Translator’s “Visibility”: E. Teza and His Translation of Pushkin’s “The Undertaker”

Vigna-Taglianti Yakopo ORCID: 0000-0001-8449-544X Senior Educator, Department of Russian and Foreign Languages, Russian State Agrarian University - Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy 127434, Russia, Moscow, ul. Timiryazevskaya, 49 jacopo.vignataglianti@gmail.com

Sidorova Elizaveta Nikolaevna ORCID: 0000-0002-1550-1145 Educator, Department of Russian and Foreign Languages, Russian State Agrarian University - Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy 127434, Russia, Moscow, ul. Timiryazevskaya, 49 elizavetasidorova5@gmail.com

Introduction

"Postal horses of enlightenment" is how A. S. Pushkin called translators in a famous aphorism of 1830, bearing in mind the importance of their activities in creating literary, cultural and business ties between different countries. Alexander Sergeevich himself was fond of translation, and his works have been translated into dozens of languages around the world. In Italy, the very first translation of Pushkin was published in 1841, when the Pisan poet Ch. Bocchella published the collection "The Four Main Poems of Alexander Pushkin", which included "The Fountain of Bakhchisarai", "The Caucasian Prisoner", "Gypsies" and "The Robber Brothers". The first prose work translated into Italian is an anonymous translation of The Captain's Daughter, published in 1876 in Milan ^[1-2].

Since then, many translations of both Pushkin's poetic and prose works have accumulated, which is a distinctive feature of the Italian book market: as A. Yampolskaya notes, translation in Italy is a low–paid and low-valued activity, therefore, it is much more profitable for a publisher who wants to publish a new edition of an already translated work to order a new translation than to purchase from the copyright holder of the right to republish the old one ^[3].

In particular, the "Tales of the late I. P. Belkin" were translated into Italian seven times: in 1931 by the writer and anti-fascist political activist Leon (Lev Fedorovich) Ginzburg (Slavia publishing house); in 1936, the poet and translator Rinaldo Kufferle (Barion publishing house); in 1946, the "father" of Italian Slavistics, professor and academician Ettore Lo Gatto (De Carlo publishing house); in 1948, the writer and poet, representative of Italian surrealism Tommaso Landolfi (ed- in Bompiani); in 1950 by the professional translator Silvio Polledro (Rizzoli publishing house); in 1985 by the professional translator Luciana Montagnani (UTET publishing house); and in 2006 by the famous writer, journalist and blogger Paolo Nori (Feltrinelli publishing house). However, already in June 1884 – almost half a century before the first complete edition of Belkin's Novellas – a separate translation of the story "The Undertaker" was published in the literary newspaper Ateneo Veneto, made by the outstanding philologist, professor and academician of the University of Pisa Emilio Tedza, who is the object of this study ^[4].

As L. Venuti noted in the translation history of the same name, a distinctive feature of the modern translation market is the concept of "invisibility" of the translator, according to which the translator who remains invisible against the background of the "visible" author is considered good. Accordingly, in a "good" translation, the reader should feel only the taste, style and personality of the author, and not the translator. However, the translator cannot completely annul himself and creates a linguistic work corresponding to his own literary taste and professional skills, as well as containing all the features of personal speech in terms of grammar, vocabulary and syntax ^{[3, 5-6]}.

Over the past decades, questions of translation ethics have increasingly focused on the role of the translator himself, in particular paying attention to the key issue of the "visibility" or "invisibility" of the translator, which replaced the traditional comparison between "true" and "free", "literal" and "free" translation. In other words, if earlier the focus of translation research was the translation itself (in particular, the translated text in comparison with the original text), now various aspects of the translation process or the translator's activity as a whole are most likely being considered. The emerging paradigm determines the relevance of our research, in which the translator's "visibility" is presented as a reflection of his biography, his scientific interests and his approach to his activities in the translated text.

To achieve the purpose of this study, the following tasks were identified and solved:

1. to study the biography of E. Tedz in order to contextualize the translation under study at a certain point in his life;

2. Compare the original text and the translated text to identify elements of particular interest from a translation point of view, in particular Russian realities;

3. to analyze the translation strategies and techniques used by E. Tedza in the translation of previously identified "problematic" elements of the original text;

4. Conduct a language analysis of the translation in order to identify the translator's idiolect.

As for research methods, methods of analysis and synthesis were used in the study of E. Tazda's biography, which make it possible to clarify the main features of his professional activity as a scientist and translator.  The analysis method was also applied in comparing the original text and its translation, which allowed us to identify key translation units, find out the translation strategies and techniques used by Tedza, and deduce examples of his idiolect from the translated text.

The primary research material is the translation of The Undertaker by A. S. Pushkin, performed by translator Emilio Tedza and published in 1884 in the literary newspaper Ateneo Veneto ^[4]. Additional sources include online and offline encyclopedia articles dedicated to E. Tedze; obituary of P. Raina, published in the issue of the newspaper "Il Marzocco" dated July 7, 1912; the scientific work of scientists V. Kresini and K. Frati, consisting of a biography and a complete bibliographic list of Tedza's works ^[7]; an article by E. Pascucci devoted to Tedza's translation activities ^[8]; Tedza's own commentary on the translation of The Undertaker [4 c. 574].

The theoretical basis of the research was the works of L. Venuti, E. Pym, R. Arroho, K.M. Sheriffa, K.R. Emmerich, Ts. Chzan, J. Laaksonen and K. Koskinen, P.V. Klyushin, devoted to the ethics of translation and the issue of "(not) visibility" of the translator ^{[5, 9-16]}. In addition, the works of J. Corbetta, I.V. Voynich, Yu.T. Bogrova present examples of the practical application of the concept of "(not)visibility" of the translator in relation to individual works ^[17-19]. An important aspect of the analysis of the studied translation turned out to be a system of paratextual elements (commentary, explanatory), which are devoted to the scientific works of S.J. Kellman, K. Toledano Buendia, M. Podlevskikh Karlstrom ^[20-22].

Practical significance of the work: the research materials can be used in universities of the humanities in the study of special courses and special seminars on the theory and practice of translation, ethics of translation, translation studies.

Results and their discussion

As we have already noted, the first translation of Pushkin's novella "The Undertaker" was published in 1884 in the June issue of the literary newspaper "Ateneo Veneto" ^[4]. The author of this translation was the Venetian philologist, ethnographer and translator Emilio Tedza (1831-1921). Contemporaries describe Tedza as an "outstanding person", emphasizing the versatility of his scientific interests, the volume of published scientific works and translations (from Latin and Sanskrit, ancient Greek, English, French, German, Swedish, Occitan, Spanish, Portuguese, Armenian, Hungarian, Czech, Serbian, Bulgarian and of course Russian), the number of the languages he studied (in addition to the above, they also studied Chinese, Japanese, Mongolian, as well as the languages of the indigenous peoples of Oceania and America and several Creole languages). In addition to The Undertaker, he translated from Russian the poems "The Robber Brothers" by A.S. Pushkin and "The Song about Tsar Ivan Vasilyevich, the Young oprichnik and the daring merchant Kalashnikov" by M.Y. Lermontov. According to the obituary in the newspaper Il Marzocco, Italy in his person has lost the most beautiful polyglot who ever lived in it. After working as a librarian in Venice and Florence, in 1860 Tedza became an associate professor of comparative studies at the University of Bologna, then a professor of Sanskrit at the University of Pisa, where he was elected twice to the position of rector in 1880-81 and 1884-85 academic years. In 1891, he became a member of the Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, the oldest and most prestigious Academy of Sciences in Italy ^[7].

According to E. Pascucci, the translation of The Undertaker by E. Tedza can be considered an example of a domestication strategy, since he adapts the content of the original text to his life experience, moving the story into the reality of his time [8 p. 212]. This approach is stated by the translator himself in his commentary on the translation:

Il Pus’kin racconta e non declama: se non paresse, la colpa ? mia. Rileggendo, veggo che ora sparisce un po’ troppo il russo, e ora l’italiano: si mescola il giallo e l’azzurro, salta fuori il verde [4 c. 574].

Pushkin tells, not recites: if you don't think so, it's my fault. Rereading my translation, I see that Russian disappears somewhere, and Italian disappears somewhere: yellow and blue mix, green pops up (Here and further the translation is made by the author of the article. – V. Ya.)

However, in the translation of The Undertaker, another aspect of E. Tedza's personality is clearly expressed – his interest in ethnographic research. Thus, in translation there is a certain contrast between two opposite approaches: on the one hand, Tedza tries to provide the reader with a text that is as understandable and pleasant as possible, using – more or less successfully – similar Italian realities; on the other hand, the ethnographer's professionalism is manifested in a system of footnotes in which he describes in great detail those Russian realities, which he replaced with Italian ones, although these footnotes may sometimes seem strange and, perhaps, superfluous [8 p. 214].

The first example of E. Tezda's ethnographic approach is the translation of the title of the story as "appaltatore di funerali". With the exception of Tedza himself and L. Ginzburg, all translators translate the word "undertaker" as "fabbricante di bare" (i.e., coffin maker), using the most etymologically approximate expression to the Russian original. The expression chosen by Tedza is literally translated into Russian as "funeral contractor"; from a translation point of view, this translation is a kind of explication – as the story itself shows, the official duties of the undertaker included not only the manufacture and sale of coffins, but also the general organization of funerals, transportation of the coffin from the funeral hall to the cemetery and, finally, burial. However, Tedza's ethnographic approach is manifested in the decision to comment on the use of such a translation technique with a footnote:

La parola, che ? grobovs’c’ik, non si trover? in tutti i lessici: come il grobotes e il grobod?lja, sarebbe il maestro che fa le casse: e cos? lo spiega il Dal (Tolkovyj Slovar). Ma la novella ne allarga l’officio e la dignit? [4 c. 574].

This word, i.e. the undertaker, is not present in all dictionaries: as a grobotesman and coffin maker, it means a master who makes coffins: and so it is defined by Dahl (Explanatory dictionary). However, the novel expands the range of his activities and his dignity.

Thus, Tedza's choice may seem justified, but E. Pascucci notes that the term "contractor" refers more to the field of public works and services and, accordingly, is not suitable for such a type of artisanal, "family" business as that of the protagonist of the story by A. Prokhorov [8 p. 213].

Of particular interest to us are the translation strategies used by Tedza in interpreting Russian realities. Nowadays, Italian readers have long been accustomed to the fact that transliterated terms are found in Russian classics, the meaning of which can be found either in footnotes or in the attached glossary ^{[8, 23]}. In the 19th century, however, there was a much more widespread domestication strategy in which the translator chose and replaced Russian realities with more or less equivalent Italian counterparts. For example, Tedza translates a samovar as "tettiera", i.e. "teapot", and "kivot" as "altarino", i.e. "small altar" (in the Italian tradition, this is a small table or chest of drawers on which there are icons, candles, flowers, photographs or portraits of deceased relatives), "dime" as the "lira" (the monetary unit of the Kingdom of Italy and then the Italian Republic until 2000) [4 c. 575, 582, 575, 579]. Translating garments, in particular the words "caftan", "frock coat" and "robe", Tedza applies a generalization technique and uses the generalized term "abito" for all three, i.e. "dress, suit, thing" [4 p. 577, 581, 582].

However, the uniqueness of Tedza's translation is represented by footnotes, in which he sometimes justifies his translation decisions and informs the reader about the realities present in the original text. For example, the key character of the story – the booth boy Yurko – is defined by the nation as a "chukhonets", i.e. Finn (with a dismissive connotation). Tedza, however, translates this word as "d'estonia", i.e. "Estonian", commenting on his choice with a long footnote:

Nel testo si ha C’uhonec <…> e potrebbe valere anche uomo di Finlandia. Prescelgo l’altra provincial perch? dal grande lessico del Wiedemann ho la sicurezza che Jurka ? un nome usato in Estonia e nulla potrei affermare dei finni. ? noto che gli slavi diedero nome di C’ud alle genti altaiche che stavano, e stanno, loro accanto: e aggiungeremo, a migliore spiegazione della parola, col Safar’ick nelle sue Antichit? slave (Slovansk? staroz’itnosti, V Praze 1837 p. 240) che nel russo ant. i finni si chiamavano e C’uchna e C’uhonci e C’uchari [4 c. 577].

In the text, a Chukhonets <...>, which can also mean a person from Finland. I prefer this option, because according to Wiedemann's vocabulary, I am sure that Yurka is an Estonian name, but I can't say anything about Finns. It is known that the Slavs called "chud" all the Altai peoples who lived – and live – next to them: I would also like to add, in order to better explain this word, that in the "Slavic Antiquities" of Shafarik (Slovans ? staro?itnost, Prague, 1873, p. 240) it is written that the Finns were also called "chukhna", and "chukhontsy", and "chukhari".

Returning home after the main character of the story was ridiculed, A. Prokhorov asks the question: "Is the undertaker a Yule gaer?". And this time Tedza uses the technique of domestication and translates "gaer Yuletide" as "burattino", i.e. "puppet"; however, in the footnote he again tries to bring the reader closer to Russian culture:

Gaer svjatoc’ny: un buffone che serve di spasso nelle feste solenni [4 c. 577].

Yule Gaer: A buffoon who entertains people during the great holidays.

Sometimes the domestication of some words in Tedza's translation is due to the generally accepted social norms of his time: it is for this reason that he translates the expression "Orthodox dead" as "quelli che sono morti nel seno della santa chiesa", i.e. "those who died in the bosom of the holy church" [4 p. 579], avoiding the word "ortodosso" (Orthodox), which – as E. Pascucci notes – in the XIX century was used exclusively to refer to Roman Catholics [8 p. 215].

A very interesting translation find by E. Russian Russian interpretation of the address "father". Yu. Dobrovolskaya in her textbook on translation from Russian to Italian cites this word as an example of an "ingrained" error, since very often it is translated as "piccolo padre", literally – "little father" [23 p. 8]. E. Tedza's translation solution, on the contrary It can be considered particularly interesting and successful: he translates this word as "compare", i.e. "comrade" when it is pronounced by friends and buddies; as "sor padrone", i.e. "Mr. master", when a maid addresses Prokhorov in this way. It should be noted that in the latter case, the maid – unlike the original – addresses him with "You", and not with "you" [4 p. 579, 582; 8 p. 213-214]. Thus, both versions of the translation of the word "father" are examples of the method of domestication.

Another aspect of E. Tedza's "visibility" as a translator is, of course, his idiolect. In particular, the translation of "The Undertaker" is characterized lexically by the presence of many diatopic variants typical of the Tuscan dialect. Despite the Venetian origin, in 1884 Tedza lived in Pisa, so it can be assumed that he wanted to convey a certain "local" flavor with such forms [8 p. 212]. The following table shows examples of Tuscan forms along with their equivalents in "standard" Italian (Table 1).

Table 1 – Toscanisms translated by E. Tedza and their equivalents in standard Italian and Russian

Another small mistake indicates the identity of E. Tedza as a translator. Pushkin writes "The girls have gone to their room", and Tedza translates "Le ragazze entrarono nella loro camera" using the verb "entrare", i.e. "enter", instead of "leave" [4 p. 575]. According to the authors of the article, the choice of an inappropriate verb in translating this sentence is justified by the linguistic interference of a third language that the translator knew and translated several works from, namely Serbian, in which the preposition (and the corresponding prefix) "u" is the equivalent of the Russian preposition "b".

Conclusion

The general characteristics of the analyzed translation of The Undertaker are the domestication of foreign realities and the desire for maximum perception of the described reality as "one's own" on the part of the reader. Such characteristics, as a rule, contribute to the "invisibility" of the translator, bringing the text closer to the culture and mentality of the target audience. However, after performing a thorough linguistic and textual analysis of the translation, it can be concluded that the personality of Emilio Tedza is quite "visible" in the translation text. In accordance with the tasks set, the following conclusions can be formulated: when translating words and phrases describing Russian realities unfamiliar to the Italian reader and, therefore, requiring the use of translation techniques to convey the linguistic and cultural background of the story, E. Tedza applies a general strategy of domestication, which was characteristic of that era and is traditionally associated with the "invisibility" of the translator. However, Tedza's scientific interests as a philologist and ethnographer are manifested in a system of detailed explanatory footnotes, where each method of domestication is justified by a brief description or explanation of the original term or phrase, as well as a transliterated original. The personality of the translator is also manifested due to his idiolect, since the linguistic analysis of the translated text highlighted the presence of a large number of Toscanisms in the translation text. This fact reflects the biography of Tedza, who, as it turned out at the first stage of the study, lived in Pisa at the time of this translation. Another element indicating the translator's identity in the text is an error in translating the verb "gone": being apparently related to the phenomenon of language interference from the Serbian language, it reveals another aspect of the translator's personality, namely his polyglotism.

Thus, the translator's "visibility" is not only manifested in the text, but can also help the reader learn a lot of interesting things about Emilio Tedze, about his interests and about his life in general.

The prospects for further research include an analysis of other translations by E. Tedza, which allows us to confirm the reflection of his personality in translation activities, as well as the application of the developed methodology to the works of other translators in different language combinations.