]. Indeed, V. Alekseev views style as something original and similar to nothing and believes it to be close to aesthetic taste, though, not quite the same thing; and dwells on the deviation from norm as a necessary characteristic of artistic style [1]. A very interesting approach is presented by O. Sokolov and V. Fashchenko, who differentiate style-creating factors (writer`s imagery, themes, problems touched upon in the text, and genre norms) and style-creating means (form elements of the artistic text: composition, lingual expressive means with their lexical and syntactic structures and acoustic peculiarities) [34: 642]. Since the reproduction of the former was studied by O. Tsishchyk in the article Contrastive Analysis of the Translations of G. Byron`s Poem The Prisoner of Chillon (Зіставний аналіз перекладів поеми Дж. Байрона The Prisoner of Chillon) [20], where he contrasted the poem and the Sonnet on Chillon with their translations by P. Hrabovs`kyi, D. Pavlychko, M. Kabaliuk and V. Zhukovs`kyi as to the reproduction of content and idea of G. Byron`s creation, it is the latter which will be discussed in this paper. We believe that the study of the form elements is better to be conducted according to the levels of language; and their reproduction should be studied at all the levels, graphical and prosodic including. Moreover, not only the reproduction of usually characteristic features should be studied, but also of those which are highly unusual for the author, and thus violate his usual style of writing.reproduction of authors style in the translations to other languages is a very interesting problem, the one which has been frequently discussed by numerous scholars: I. Kashkin, K. Chukovskiy, A. Parshyn. For instance, A. Parshyn states that style and manner of writing of the translation should be the same as in the original, and strongly supports the stylistic assimilation (that is, when the style of the original and translation is similar if not the same) as opposed to stylistic creolisation (so-called transfusions) [19]. R. Zorivchak defines the ideal style of translation as the best possible representation of authors idiostyle, the result of finding of the best means to express sense, and to render functions of all components of the original in the target language [qtd. in: 19].is a well known fact, that each translator, as each reader in fact, views the source text in a different way. Furthermore, translators personality influences not only the process of reading and interpreting of the original text, but also the process of actually writing the translation. As K. Chukovskiy properly notes, each translator introduces into translated work a part of his own personality [21]. Thus, the notion of translators style and the vision of translator as authors rival appear. The notion of a translator as a figure not dependent on the author can be seen in the views of the school of Manipulation, or descriptivists. J. Holmes and A. Lefevere believed, that translation products were to be traced back to the sociohistorical conditions of their emergence in the (mainly literary) "systems", "états de société", "fields" or "spaces" making up the host environments; their main idea was that the "sociocultural inscription" of translation can be described and accounted for [23]. Neither deep structure level, nor abstract core of meaning were important, and their translation method presupposed domestication, thus leaving the author`s style out of the scope of translator`s interest.

The Soviet school of translation, as well as the Ukrainian one later, considers that for the most adequate rendering of the original the more translator is able to reproduce the authors style, the better. For instance, P. Antokol`skiy, M. Auezov, and M. Ryl`s`kyi believe that translator has a right for manifestation in his work of his personality, and of his own style, correspondently. Their position is based on the fact, that any creativity is individual, and translator cannot exclude his personality from the process of translation [qtd. in: 1]. The school of deconstruction goes even further in this respect: translator himself chooses which implications of the original he wants to make explicit, what possibilities presented by the original he will take and develop, and what he decides to ignore. Another approach is close to the hermeneutic project by L. Kolomiets` [13], when lingual, literal and socio-cultural levels, and authors style, correspondently should remain as intact as possible. This approach is characteristic of H. Kochur`s school of translation, the main rule of which is to render and preserve as much as possible. There exists also the third view on this problem. G. Gachehciladze attempts at combining two previous approaches and states that translation should equally combine the author`s style and the translator`s style, thus being a kind of hybrid [5].

In this paper we agree with the position of V. Alekseev: translators style has a right for existence, but only within the authors style, which should be prior to translator [1]. This idea is supported by the existence of numerous translations, which proved the possibility of adequate transference of the authors style, translations of The Prisoner of Chillon and Sonnet on Chillon among them. Therefore we can assume the existence of some generalized conclusions and norms of style rendering, which can be singled out for the better understanding of the process and then used to help translators in their work. In this paper we will try to find such helpful scenarios at each level discussed., there are no ready-made rules how to render authors style, and each artistic text demands special approach with its unique variation of methods used. It has been noticed that the more translator likes the works of the author he is to translate, and the more his worldview resembles that of the authors one, the less problems translator is likely to encounter and the better rendering of style he is likely to perform. We recognize the impossibility of full rendering of authors style in a translated work; however, we believe that this aim is worth at least trying to achieve.


1.2 Stylistic peculiarities of G. Byrons poem The Prisoner of Chillon as a literary work


In order to render style-creating means, it is necessary to define which of the variety of formal means the author uses to create his style. It is natural, that some formal means author may use frequently, while others he may never address at all. Thus, those formal means which are frequently used by author and are characteristic of his works constitute style-creating means of the given author; and their rendering is transference of the authors style. However, it is necessary to remember, that style deals not only with the constant repetition of some elements while avoiding others; its other part is represented by violations, not only by violations of the source language norms by the author, but also by his violations of his own established style: usage of uncharacteristic, usually avoided means; and avoidance of means which were frequently used before. These should not be overlooked.

Before we start discussion of the poem in question, it is desirable to outline some general features characteristic of G. Byrons style. Though G. Byron recognised the authority of the Enlighters and used in his creativity the poetic achievements of Classicism and Sentimentalism, he is a representative of the Romanticism, developing the stylistic innovations of W. Wordsworth <#"justify">1.3 Translation methods and translation styles of V. Zhukovs`kyi, P. Hrabovs`kyi, and M. Kabaliuk as translators of G. Byrons poem The Prisoner of Chillon


A. Pushkin called V. Zhukovs`kyi a genius of translation [9]; and it is not a mere coincidence that The Prisoner of Chillon is not only known and published in Russia almost exclusively in his translation, even though new translations appear, but is truly believed to be unsurpassed [20: 83]. A possible reason of such a success may be the fact that V. Zhukovs`kyi translated only those poetic works which were close to his worldview in their ideological and aesthetical values [9], and therefore resonated with his own poetic world. V. Zhukovs`kyi is known for his transfusions and transformations of the source texts; he himself admitted to introducing changes within the translated works and never aimed at accuracy or full equivalence of translation. His main purpose was to introduce motifs and ideas of G. Byrons poem to Russian literature, and not to preserve the poets style. That is the cause of some liberties taken with the text: omission of the Sonnet on Chillon, lengthening the poem by introduction of his own lines, restructuring images, and so on. Nevertheless, the aesthetic value of the translation cannot be diminished and its successful findings cannot be denied, despite the changes.. Zhukovs`kyi interpreted The Prisoner of Chillon as melancholic, tragic and sorrowful story of a person; he did not render the image of a fighter because he was not a fighter himself [9]. But the spiritual closeness to the lyrical aspect of G. Byron`s poetry gave him the opportunity to render this aspect of the poem if not flawlessly, than not far from that. Nevertheless, despite the closeness of translators and authors styles, they are not the same. Nor is it the compromised style within the style, as when the choice is to be made, V. Zhukovs`kyi eliminates and changes not only style-creating means, but style-creating factors as well.P. Hrabovs`kyi admitted that the main thing he valued G. Byron`s poetry for was the love of freedom [qtd. in: 20: 82]. That is why he chose the other dominant idea of The Prisoner of Chillon for the leitmotif of his translation: he focused on the social protest [20: 83] and fighting for liberty. Like V. Zhukovs`kyi, P. Hrabovs`kyi was a poet himself, and his interpretation of G. Byrons poem proves to be similar to his poetic world and ideology. Thus, P. Hrabovs`kyi is spiritually close to G. Byron - fighter for freedom, and his translation resembles that part of G. Byrons style and personality which is passionate, ardent, and uncompromising. Although, P. Hrabovs`kyi developed the part of style-creating factors almost alternative to the one chosen by V. Zhukovs`kyi; in some formal features, that is, style-creating factors (prosody, for instance) he followed V. Zhukovs`kyi`s translation decisions. This may be the reason of some contradictions within his translation which are mentioned by O. Tsishchyk [20: 83], and the appearance of the thought that P. Hrabovs`kyi translated The Prisoner of Chillon from V. Zhukovs`kyi`s translation. However, this idea is wrongful. That he translated Sonnet on Chillon which was left out by V. Zhukovs`kyi, is but one proof; P. Hrabovs`kyi`s letters, in which he confided that friends helped him in his translations from English - another, but the very translation speaks for itself. In many cases P. Hrabovs`kyi`s version is closer to the original, or renders the nuances missed in V. Zhukovs`kyi`s translation. Moreover, P. Hrabovs`kyi does not follow the Russian translator, when he introduces changes to the poem; and the accent on the fight for liberty foreign to V. Zhukovs`kyi leave no doubt as to the whether P. Hrabovs`kyi used original in his translation. All of these differences will be further demonstrated in details in the course of the analysis of the translators` choices and methods used.to the translators and authors style, P. Hrabovs`kyi does not fully correspond to the style within the style rule as well. In some excerpts it is translators voice that speaks to the readers, not G. Byrons. The abundance of diminutive suffixes, ellipses, usage of pleonasms, and similar poetic means typical of the Ukrainian poetry, but not of the G. Byrons one, sometimes makes it hard to discern G. Byron behind the lines., neither V. Zhukovs`kyi, nor P. Hrabovs`kyi intended to render the style of G. Byron. Their priority was the idea behind the text, and some ideological or aesthetic effect they wanted to achieve. This task they fulfilled; and their translations have served and continue to serve the purpose of dissemination of great poets ideas and became an important inseparable part of respective literatures.

M. Kabaliuk went even further than two translators discussed above: he combined the views of the poem as a lyrical verse and as a manifest for freedom, and managed to recreate both of these ideas together, in their unity presented by G. Byron. He recognises the significance of G. Byron`s creativity and poet`s importance not only as a representative of a new epoch in literature, but also the founder of the new topics and new artistic froms [11: 128]. Translator`s research of G. Byron`s creativiy gave him the deep comprehension of poet`s ideas and artistic means of their implementation. Being a representative of the Ukrainian school of translation, M. Kabaliuk pays attention to both, form and meaning, as well as their interconnection. Not only his translation is faithful to the philosophic and poetic authors concept, but it is also accurate in the rendering of the formal features [20: 87]., all the translators done their work in accordance with their understanding of the poem, had their aim (to acquaint the reader with the story, or the main idea, or to represent G. Byron`s poetic might), and made their translation choices in relevance with that.


1.4 Translation methods of P. Hrabovs`kyi, V. Mysyk and D. Pavlychko as translators of G. Byrons Sonnet on Chillon


Sonnet on Chillon differs from The Prisoner of Chillon in style and mood. This difference is not striking, as both of the poetic works have the same author, but author`s voice sounds a bit differently in the poem and the sonnet. At first, one should take into account, that Sonnet on Chillon was written as an afterthought to the poem, when G. Byron got to know the tragic details of Bonivar`s fate, and grew to admire this man. The horror of Bonivar`s destiny, admiration which G. Byron felt towards him, and ardous protest against barred windows are primary for sonnet. The first lines of poet`s address to Liberty define the whole verse: it is a call to something innate and sacred in human Mind, praise to those, who wear chains as its mark, and condemnation to all, who dared an infringe on it. These style-creating factors define the style-creating means of the poem, and to translate them properly is a challenge not every translator can meet.. Hrabovs`kyi`s style was discussed in a previous section; however, as a translator of the Sonnet on Chillon P. Hrabovs`kyi is even closer spiritually to G. Byron, than P. Hrabovs`kyi - translator of The Prisoner of Chillon. The previously discussed drawbacks of P. Hrabovs`kyi`s style, such as overuse of diminutive suffixes, ellipses, an such, disappear, when the translator fiery and passionately speaks of Freedom, which was similar in his own poetic works. P. Hrabovs`kyi, though, eliminates the form of sonnet. Nevertheless, his foresong, for he did not call his rendering of Sonnet on Chillon a translation, is a fine example of usage of different translation methods, which will be discussed furtheron.. Mysyk, as other translators of the Sonnet on Chillon: P. Hrabovs`kyi and D. Pavlychko, was both, a poet and a translator. His translation preserves the form of sonnet, though introduced a different division to it. V. Mysyk`s has some examples of fine and successful translation findings, which will be discussed later at the corresponding level. Among the drawbacks of his translation one may name the irregular use of vocative case, which is used for the address to Liberty, but omitted in the first line and in addressing Chillon.. Zorivchak names the D. Pavlychko`s rendering of the sonnet a transfusion [10: 13], as D. Pavlychko, a poet himself, tends to omit images, and even whole lines of the source text, developing those, which he likes and which are close to him. True to say, his rendering includes some very bright translation findings (найсяйливіша, натхненнолиці, священний вівтар), sounds very natural in Ukrainian, and are very melodic. That is why we believe it is worth of studying and is a fine example of translation performed by a talented poet.peculiar feature of the Ukrainian translations of the Sonnet on Chillon is that all the three translators are poets themselves, and very talented poets at that. Thus, it is not surprising that their translations bear not only the features normative for the time of translation, but also the significant signs of their personalities.


Chapter 2. THE REPRODUCTION OF STYLE-CREATING MEANS OF DIFFERENT LEVELS IN THE TRANSLATIONS OF THE PRISONER OF CHILLON AND SONNET ON CHILLON


2.1 The peculiarities of graphical expression as the style-forming means and their rendering


At this level we will study the visual organisation of lines, graphons, and punctuation.first problem to be discussed is the division of poem into parts and its reproduction, in other words, equlinearity. The following table presents the number of lines in each part of the original and its translations, and the general quantity of lines:


OriginalZhukovs`kyiHrabovs`kyiKabaliukI26262424II21252221III21232421IV23202823V15141616VI19202019VII38464439VIII67787067IX20242420X49504449XI18171820XII14211216XIII34493239XIV27252832Total392438406406we can see, neither of the translators retained the same number of lines as in the original, adding 14 (P. Hrabovs`kyi and M. Kabaliuk) to 46 (V. Zhukovs`kyi) lines, which resulted in the decompression of images and thoughts.to the visual organisation of lines, G. Byron frequently introduces different shifts of the lines. One of the brightest examples is the peculiar visual form in the first and in the eighth part; in the former - at the very beginning, and in the latter - at the very end correspondently. In both cases he shortens two middle lines of the four by the half and thus creates some kind of a circle, which is emphasised by the rhyme and rhythm which is automatically changed. Lets look at the first example:


My hair is gray, but not with years,Я сивий; хоч не вік, не страх,Nor grew it whiteЩо сивинуIn a single night,За ніч однуAs men's have grown from sudden fears [32: 353, I, 1-4]*Дає і в молодих роках, [29: 16, I, 1-4]

Взгляните на меня: я сед,Не від лихих старечих днівНо не от хилости и лет;Я весь заслаб, я весь змарнів,Не страх незапный в ночь однуНе жахом ночі однії,До срока дал мне седину. [26: 315, I, 1-4]Що несподівано вража [27: 224, I, 1-4]repetition of this graphical stylistic means at the end of the eighth part sets another closed circle encompassing everything in between the first and the eighth part, and thus marks the end of the first nominal part of the poem, when any struggle becomes senseless, as all the loved ones are dead.we can see, the special structure and rhyming is rendered by M. Kabaliuk only, while their omission by V. Zhukovs`kyi and P. Hrabovs`kyi smoothes lines and eliminates the possibility to attract readers attention to the parts emphasised by the author.. Byron tends to capitalising the abstract notions he wants to focus his readers` attention on:

of Persecution's rage [32: 354, I, 20]Sin delirious with its dread [32: 359, VIII, 20]Spirit of the chainless Mind!in dungeons, Liberty! thou art,

[32: 353, sonnet, 1-2]Freedom's fame finds wings on every wind [32: 353, sonnet, 8]those, a special group of religious lexis can be singled out:, God! it is a fearful thing [32: 359, VIII, 13]


* - Here and furtheron the first figure stands for the index of book, the second denotes page, the third is for the number of part and the last - for the number of line.

they appeal from tyrrany to God. [32: 353, sonnet, 14]visitant from Paradise;- Heaven forgive that thought; the while [32: 362, X, 34]

. Hrabovs`kyi and D. Pavlychko did not reproduce this graphical emphasis at all, while other translators rendered it to different scale. For example, V. Zhukovs`kyi uses one word capitalised, while religious lexis is mostly omitted or not capitalised:


О боже! боже! страшно зреть [26: 325, VIII, 17]

Без Промысла, без благ и бед [26: 327, IX, 20]


V. Mysyk`s method in translation of sonnet is directly opposite: he does not capitalise the abstract notions like ум, but writes the word Бог with capital letter. Even more peculiar is the translation by M. Kabaliuk, when the translator starts with the reproduction of capitalising of all the correspondent words but then switches to writing religious lexis in small letters:


Та Переслідування лють [29: 16, I, 19]

За Бога й волю оддали [29: 16, I, 23]

О боже мій! Який то жах [29: 17, VIII, 13]

В огиднім ліжку смерть, де Гріх [29: 17, VIII, 19]

Лиш бог, душі остання твердь [29: 17, VIII, 66]

Тоді - хай бог мені простить! [29: 17, X, 35]


We believe that the method of translation of such graphons should be more consistent and apply to all the emphasized lexis in question.. Byrons use of graphons is not limited to the capitalizing of particular lexis, but also includes shortening of some verbs (bow`d, bann`d, barr`d, suffer`d, perish`d, finish`d, seal`d). Despite the frequency of such shortening, it is done for the sake of rhythm and not for the stylistic effect; therefore we will not study these cases in detail.last problem to study at the graphical level is punctuation. One of the most characteristic features of G. Byrons punctuation is a frequent use of dashes - both within the line and at the end of it. Sometimes he uses dashes instead of commas in enumeration order to enlarge the pause and to strengthen their effect:


No child - no sire - no kin had I

No partner in my misery [32: 363, XII, 7-8]were no stars - no earth - no time -check - no change - no good, no crime - [32: 361, IX, 15-16]


All the translators used different methods to render it. For instance, V. Zhukovs`kyi resorts to decompression and addition of his own images:


С тюрьмой я жизнь сдружил мою:

В тюрьме я всю свою семью,

Все, что знавал, все, что любил,

Невозвратимо схоронил,

И в области веселой дня

Никто уж не жил для меня;

Без места на пиру земном,

Я был бы лишний гость на нем,

Как облако при ясном дне,

Потерянное в вышине

И в радостных его лучах

Ненужное на небесах... [26: 331, XII, 6-17]


P. Grabovs`kyi combines one dash per line to strengthen the caesura with the generalisation of nouns enumerated:


Ніде нікого - вимер рід,

Ні друга в горі - зник і слід... [27: 233, XII, 5-6]


M. Kabaliuk tries to compensate by adding one more line and repeating negative particles, that is, reproducing the effect on the lexical level:


Не мав я батька, ні дітей,

Ані близьких мені людей,

Ні спільника в біді моїй; [29: 18, XII, 7-9]


In other cases G. Byron uses dashes in antithesis, right in the middle of the line so as to strengthen the caesura:


But these were horrors - this was woe'd with such - but sure and slow; [32: 359, VIII, 21-22]know not well - I never knew - [32: 361, IX, 2]


The author also applies other punctuation means, such as question marks, exclamatory marks, brackets and ellipsis to the stylistic purposes; nevertheless, they cannot be viewed separately from the rhetoric questions, exclamations, ellipses, and detachments, which they are part of. Therefore, their impact will be discussed in more details in the part dedicated to the syntactic level. Nevertheless, we believe that for the sake of comparison and contrast of the punctuation and thus - pauses and peculiarities of the author`s voice - the following table recording the most emphatic punctuation marks used will be beneficial:


The Prisoner of Chillon

G. ByronV. Zhukovs`kyiP. Hrabovs`kyiM. Kabaliukdashes61465879exclamatory marks91739queston marks3976ellipsis0375514brackets1031colons23212012

Sonnet on Chillon

G. ByronV. MysykD. PavlychkoP. Hrabovs`kyidashes2131exclamatory marks5623queston marks0000ellipsis0001brackets0000colons0000

2.2 Alliteration, assonance, consonance and onomatopoeia as phonetic style-creating means


G. Byrons poetry is known for its emotional tension [12: 49]; and while he achieves it via the whole range of both style-creating factors, and means, this tension is always strongly emphasized on a phonetic level. The reproduction of rhyme, which is a strong means of suggestive influence, will be discussed later on in the part dedicated to the rendering of prosody, while in this part we will focus on alliteration, assonance, consonance and onomatopoeia.is very characteristic of all G. Byrons works; and The Prisoner of Chillon is not an exclusion. Of special interest is the way poet applies alliteration in collocations; the type of collocation is usually the combination of attribute and a noun, or two synonyms combined by and: livid light, full and free, wall and wave, fair face, sweetest song, etc. There are no less than 20 of such collocations in The Prisoner of Chillon; and most of them proved to be impossible to translate preserving alliteration. P. Hrabovs`kyi and M. Kabaliuk, for instance, rendered such collocations only once: гучний голос (P. Hrabovs`kyi), xолодні, хриплі (M. Kabaliuk) due to the difference in length of the Ukrainian and English words which does not allow for many synonyms in the same line; and in order to preserve the sense of the whole in general and separate lines in particular., in G. Byrons works alliteration is rarely used on its own, as the author combines it with assonance and consonance:


With marks that will not wear away, [32: 355, II, 14]

'Twas still some solace, in the dearth [32: 355, III, 9]Leman lies by Chillon's walls [32: 357, VI, 1]saw, and could not hold his head [32: 358, VII, 20]might have spared my idle prayer - [32: 358, VII, 33]eye of most transparent light, [32: 359, VIII, 31]know not well - I never knew - [32: 361, IX, 2]


Thus G. Byrons lines acquire sharpness and speed by repetition of phonemes [s]; smooth flow of speech by repetition of [f], [w], [l] combined with vowels; resemblance of a sigh via [h]; or express obvious resentment in combination of [m], [a], [j].some cases it is close to paronomasia, as only one or two sounds in a word differ, as in the pairs might-my or eye-light in the previous examples.rarely manage to reproduce these effects, especially in correspondent lines. V. Zhukovs`kyi, for instance, did not render alliteration or paronomasia effect; however, he not infrequently changes it for assonance and in rare cases applies the repetition of two neighbouring vowel and consonant:


Не будет ввек истреблено [26: 315, II, 16]

Была услада нам в одном [26: 317, III, 9]

Шильон Леманом окружен [26: 319, VI, 1]

Он умер... я ж ему подать

Руки не мог в последний час, [26: 321, VII, 18]

Вотще я их в слезах молил [26: 321, VII, 37]

Как радуга, пленяя нас,

Прекрасно гаснет в небесах; [26: 323, VIII, 36-37]

Но что потом сбылось со мной [26: 323, IX, 1]


Though alliteration is important for the Slavonic poetic tradition, it allows reproduction by assonance or other phonetic effects; the loss of paronomasia, however, needs stronger compensation.. Hrabovs`kyi tends to compensation through the means of consonance and repetition of the same words, as in the last two examples:


Отрути повік не звести [27: 225, II, 13]

Нас відхиляла від журби [27: 226, III, 14]

Навколо Леман обляга [27: 228, VI, 1]

Востаннє бачив я його [27: 229, VII, 21]

Так сумно іноді згаса

Веселки промінь чарівний... [27: 230, VIII, 26-27]

Не знаю добре і не знав [27: 231, IX, 2]

Здобудуть волі жертвою страждання

Країні рідній, - швидше б здобули! [27: 233, sonnet, 7-8]

Still, this repetition of the same words even combined with consonance is not enough for the proper reproduction of such a strong phonetic means as paronomasia, as its phonetic effect is weaker.. Kabaliuk applies similar approach; but he also uses the compensation on other levels: for instance, parallel constructions, as in the fourth example.


Не стерти вже цього тавра [29: 16, II, 14]

Ми мали втіху там одну [29: 16, III, 11]

Водою Леману Шільйон [29: 17, VI, 1]

Я лиш дививсь. Я марно гриз [29: 17, VII, 20]

Сміявсь над смертю - так цвіте

Веселка в небі - а, проте [29: 17, VIII, 28-29]

Не пам`ятаю - я не жив [29: 17, IX, 2]


In the lines dedicated to the nature, that combination of consonance, alliteration and occasional paronomasia often creates onomatopoeia:


Wash through the bars when winds were high [32: 357, VI, 14]massy waters meet and flow [32: 357, VI, 3]heard the torrents leap and gush [32: 363, XIII, 6]


It is worth to mention, that all the translators noticed this peculiarity and used onomatopoeia when translating scenes of nature.


V. Zhukovs`kyi:

И шум над нашей головой

Струй, отшибаемых стеной.

Случалось - бурей до окна

Бывала взброшена волна,

И брызгов дождь нас окроплял;

Случалось - вихорь бушевал, [26: 319, VI, 11-16]

P. Hrabovs`kyi:

Та як там прірва б не ревла [27: 228, VI, 5]

Швиря, зриваючи, вали [27: 228, VI, 12]

Струмці вигукують, рвучи [27: 234, XIII, 9]

M. Kabaliuk:

Гірський щось шепотів йому,

Повз нього теплі води йшли [29: 18, XIII, 18-19]

There are two lines in Sonnet on Chillon where phonetic effects are very bright and therefore should be paid special attention to:there in thy habitation is the heart [32: 353, sonnet, 3]Freedom's fame finds wings on every wind. [32: 353, sonnet, 8]


Unfortunately, neither of translators managed to reproduce it, as the reproduction of phonetic effects in Sonnet on Chillon is even harder than in The Prisoner of Chillon. Its short form does not allow for the compensation by introducing consonance, or other phonetic means in further lines in the verse, as it was done by translators of the poem. Despite the fact that consonance, which is the most common way of compensation for G. Byrons sound effects, not infrequently lacks strength and power of poets suggestion in translations, all the translators managed to represent the importance of phonetic counterpart in G. Byrons style.


2.3 Morphological style-creating means and their reproduction


The first problem we will study at this level is the reproduction of emphatic do, which is very characteristic for G. Byrons creativity. This means is used in The Prisoner of Chillon four times:


The being we so much did love [32: 358, VII, 36]links unfasten'd did remain [32: 363, XI, 6]in my very face did smile [32: 364, XIII, 11]when I did descend again [32: 365, XIII, 29]


All the translators approached this problem in the same way, rendering this peculiarity via lexical means, although, with some variations. V. Zhukovs`kyi, for instance, heavily relies on decompression and addition of extra lines, and in two cases he omits the reproduction of this emphasis at all, choosing to develop G. Byrons images in his own way:


Холодный смех; и брат мой там

В сырой земле тюрьмы зарыт [26: 321, VII, 42-43]

Не знаю... но опять к стене

Уже прикован не был я [26: 329, XI, 8-9]

Прекрасен, свеж, но одинок

В пространстве был он голубом; [26: 333, XIII, 18-19]

Когда ж на дно тюрьмы моей

Опять сойти я должен был [26: 333, XIII, 40-41]


P. Hrabovs`kyi either combines lexical means with syntactic creating the effect of aposiopesis; or omits the emphasis altogether, when it is impossible:


Любимий... він... кладуть у млі [27: 229, VII, 41]

Вони мене не прикули [27: 233, XI, 5])

Там усміхався острівець [27: 234, XIII, 13]

Від світла швидше!.. Прежня мла [27: 234, XIII, 27]


It is worth to admit, that P. Hrabovs`kyi is the only translator of the three to keep within one line in reproduction of this emphasis, while M. Kabaliuk is the only one to render all cases of its usage:

Був любий брат і мужній друг. [29: 17, VII, 37]

Не знаю; але мій ланцюг

Не прикували до кільця. [29: 17, XI, 6-7]

Мов усміх посилав ясний

Привітно так мені [29: 18, XIII, 13]

Коли ж у морок я зійшов [29: 18, XIII, 33]


As we can see, it is possible to reproduce emphatic do on lexical level or combining lexis with syntactic means. In the last case, however, as it is clear from the P. Hrabovs`kyi`s translation, it is easy to overdo with emphasis; thus the two lines sound more tragically and desperate versus the stoic and calm sorrow of the G. Byron`s verse.more interesting problem to study is the rendering of number of abstract and non-abstract nouns:


Its massy waters meet and flow [32: 357, VI, 3]follow'd there the deer and wolf [32: 357, V, 13]double dungeon wall and wave [32: 357, VI, 7]heard the torrents leap and gush [32: 365, XIII, 6]by it there were waters flowing [32: 365, XIII, 17]spiders I had friendship made [32: 366, XVI, 16]seen the mice by moonlight play [32: 366, XVI, 18]


Let`s compare these examples with the lines in the translation of V. Zhukovs`kyi, P. Hrabovs`kyi and M. Kabaliuk correspondently:


И вод его со всех сторон [26: 319, VI, 2]Бурхливі хвилі досягли б [27: 228, VI, 4]Водою Леману Шільйон [29: 17, VI, 1]Гонитель вепрей и волков [26: 319, V, 12]За вовком, сарною слідом [27: 227, V, 13]Там, де лиш ходить дикий звір [29: 16, V, 14]В него биющая волна [26: 319, VI, 10]Стіна та хвиля - мов труна, [27: 228, VI, 7]Подвійна - хвилі і стіна [29: 17, VI, 7]И слышен был мне шум Ручьев [26: 333, XIII, 8]Струмці вигукують, рвучи [27: 234, XIII, 9]Потоки прокладають шлях [29: 18, XIII, 7]И воды были там живей [26: 333, XIII, 23]Один одним посеред хвиль. [27: 234, XIII, 18]Повз нього теплі води йшли [29: 18, XIII, 19]Паук темничный надо мной [26: 335, XVI, 17]Де був я другом павука [27: 235, XVI, 16]Я з павуками подружив [29: 18, XVI, 19]За резвой мышью при луне [26: 333, XVI, 19]На мишеняток позирав [27: 235, XVI, 17]Спостерігати гру мишей [29: 18, XVI, 21], in The Prisoner of Chillon this factor generally does not play an important role and therefore does not have any impact on the style. However, it is absolutely different when the object in question is used for comparison or as a symbol. In such case, both gender and number become very important, and are better left intact:


To see such a bird in such a nest [32: 356, IV, 10]he, the favorite and the flower [32: 359, VIII, 1]was the carol of a bird [32: 361, X, 2]bird was perch'd, as fond and tame [32: 362, X, 16]lovely bird, with azure wings [32: 362, X, 18]bird! I could not wish for thine! [32: 32, X, 32]

again, let us refer to the translations:

При мне был должен милый цвет [26: 319, IV, 11]Росла ця пташка молода? [27: 227, IV, 12]Що птах такий в такім гнізді?.. [29: 16, IV, 10]Но он - наш милый, лучший цвет [26: 323, VIII, 1]А той... кохання наше, цвіт [27: 229, VIII, 1]Та й він - сім`ї найкращий цвіт [29: 17, VIII, 1]Мой ум... то голос птички был. [26: 327, X, 2]Немов учулися пташки... [27: 232, X, 1]У мозок - був то пташки спів [29: 17, X, 2]И мой певец воздушный был: [26: 327, X, 17]Моя пташиночка ясна [27: 235, X, 14]Ту пташку бачив я - вона [29: 17, X, 16]Но кто ж он сам был, мой певец? [26: 327, X, 33]Прихильна братові душа [27: 235, X, 31]Того ж... Чи, може, райський гість [29: 17, X, 33]

Translators used the variety of synonyms in order to render symbolic gender of flower and bird as masculine. Although noun птица, птичка is feminine only in Russian, V. Zhukovs`kyi managed to limit its use, and successfully rendered bird as певец in most cases. For the Ukrainian translators this problem is easier to solve, as in Ukrainian there exist feminine and masculine lexical units for both flower and bird: квітка/квіт, пташка/птах. That is why we find it strange that both Ukrainian translations abound in repetition of feminine form пташка, especially, taken into consideration that symbolical gender of these lexemes in G. Byrons poem is obvious, and the fact, that in provided examples from M. Kabaliuk`s translation, for instance, пташка may be easily substituted for птах without violation of rhythmical structure.other problems on the morphological level there are such as rendering of possessive case of abstract nouns (Persecutions rage), use of tenses (tenses used by G. Byron include Present Indefinite, Present Perfect, Past Indefinite, Past Perfect, and Future-in-the-Past), usage of passive constructions, and modals; but all of these bear no special significance for poets style, and do not present any peculiar problems for the translator, but for the natural difference between the English and Ukrainian, or Russian, if one refers to V. Zhukovs`kyi`s translation, languages.

Sonnet on Chillon does not present any peculiarities worth of detailed discussion on this level.


2.4 Lexical means in poetic style-creating and their transference


The most important stylistic means at this level are metaphors, personifications and simile. As Je. Klimenko notes, the Swiss period of G. Byron`s creativity was marked by the particularly bright personifications, metaphors and simile [12: 15]. It is absolutely true for The Prisoner of Chillon, inspite of its tender narration flow, which is performed in a more or less plain unembellished language, but for the moments of emotional strain, and description of nature.most commonly used tropes of the G. Byrons style are metaphors and personifications. Metaphor is a trope in which certain words and word combinations explain the essence of some objects and phenomena through others similar or opposite to them [34: 444]. As personification is a type of metaphor, we will include the study of their reproduction with metaphors. There are more than 30 examples of metaphor usage in the Prisoner of Chillon. Not infrequently they are extended and form a resemblance of a chain, where one trope goes after another to strengthen the effect and create the appearance of emotional speech. Let us refer to such a personification which includes appellation as well:


But he, the favorite and the flower,cherish'd since his natal hour,mother's image in fair face,infant love of all his race,martyr'd father's dearest thought,latest care, for whom I sought [32: 359, VIII, 1-6]


Generally, translators did not encounter particular problems in reproduction of G. Byrons metaphors. V. Zhukovs`kyi tends to add his own counterparts to the trope, and to decompress it into more lines, as well as to transform some of them:


Но он - наш милый, лучший цвет,

Наш ангел с колыбельных лет,

Сокровище семьи родной,

Он - образ матери душой

И чистой прелестью лица,

Мечта любимая отца,

Он - для кого я жизнь щадил [26: 325, VIII, 1-7]

The usage of lexeme ангел is probably due to the translators orientation on the religious aspect of Bonivar`s fighting. P. Hrabovs`kyi applies lexical reproduction with syntactic, as he uses ellipsis to create aposiopesis in the first line, and thus strengthen the emotional impact, which was lessened due to the repetition of appellation flower, though expressed via synonyms. The same reason is probably the cause for reproduction of favourite as stronger кохання:


А той... кохання наше, цвіт,

Утіха батька з перших літ,

Краса, квіточок польовий,

Малюнок матері живий,

Що муки, в`янучи, долів,

За кого надто я болів [27: 229, VIII, 1-6]


The best reproduction of this extended metaphor is done by M. Kabaliuk, who extended fair face to occupy the whole line; but generally kept to G. Byrons scheme of the trope:


Та й він - сім`ї найкращий цвіт,

Кого любив увесь наш рід,

Хто образ матері зберіг

У рисах ніжних і ясних,

Він батька-мученика син

Омріяний. І та з причин [29: 17, VIII, 1-6]

Let us now consider the following G. Byrons metaphors:limbs are bow'd, though not with toil,rusted with a vile repose [32: 353, I, 6-7]said my nearer brother pined,said his mighty heart declined [32: 357, VII, 1-2]was the mate of misery [32: 361, X, 8]are their translations by V. Zhukovs`kyi, P. Hrabovs`kyi, and M. Kabaliuk, correspondently:

Но не труды, не хлад, не зной -Не труд кістки проїв, а ржа [27: 224, I, 6]Не труд - кайдани і тюрмаТюрьма разрушила меня. [26: 315, I, 6-7]Звели в неробстві та ганьбі. [29: 16, I, 6-7]Середний брат наш - я сказал -Середній брат - мовляв я - гас;Середній брат - я вже казав -Душой скорбел и увядал. [26: 327, VII, 1-2]Він умирав, він кидав нас [27: 228, VII, 1-2]Гас духом, серцем знемагав [29: 17, VII, 1-2]Но ненадолго... мысль мояМій ум зворушений прочнувсь;Що нерозлучний з горем я [29: 17, X, 8]Стезей привычною пошла,Все те ж, і стіни, як Були [27: 232, X, 8-9]И я очнулся... и была [26: 327, X, 8-10]

V. Zhukovs`kyi sometimes omits G. Byrons metaphors, as in the third example, but generally he tends to transform them for his target reader, as in the second example, or combine with previous or following one, as in the first. P. Hrabovs`kyi sometimes follow his example as to the omission (third example in the second column), or generalizes the metaphor into simple statement (the second example), but mainly he is attentive to metaphors and translates them accurately (the first example). On the whole, M. Kabaliuk is the most attentive one when it comes to metaphors, and reproduces them where only possible., not all of the metaphors of the Prisoner of Chillon are rendered by at least one translator. For instance, this is the line in which the attention is equally divided between the protagonist and chains, and thus makes them equal, friends:


My very chains and I grew friends [32: 365, XIV, 24]


V. Zhukovs`kyi makes this line more general, and focuses on the protagonist:


Я к цепи руку приучил [26: 333, XIV, 21]


P. Hrabovs`kyi combines this trope with following lines and comes with the following translation:


Тягучі ретязі тюрми

(Так час панує над людьми)

Я щирим жалем спом`янув [27: 235, XIV, 25-27]

M. Kabaliuk destroys the trope altogether:

Я звик уже й до ланцюгів [29: 18, XIV, 29]


The next large group of tropes to be discussed is that of simile and comparisons, which includes around 20 examples. Some of them are disguised simile and deserve special attention:


Of whom this wreck is left the last [32: 354, I, 26]him this dungeon was a gulf [32: 357, V, 14]the whole earth would henceforth bewider prison unto me [32: 363, XII, 6-7]I, the monarch of each race [32: 365, XIV, 20]are rather extended and combine a few simile as their counterparts:he would never thus have flown,left me twice so doubly lone, -as the corse within its shroud,as a solitary cloud,single cloud on a sunny day,all the rest of heaven is clear,frown upon the atmosphere [32: 362, X, 41-47]. Kabaliuk is the only one who translated all the four above-enlisted examples of the first subgroup (the third column of the table). P. Hrabovs`kyi omitted the first latent simile, and transformed the image of the second, while V. Zhukovs`kyi transformed both, second and third, and omitted the fourth one.

style literary translation syntax

Лишь я, развалина одна [26: 315, I, 24]З тих трьох - руйна із руїн [29: 16, I, 25]И гроб тюрьма ему была [26: 319, V, 13]То скуті ноги, царство мли [27: 227, V, 15]Тюрма була безодні дном [29: 16, V, 15]Мир стал чужой мне, жизнь пуста [26: 331, XII, 5]Тюрма чи світ - одно були [27: 233, XII, 4]Земля, де рідних вже нема,Лише просторіша тюрма. [29: 17-18, XII, 5-6]Я був владикою між їх; [27: 235, XIV, 21]Я, їх володар, будь-коли [29: 18, XIV, 25]

As to the translation of the example of extended simile, V. Zhukovs`kyi omitted it in the tenth section, but included it to the section twelve:


Я был бы лишний гость на нем,

Как облако при ясном дне,

Потерянное в вышине

И в радостных его лучах

Ненужное на небесах...

[26: 331, XII, 13-17]


Both P. Hrabovs`kyi and M. Kabaliuk left this simile intact, and reproduced it according to the principle of accumulation of simile, as G. Byron had it:


Немруща, - чи знялась би ж та,Я добре знав це - брат ніякЩоб я, удвоє сирота,Не кинув би мене отак,Отут навіки самотніПодвійно у самотині.Остався трупом у труні,Мов трупа у тісній труні,Один, - хмариночка одна,Мов одиноку в вишиніЩо в небі іноді зрина,Хмарину на небеснім тлі, -Як небо ясне, а земляПохмурість в синяві ясній,Чарує, манить, привабля.Де не лишила місця їй[27: 232, X, 37-44]Вся радість неба і землі. [29: 17, X, 41-49]are far rarer than simile and occur only three times. The translators` approaches to their translation do not differ from those applied to the translation of simile, and therefore will not be discussed.next problem to be studied is the translation of epithets. This group is not that numerous as the previous two, but it includes some interesting examples of G. Byrons style:


I lost their long and heavy score [32: 355, II, 19]with that pale and livid light [32: 355, III, 5]coldly laugh'd - and laid him there [32: 358, VII, 34]


Evidently, the reproduction of collocation consisting of two one-syllabic words, one of which is emotionally loaded epithet, is a problematic issue, which becomes even harder task, taking into consideration the presence of two such epithets (long and heavy, pale and livid), and phonetic effect (livid light).we will refer to the table to see the way translators dealt with this task:


Вже погубив їх довгий лік. [27: 226, II, 22]Я їм рахунок загубив [29: 16, II, 19]Нам бледный мрак тюрьмы мешал. [26: 317, III, 6]Було нас троє бранців тьми [27: 226, III, 7]В тім світлі, мертвім і блідім [29: 16, III, 7]Холодный смех; и брат мой там [26: 321, VII, 42]Зареготались в одвіт... [27: 229, VII, 35]Й по смерті спокою. КатиСміялись з мене в той момент. [29: 17, VII, 33-34]. Zhukovs`kyi omits the first collocation altogether, while M. Kabaliuk omits the epithets, preserving the word score; and P. Hrabovs`kyi goes even further preserving one of the epithets as well: довгий лік. Of special interest is the translation of the second example, with all the translators applying different approaches: V. Zhukovs`kyi uses oxymoron, P. Hrabovs1kyi makes antonymic translation strengthening it with lexeme бранці, and M. Kabaliuk rather accurately translates the whole collocation and emphasizes it by detachment. The third example shows us one more direct translation with the omission of adverb, but additional emotional colouring of the verb (P. Hrabovs`kyi); conversion of adverb + verb into epithet + noun (P. Hrabovs`kyi); and conversion of the emphasis and connotations onto the noun (M. Kabaliuk). All of these methods are equally creative and preserve the stylistic effect.to the other lexical means that may influence the style, these are archaisms; but all the obsolete grammatical forms used in The Prisoner of Chillon were at G. Byron`s time almost an obligation for the poetic work [12: 59], especially in Romanticism: hath, I found him not. Thus, the one way of the archaism rendering in this case is to translate them by correspondent Ukrainian archaic words. The example of such translation may be the translation of W. Shakespeare`s sonnets by I. Kostets`kyi, who in this way wants to achieve the same effect as the W. Shakespeare`s poetry has on the contemporary reader. The other method is to use traditional Ukrainian forms and characteristic features, peculiar for the Ukrainian Romantic poetry: for instance, shortened/lengthened formes of words. The example of such a method may be the translation by P. Hrabovs`kyi, who used однії, вража, обляга. However, it is worth noting that this translation was done in 1894 when such forms were more common. The third method is the one used by V. Mysyk, D. Pavlychko and M. Kabaliuk, and it presupposes the omission of archaisms in translation, substituting them for the common words, as they were a norm for G. Byron`s style, but were not at the time of the translation. Each method has its merits and drawbacks, though the first one is more of an experiment as it complicated the comprehension of the poem by readers. The second may be also a cause for misunderstanding and creation of the wrong stylistic effect if its usage is not regulated by the contemporary norms of the Ukrainian language, as with the development of the language some words or constructions may become outdated. For instance, though the translation by M. Kabaliuk is very good and many of the translators findings are more than adequate; and it was published in not so far 1982, it already needs editing. That is why we feel it would be reasonable to review this translation as to the changed language norms:


На мене із-за мокрих грат [29: 17, VI, 14]

Мов звіра, посадив між грат. [29: 17, VII, 12]

І я радів судьбі такій [29: 18, XII, 10]

Могла звести мене з ума [29: 17, XI, 12]

Хоч крізь гратоване вікно [29: 17, XI, 14]


Sonnet on Chillon may be regarded as a combined extended trope on itself, as almost every line contains personification (addressing abstract notions, in particular), simile, and epithets. Their reproduction by P. Hrabovs`kyi has already been discussed, so let us have a closer look on the translations by V. Mysyk and D. Pavlychko:


Brightest in dungeons, Liberty! thou art [32: 353, sonnet, 2]Свободо! Ясно ти в темниці сяєш [30: 421, VII, 2]Свободо, найсяйливіша в темниці [31: 16, sonnet, 2]Their country conquers with their martyrdom [32: 353, sonnet, 7]Їх жертва сили додає країні [30: 421, VII, 7]То їхня слава, наче крила птиці [31: 16, sonnet, 7]Chillon! thy prison is a holy place [32: 353, sonnet, 9]Шільон! Ти найсвятіша із руїн [30: 421, VII, 9]Шільйоне, знай, твоя тюрма - то храм [31: 16, sonnet, 9]

V. Mysyk reproduces the metaphor in the first example by addition of extra verb with the meaning of bright, combined with adverb ясно, while D. Pavlychko follows G. Byrons lead creating epithet найсяйливіша. The translation of the second example is more problematic: V. Mysyk resolves it changing the subject into object and vice versa, which seems a good choice and successful translation; and D. Pavlychko omits this line and does not reproduce it, but creates his own simile, connected with the following lines. The third example is a latent simile. V. Mysyk reproduces it introducing the noun руїни as an equivalent for place, and additionally strengthens the line with the superlative. However, the general mood of the sonnet allows for such an elevation. Nevertheless, he does not use vocative case for address, as would be proper; although, in case ти is omitted, it is possible to introduce vocative case without violation of rhythm. D. Pavlychko achieves accurate and laconic translation by finding single equivalent храм for the collocation holy place.


Of special interest is the poets use of lexical repetitions in the sonnet:there in thy habitation is the heartheart which love of thee alone can bind;when thy sons to fetters are consign'd -fetters, and the damp vault's dayless gloom [32: 353, sonnet, 3-6]


Unfortunately, neither of translators managed to reproduce it.is understandable that some losses in translation at this level or any other level are inevitable, as shorter English words allow for more extended tropes, moreover, some of the losses may be caused by the necessity to adhere to rhyme, and to reproduce the meaning properly. Still, the above-mentioned examples prove that it is possible to render G. Byrons linguo-stylistical peculiarities on the lexical level.


2.5 Syntax as a style-creating means and its rendering


The most characteristic means of G. Byrons style at this level are syntactic repetitions, parallel constructions, polysyndeton and asyndeton, rhetorical questions and exclamations, and ellipsis.first the different kinds of syntactic repetition will be studied. There are 5 examples of anaphor in The Prisoner of Chillon, one of them encompassing repetition of the beginning of the line thrice:


I've seen it rushing forth in blood,'ve seen it on the breaking oceanwith a swoln convulsive motion,'ve seen the sick and ghastly bed

[32: 359, VIII, 16-19]

. Zhukovs`kyi, P. Hrabovs`kyi, and M. Kabaliuk render it in a following way:

Смерть человека... я видал,Я бачив збитого борцяЯ бачив смерть не раз в боях,Как ратник в битве погибал;В годину смертного кінця;Коли рікою кров текла,Я видел, как пловец тонулПловець - пригадую - вмирав,Я бачив, як в глибінь морськуС доской, к которой он прильнулЗі смертю п*явся - не здолав;У корчах йшли людські тіла,С надеждой гибнущей своей;Знавав я грішника, що чах [27: 230, VII, 17-21]В огиднім ліжку смерть, де Гріх [29: 17, VII, 15-19]Я зрел, как издыхал злодей [26: 325, VIII, 19-24]

Due to the demands of rhyme and rhythm, it is hard to adjust words in a way that they create repetition at the beginning of the line, and even to preserve that repetition within the line. As we can see, only M. Kabaliuk succeeded to achieve the repetition of two lines of three; V. Zhukovs`kyi uses three synonyms, managing to place two of them in the anaphoric position; and similar translation belongs to P. Hrabovs`kyi, though he changes I`ve seen for пригадую in one case of the three. Nevertheless, the syntactic repetition is partly preserved because of the preservation of the general syntactic structure of the lines.G. Byron does not use anaphor often; he does not apply epiphor at all, the same considers frame repetition. What concerns chain repetition, there are two examples of it in Sonnet on Chillon:


For there in thy habitation is the heartheart which love of thee alone can bind;when thy sons to fetters are consign'd -fetters, and the damp vault's dayless gloom

[32: 353, sonnet, 3-6]


As we discussed their reproduction in the previous section, we will not dwell on them again., the largest group of examples on syntactic repetition refers to the enumeration. The combination of two homogeneous nouns or verbs is very common, but longer chains of homogeneous parts of the sentence are not infrequent as well, and more often than not are emphasised with the repetition of different kinds, or even punctuation:


He faded, and so calm and meek,softly worn, so sweetly weak,tearless, yet so tender, kind [32: 359, VIII, 23-25]


It is highly problematic to render all of these taking into consideration the preservation of meaning and poetic form; however, it is possible to compensate for it:

Он гас, столь кротко-молчалив,А тут був інший жах: журба -Він в`янув лагідно, без сліз,Столь безнадежно-терпелив,Тиха, покірна та слаба...Покірно всі страждання нісСтоль грустно-томен, нежно-тих.Марніла знищечку краса;І з ніжним сумом шкодувавБез слез, лишь помня о своих [26: 325, VIII, 31-34]Так сумно іноді згасаПро тих, кого він тут лишав. [29: 17, VII, 23-26]Веселки промінь чарівний...Як завжди, добрий, привітний [27: 230, VII, 23-28]

Both V. Zhukovs`kyi and P. Hrabovs`kyi use a brightly expressed anaphor in combination with other kinds of repetition, though P. Hrabovs`kyi tears the long enumeration into two shorter stems and even separates them with three lines. M. Kabaliuk does not reproduce the enumeration.


Another type of parallelism is climax:were no stars - no earth - no time -check - no change - no good, no crime - [32: 359, IX, 15-16]

us look at the way translators reproduced it:

Без неба, света и светил,Ні зір, ні неба, ні землі,Зник простір, зорі, час, буття, -Без времени, без дней и лет,Ні часу, близу, ні далі,Ні змін, ані добра, ні зла [29: 17, IX, 15-16]Без Промысла, без благ и бед [26: 327, IX, 18-20]Ні руху, зміни, ні добра,Ні тиші тихої, ні зла,Ні відпочинку, ні буття,Ні смерті навіть, ні життя... [27: 230, IX, 17-22]. Zhukovs`kyi and P. Hrabovs`kyi reinforce this expressive means by decompression, and lengthening chain of synonyms on their own. No matter how expressive such an approach may be, it is better not to overuse it as decompression weakens the general emotional impact of poetry, lengthens it and weakens the condenced meaning of each word. M. Kabaliuk in his translation even preserved the same quantity of homogeneous parts in the chain, and managed to keep them all within two lines, as in The Prisoner of Chillon.constructions have less to do with lexical flesh of the sentences, but rather with the reiteration of the structure of several successive sentences or clauses [Kukh: 79], and are in fact another type of repetition; which does not mean that they cannot include the repetition of lexical units as well. The latter is particularly true for G. Byrons style, as his parallel constructions are almost always enhanced with lexical repetition of some kind or other:


My hair is gray, but not with years,grew it whitea single night,men's have grown from sudden fears:limbs are bow'd, though not with toil, [32: 353, I, 1-5]in youth, and one in age,'d as they had begun,of Persecution's rage;in fire, and two in field [32: 354, I, 18-21]are seven pillars of Gothic mould,Chillon's dungeons deep and old,are seven columns, massy and grey [32: 353, II, 1-3]


Reproduction of parallel constructions does not present any particular problems, as translator may choose what lexical units he will use for lexical repetition and correspondently, their strengthening, if any:

Взгляните на меня: я сед,Не від лихих старечих днівЯ сивий; хоч не вік, не страх,Но не от хилости и лет;Я весь заслаб, я весь змарнів,Що сивинуНе страх внезапный в ночь однуНе жахом ночі однії,За ніч однуДо срока дал мне седину.Що несподівано вража,Дає і в молодих роках,Я сгорблен, лоб наморщен мой [26: 315, I, 1-5]Сивини вигнало мої,Тут винні. Й руки ці слабіНе труд кістки проїв, а ржа; [27: 225, I, 1-6]Не труд - кайдани і тюрма [29: 16, I, 1-6]Нас было шесть - пяти уж нет.Було нас семеро - нема;З шести синів скінчили путь,Отец, страдалец с юных лет,Не сяє день над шістьома.Крім мене, всі в юнацький час -Погибший старцем на костре,Загинув, батькові услід,Та Переслідування лютьДва брата, падшие во пре,Його коханий, певний рід, -Лиш гордість збуджувала в нас;Отдав на жертву честь и кровь,За пересвідчення ляглиОдин в огні, а два в боюСпасли души своей любовь.Сини так славно, як жили:За Бога й волю оддали,Три заживо схороненыОдин - на вражому огні,Три здобиччю тюрми були, [29: 16, I, 17-23]На дне тюремной глубины -Два інші - зотнуті в борні; [27: 225, I, 17-22]И двух сожрала глубина; [26: 315, I, 15-23]Там, в подземелье, семь колоннУ підземеллі - сім колон -Важких готичних сім колон;Покрыты влажным мохом лет.Готичні, сірі, кам*яні... [27: 225, II, 17-22]Їх сірі форми ледь могли [29: 16, II, 2-3]На них печальный брезжит свет [26: 315, II, 2-4]

As we can see, only one example of three, the last one, proved to be challenging for translation; and was not preserved by any translator. V. Zhukovs`kyi and M. Kabaliuk compensated by the repetition of the meaning (колонн - на них, колон - їх); and P. Hrabovs`kyi - by enumeration.and asyndeton constitute another group of expressive means typical of G. Byrons style in The Prisoner of Chillon. There are plenty of examples of both: in fact, and is used for 141 times, which is more often than in each third line; or is used for 78 times, but - for 32 times. Nevertheless, asyndeton is not a rare case as well. Still, some of the most characteristic examples only, and hard to translate ones will be discussed:


And I have felt the winter's spraythrough the bars when winds were highwanton in the happy sky;then the very rock hath rock'd,I have felt it shake, unshock'd

[32: 353, VI, 13-17]were seven - who now are one,in youth, and one in age,'d as they had begun,of Persecution's rage;in fire, and two in field,belief with blood have seal'd,as their father died,the God their foes denied;were in a dungeon cast,whom this wreck is left the last.

[32: 354, I, 17-26]


Apparently, polysyndeton is frequently emphasised by anaphor, but the beginning of a line is rather common position for the conjunction. Still, asyndeton and polysyndeton are hard to render; even though V. Zhukovs`kyi fulfils the task, he is the only of three translators to do so. While hard to preserve, these expressive means are not impossible to compensate for, whether via any other kind of repetition on phonetic level as P. Hrabovs`kyi does it with polysyndeton; or using other punctuation marks (dashes in the second example in the translation by P. Hrabovs`kyi). M. Kabaliuk does not pay any special attention to the reproduction of asyndeton and polysyndeton, and his style seems to be a bit drier than G. Byrons; however, the style of The Prisoner of Chillon does not suffer significant losses because of it, as it is style within the style, and M. Kabaliuk applies enough repetition of conjunctions, and their omission to compensate for any losses to be:

Бывала взброшена волна,Над головою сумно б`є,На мене із-за мокрих гратИ брызгов дождь нас окроплял;Щодня, щоночі хвилю рве;Спадав холодних крапель град.Случалось - вихорь бушевал,А часом буря зареве,Дрижав наш склеп, і ждав я - смертьИ содрогалася скала;Скалою страшно захита [27: 228, VI, 14-17]Зламає ту гранітну твердь [29: 17, VI, 14-17]И с жадностью душа ждала [26: 321, VI, 14-18]Нас было шесть - пяти уж нет.Було нас семеро - нема;З шести синів скінчили путь,Отец, страдалец с юных лет,Не сяє день над шістьома.Крім мене, всі в юнацький час -Погибший старцем на костре,Загинув, батькові услід,Та Переслідування лютьДва брата, падшие во пре,Його коханий, певний рід,Лиш гордість збуджувала в нас;Отдав на жертву честь и кровь,За пересвідчення ляглиОдин в огні, а два в боюСпасли души своей любовь.Сини так славно, як жили:За Бога й волю оддали,Три заживо схороненыОдин - на вражому огні,Три здобиччю тюрми були,На дне тюремной глубины -Два інші - зотнуті в борні;З тих трьох - руйна із руїн -И двух сожрала глубина;Лилася кров братів моїх,Тепер лишився я один. [29: 16, I, 17-25]Лишь я, развалина одна,Бо не признали бога їх. [27: 225, I, 15-24]Себе на горе уцелел,Чтоб их оплакивать удел. [26: 315, I, 15-26]

Rhetorical questions, exclamations, and ellipses were mentioned in the discussion of punctuation. Let us now look deeper into the matter. Altogether, there are three rhetorical questions and nine exclamations in The Prisoner of Chillon. In the Sonnet on Chillon there are five exclamations and no rhetorical questions at all. Such a difference in usage of such strong emphatic means, as exclamation, and rhetorical questions are for the English language, is caused by the narrative manner of The Prisoner of Chillon, which is thoughtful, sorrowful, tenderly sad and placate. Thus rhetorical questions are present as marks of this mood in inner monologue:

But what were these to us or him? [32: 358, VII, 13]why delay the truth? - he died. [32: 358, VII, 19]why should I feel less than they? [32: 365, XIV, 19]


Unlikely M. Kabaliuk, both V. Zhukovs`kyi and P. Hrabovs`kyi do not render the first rhetoric question. Nevertheless, generally the reproduction of rhetoric questions is not problematic. All the three translators solve this task according to their translation position, and their view of the poems style, introducing rhetoric questions of their own (see table on page 22). Moreover, they do it within G. Byrons style, enhancing and explicating the effects of the verse-tale.is not different with exclamations, which appear when the protagonist feels emotional turmoil, or rebels against the injustice with the fervour of righteous indignation. The latter is the general mood of the whole Sonnet on Chillon; hence the exclamations:


Such murder's fitting monument! [32: 358, VII, 38]bird! I could not wish for thine! [32: 362, X, 32]hermitage - and all my own! [32: 365, XIV, 13]Spirit of the chainless Mind!in dungeons, Liberty! thou art, [32: 353, sonnet, 1-2]


Ellipsis as a means of punctuation is frequently used by translators together with aposiopesis to create the effect of emotional agitation or alarm. Its application is absolutely justified as long as translator does not overuse it, since abundance of ellipsis leads to the fragmentation of poetic text and damages its integrity. Moreover, it may distort the image of protagonist, as the whole poem presents his monologue; hence its lingual organisation characterises the main hero. This is the reason we believe that a part of ellipses introduced by V. Zhukovs`kyi and P. Hrabovs`kyi is not only unnecessary, but even improper for G. Byrons style (see table on page 22).a deliberate omission of at least one member of the sentence [Kukh: 85], as well as inversion, detachment, and enjambment is generally characteristic of poetic speech, and G. Byrons is not an exclusion:


As men's <hair> have grown from sudden fears [32: 353, I, 4]thus together - yet apart,

<we were> Fetter'd in hand, but join'd in heart, [32: 355, III, 7-8]mine has been the fate of thosewhom the goodly earth and air [32: 354, I, 8-9]he was as beautiful as day -

(When day was beautiful to meto young eagles, being free) -polar day, which will not see [32: 356, IV, 11-14]our mother's brow was givenhim, with eyes as blue as heaven - [32: 356, IV, 6-7]corse in dust whereon the dayshine - it was a foolish thought, [32: 358, VII, 28-29]


As these are not particularly peculiar features of G. Byrons style and are more related to the general study of English-Ukrainian contrastive stylistics, their reproduction is not discussed in this paper.


2.6 Lingual-stylistic peculiarities of the prosodic means and their rendering


The Prisoner of Chillon is mainly written in iambic tetrameter, with masculine rhyming (aabb). All the translators reproduced this meter and type of rhyming; however, not the violations which G. Byron tends to introduce to the prosody of the poem for the effect of defeated expectancy. These are some examples of variations which poet applies (the second column presents the scheme of rhyming, whereas the third - type of the rhyme: masculine, feminine, or dactylic):


My hair is gray, but not with years,amgrew it whitebma single night,bmmen's have grown from sudden fears [32: 353, I, 1-4]amare seven columns, massy and grey,amwith a dull imprison'd ray,am

A sunbeam which hath lost its way

[32: 354, II, 1-3]amour mother's brow was givenafhim, with eyes as blue as heaven - [32: 356, IV, 6-7]afLeman lies by Chillon's walls:amthousand feet in depth belowbmmassy waters meet and flow:bmmuch the fathom-line was sentcmChillon's snow-white battlement,cd

Which round about the wave inthrals

[32: 357, VI, 1-6]am


Unfortunately, V. Zhukovs`kyi does not reproduce these changes in the verse prosody:


Взгляните на меня: я сед,am

Но не от хилости и лет;am

Не страх незапный в ночь однуbm

До срока дал мне седину.

[26: 315, I, 1-4]bm

Покрыты влажным мохом лет.am

На них печальный брезжит свет -am

Луч, ненароком с вышины

[26: 315, II, 3-5]bm

Наш младший брат - любовь отца...am

Увы! черты его лица

[26: 317, IV, 5-6]am

Тюрьму совокупились там;am

Печальный свод, который нам

[26: 319, VI, 5-6]am


Moreover, he does not treat the sections of the poem separately when rhyming; as a result, whenever the number of lines in the section is odd, V. Zhukovs`kyi rhymes the first line of the next section with the last of the previous one, and distorts the relative autonomy of each section:

Терзался на полу тюрьмы.


[26: 317, II, 25]am

Цепями теми были мыam

К колоннам тем пригвождены,bm

Хоть вместе, но разлучены;

[26: 317, III, 1-3]bm


P. Hrabovs`kyi`s approach to the reproduction of prosody of The Prisoner of Chillon is very similar to that of V. Zhukovs`kyi, and follows the same pattern: aabb masculine rhyme, iambic tetrameter. Nevertheless, he preserves the autonomy of sections within the poem, as there is not a single section in his translation the number of lines in which is not even. The only departure from aabb rhyming scheme may be noticed in the first section, even though it does not resemble G. Byrons rhyming:

Не від лихих старечих днівam

Я весь заслаб, я весь змарнів,am

Не жахом ночі однії,bm

Що несподівано вража,cm

Сивини вигнало мої,bm

Не труд кістки проїв, а ржа

[27: 225, I, 1-6]cm


M. Kabaliuk is the closest to the transference of G. Byrons peculiar prosody, both in metre, and in rhyming patterns (prosodic means which differ from G. Byrons are in bold):


Я сивий; хоч не вік, не страх,am

Що сивинуbm

За ніч однуbm

Дає і в молодих роках

[29: 16, I, 1-4]am

Їх сірі форми ледь моглиbm

Виднітись тьмяно серед млиbm

Холодних мокрих стін, коли

[29: 16, II, 3-5]bm

За наймолодшого - булоdm

У нього матері чоло

[29: 16, IV, 6-7]dm

Водою Леману Шільйонam

Оточений з усіх сторін,bm

І мість масивних білих стінbm

Продовжує могутній плинcm

Тисячофутових глибин -cm

І то найкраща з охорон

[29: 16, VI, 1-6]am


As we can see, despite the imminent losses, on the whole M. Kabaliuk managed to preserve the prosody of the original, and to reproduce its stylistic effect, and suggestive power, encoded in rhythm and rhyming patterns.

Sonnet on Chillon is a classical sonnet: 14 lines, abba|acca|ded|ede (G. Byron does not separates the stanzas, though some lines are shifted, thus a kind of classical sonnet`s stanzas division 4 + 4 + 3 + 3 is presented graphically), masculine rhyming. P. Hrabovs`kyi did not preserve the form of sonnet altogether, and translated it by three quatrains. Though, generally successfully achieving the reflection of G. Byron`s images by combination (line 9 and 10 of Sonnet on Chillon are translated as one, unifying the images of holy place and altar into the holy altar - святіша з вівтарів), he did not render a number of lines:


To fetters, and the damp vault's dayless gloom [32: 353, sonnet, 6]Freedom's fame finds wings on every wind. [32: 353, sonnet, 8], as if thy cold pavement were a sod [32: 353, sonnet, 12]


It is necessary to admit that P. Hrabovs`kyi himself called his translation a foresong (передспів), and above all valued the transference of ideas and general mood.D. Pavlychko and V. Mysyk preserved the form of a sonnet and its peculiar rhyming pattern; but introduced feminine rhymes to it. V. Mysyk calls the sonnet Chillon (Шільйон), and separates it into stanzas of 4 + 4 + 4 + 2 lines; while D. Pavlychko`s translation is 4 + 4 + 3 + 3. O. Tsishchuk believes that the reason why G. Byron decided against the separate stanzas may be poets wish not to transfer enjambment to the separate stanza [20]. In any way, it is a kind of violation of classical sonnets form, which reason is definitely not the poets ignorance of the formal rules of classical sonnet, but deliberate departure from them. As both D. Pavlychko and V. Mysyk preserved enjambment, they could as well preserve the structure of the verse. The substitution of masculine rhymes for feminine makes sharp G. Byrons lines softer in translations, but none of the three translators managed to reproduce the sonnet without such substitutions. We believe, that such losses are inevitable, and take into consideration the fact that feminine rhyme is very characteristic of Ukrainian as synthetic language; therefore it did not prevent translators from proper representation of the Sonnet on Chillon.


CONCLUSIONS

contrastive analysis of the English-Ukrainian translations of The Prisoner of Chillon and Sonnet on Chillon shows that rendering of the formal elements of the artistic text is a necessary part of the authors style reproduction. The research proves that omission or transformation of an artistic means results in a general alteration of the authors style in translation. Thus, the authors style can be considered the integrity of authors intent, theme and ideas with the whole range of different formal artistic means (graphons, alliteration, metaphors, parallelism, etc) of their introduction; and the translators style can be viewed as the integrity of translators intent and his interpretation of the authors themes and ideas with different formal artistic means. While the reproduction of such style-creating factors as intent or idea cannot be measured objectively, study of the style-creating means rendering may provide a basis for the relatively objective criterion for the assessment of the authors style reproduction.

The results acquired can be phrased as follows:

1.The Prisoner of Chillon is a romantic verse-tale and may be called a typical poem of G. Byron due to its themes and images as its style-creating means are usual for the Swiss period of poets creativity. The main style-creating means of the poem are as follows: alliteration, onomatopoeia, rhyme (inner rhyme including), address to abstract notions and inanimate objects, metaphors, simile, parallel constructions, as well as synonymic chains, and enumeration.

2.V. Zhukovs`kyi chose to translate the poetic works which were close to his worldview in their ideological and aesthetical values, and therefore resonated with his own poetic world. His main purpose was to introduce motifs and ideas of G. Byrons poem to Russian literature, and not to preserve the poets style. That is the cause of some liberties taken with the text: omission of Sonnet on Chillon, lengthening the poem and introduction of his own lines (all in all, V. Zhukovs`kyi added 46 lines, which resulted in the decompression of images and thoughts), restructuring images (adding ангел in the simile), etc.

.P. Hrabovs`kyi developed the part of style-creating factors almost alternative to the one chosen by V. Zhukovs`kyi; however, in some formal features, that is, style-creating factors (prosody, for instance) he followed V. Zhukovs`kyi`s translation decisions. Still, in many cases P. Hrabovs`kyi`s version is closer to the original or renders the nuances missed in V. Zhukovs`kyi`s translation. Among the drawbacks of his translation one may name the abundance of diminutive suffixes, ellipses, and usage of pleonasms.

.M. Kabaliuk combined the views of the poem as a lyrical verse and as a manifest for freedom and managed to recreate both of these ideas together, in their unity presented by G. Byron. Not only his translation is faithful to the philosophic and poetic authors concept, but it is also accurate in the rendering of the formal features. Nevertheless, it is necessary to review it as to the new language norms introduced after 1982 when the translation was published.

.As compared to The Prisoner of Chillon, the Sonnet on Chillon presents more sophisticated language and richness of particularly bright and livid metaphors, exclamations, and high spirited, full of pathos lines.

.V. Mysyk`s translation preserves the form of sonnet and is an example of adequate translation. Among the drawbacks of his translation one may name the irregular use of vocative case, which is used for the address to Liberty, but omitted in the first line and in addressing Chillon.

.D. Pavlychko`s rendering of the sonnet tends to omit images, and even whole lines of the source text, developing those, which he likes and which are close to him. Nevertheless, his rendering includes some very bright translation findings (найсяйливіша, натхненнолиці) and is very melodic.

8.Each of the three translations of The Prisoner of Chillon (by V. Zhukovs`kyi, P. Hrabovs`kyi and M. Kabaliuk) and the three translations of the Sonnet on Chillon (by P. Hrabovs`kyi, V. Mysyk and D. Pavlychko) met the requirements of their time and served their purpose in the development of both Ukrainian Translation Studies and Byroniana; however, not always the translators` intents corresponded to that of the author, and not always the formal means by which these intents were shaped fall into the frame of the authors style and style-creating means characteristic to him.

9.These above-mentioned transformations of the authors style especially concern the translations by V. Zhukovs`kyi and P. Hrabovs`kyi, whose translations were done as far back as the 19th century (1822 and 1894 correspondently), when the main purpose of a translated work was to acquaint the reader with the best samples of world literature and to serve for the general purposes of education of the readers.

.In the Ukrainian school of translation the Classic method of the most adequate rendering of the original presupposes that the more translator is able to reproduce the authors style, the better (M. Ryl`s`kyi, M. Zerov, H. Kochur). The example of such a translation is the one done by M. Kabaliuk.conclude, this work cannot be named an exhaustive research of the style reproduction as it mostly represents the study of the formal style-creating means and does not discuss the problems of the style-creating factors, while it is both that translators have to take into consideration in their work. Moreover, due to the limited space of our work some of the problems at the syntactic and lexical levels were only touched upon as well as the artistic means not characteristic to G. Byron`s style. One should also consider the complexity of the topic, for the notion of style as a literary notion in general and of the style of the particular author is rather vague and ambiguous as different researchers choose different principles as a basis for definition, and different interpretations of the phenomenon may exist. General possibility of sufficient and adequate research of poetry and poetic translation on the whole is also ambiguous and its analysis cannot be considered totally objective. Therefore this work was just an attempt to draw attention to some of the problems English-Ukrainian poetry translator may face while rendering the authors style; as well as to study their possible solutions and the development of correspondent translation methods as introduced by the prominent Ukrainian translators in the period from the late 19th to the late 20th century.

CRITICAL LITERATURE


1.Алексеев В. Поэтика выбора // #"justify">LITERARY SOURCES

26.Байрон, Джордж Гордон. Избранная лирика. Сборник. Сост. Зверев А. М. - На англ. яз. с параллельным русским текстом. - М.: Радуга. - 1988. - 512 с.

27.Грабовський П.А. Вибрані твори: В 2-х томах. / Упоряд., передм. і приміт. В.Ф. Святовця. - К., Дніпро, 1985. Т. І. - 599 с. Іл. портр.

28.Джордж Гордон Байрон. Твори. - К.: Дух і Літера, 376 с. - 2004.

29.Кабалюк М. Шільйонський в`язень // Ранок. - 1982. - № 8 (серпень). - С. 16-18.

30.Мисик В.О. Захід і Схід: Переклади / Авт. передм. О.І. Никанорова. - К.: Дніпро, 1990. - 543 с. (Майстри поетичного перекладу).

31.Павличко Д. Сонет до Шільйона // Ранок. - 1982. - № 8 (серпень). - С. 16.

32.The Poetical Works of Lord Byron. - London: Oxford University Press (Humphrey Milford) - 1935. - 924pp.

33.Великий тлумачний словник сучасної української мови // http://www.slovnyk.net [08.02.08]

.Літературознавчий словник-довідник / За ред. Р.Т. Гром`яка, Ю.А. Коваліва, В.І. Теремка. - К.: ВЦ „Академія, 2003. - 752 с. (Nota bene)

.Словник української мови: B 11 т. - К.: Наук. думка, 1970-1980. - Т.9.

36.A new English dictionary on historical principles: In 10 vols. - Oxford: Claredon Press, 1888-1928. - Vol. IX.


Теги: Lingual-Stylistic Peculiarities of G. Byron's "The Prisoner of Chillon" and "Sonnet on Chillon", and Their Reproduction in the Translations by P. Hrabovs'kyi, V. Mysyk, M. Kabaliuk and V. Zhukovs'kyi  Курсовая работа (теория)  Английский
Просмотров: 43835
Найти в Wikkipedia статьи с фразой: Lingual-Stylistic Peculiarities of G. Byron's "The Prisoner of Chillon" and "Sonnet on Chillon", and Their Reproduction in the Translations by P. Hrabovs'kyi, V. Mysyk, M. Kabaliuk and V. Zhukovs'kyi
Назад