Interview with translator Alison Entrekin of Brasilian novelist Clarice Lispector's works:
Sarah Gerard: It has often been said that Clarice Lispector?s Portuguese isn?t like the Portuguese anyone was writing in when she published Near to the Wild Heart, and remains unique. What does this mean? How is it different?
Alison Entrekin: Clarice was a native speaker of Portuguese, but her writing style definitely isn?t run-of-the-mill. Her turns of phrase are often peculiar, her word choices unconventional, and her syntax can be rather odd at times. Not always, but a lot of the time. There are places in her books where she is entirely idiomatic and makes perfect sense and places where every reader understands something different, because her sentences are open-ended, with words that contain a range of nuances, allowing for several different readings.
SG Different challenges arise translating a work from any one language into another. What are some of the challenges you face translating a work from Portuguese into English?
AE The answer to this question varies with each book and author, but with Clarice the big challenge any translator faces is allowing her to be herself. This is easier said than done. With unconventional writers, there is always a little niggling voice in the back of your mind telling you that readers of the translation are going to attribute any difficulties they have to the translator, not to the original, and I think that this?consciously or unconsciously?leads some translators to over-interpret what the author actually said and serve up a more domesticated version of the writing. I think some past translations of Clarice have tried too hard to ?tidy her up? and have her make perfect sense where she was deliberately open-ended. I tried not to do this. There is almost always a more natural way to say the things she says, but it wouldn?t necessarily be a faithful translation.
SG You received several degrees in creative writing before studying translation. Do you consider yourself first of all a writer or a translator, or do you feel the two are inseparable?
AE For me, they are different things, though I believe my background in creative writing makes me a better translator. It certainly enables me to appreciate why a writer did something one way and not another, which in turn helps me decide what to do with it in the translation.
One of the most difficult things with any translation is finding a way to set aside your own voice, syntax, and word preferences in order to allow the writer?s voice to speak through you. In that sense, you are almost like a medium or an actor?you have to be flexible enough in your own use of language that you can ?channel? or ?impersonate? that writer in the target language. I think studies in creative writing are a wonderful foundation for literary translation, because they give you a lot of perspective and skills that aren?t always taught in translation courses.
SG How does your translation of Near to the Wild Heart differ from Giovanni Pontiero?s? Do you feel you approached it differently? Was his translation useful to you in making decisions about your own?
AE I deliberately avoided reading Pontiero?s translation until after I was done with my own. And even then, I didn?t read it all. I looked at the first few chapters and then just peeked at what he had done in some particularly difficult places to see his take on things, but I think we are completely different translators and tackled things in very different ways. I don?t want to run the man down, as he isn?t here to defend himself, but I feel that he took a few too many liberties with his translation, filling in a lot of Clarice?s little ellipses and making her sound more conventional than she was.
More
Source: http://arjay.typepad.com/vallejo_nocturno/2012/07/interview-with-translator.html
sag awards 2012 nominees sag awards pro bowl 2012 roster yamaguchi road house occupy oakland occupy oakland
No comments:
Post a Comment