poetry in translation
So I've been playing around with translating some Latvian dainas, and I have run headlong into a major problem with crafting truly effective translations -- and that is the issue of diminutive/affectionate suffixes.
The suffixes are used plentifully throughout the dainas. For the most part, I think it's a matter of getting the meter to come out right; if the word itself fits the meter, it is used in its root form, but if a few extra syllables are needed, the affectionate/diminutive form is used. However, because this strategy is used *so* frequently, it becomes one of the defining emotional characteristics of the poems. Let me give you an example:
Visas manas ceļas malas
Laimes koku pieaugušas:
No bērziņa jēriņš dzima,
No apsites kazuliņš.
Roughly translated, that means:
Along all my roadsides
Laima's trees grow:
From the birch, a lamb was born,
From the aspen, a goat.
But what that translation is not picking up is that "birch", "lamb", "aspen" and "goat" are all in the diminutive. That is, in the poems, people transform the names of trees and animals in the exact same way that in daily life they transform the names of their husbands and wives, their children and grandchildren, and their dearest friends. Even the names of gods and goddesses appear sometimes in the affectionate diminutive. The overall effect is one of cheerful, intimate fondness for everything in the natural and supernatural worlds. And because English lacks a diminutive form, I cannot find any natural, unobtrusive way to get that across.
Any thoughts from the poets and translators on my flist?
This entry was originally posted at http://loligo.dreamwidth.org/408821.html.
comments on that entry. Comments on Dreamwidth preferred.
The suffixes are used plentifully throughout the dainas. For the most part, I think it's a matter of getting the meter to come out right; if the word itself fits the meter, it is used in its root form, but if a few extra syllables are needed, the affectionate/diminutive form is used. However, because this strategy is used *so* frequently, it becomes one of the defining emotional characteristics of the poems. Let me give you an example:
Visas manas ceļas malas
Laimes koku pieaugušas:
No bērziņa jēriņš dzima,
No apsites kazuliņš.
Roughly translated, that means:
Along all my roadsides
Laima's trees grow:
From the birch, a lamb was born,
From the aspen, a goat.
But what that translation is not picking up is that "birch", "lamb", "aspen" and "goat" are all in the diminutive. That is, in the poems, people transform the names of trees and animals in the exact same way that in daily life they transform the names of their husbands and wives, their children and grandchildren, and their dearest friends. Even the names of gods and goddesses appear sometimes in the affectionate diminutive. The overall effect is one of cheerful, intimate fondness for everything in the natural and supernatural worlds. And because English lacks a diminutive form, I cannot find any natural, unobtrusive way to get that across.
Any thoughts from the poets and translators on my flist?
This entry was originally posted at http://loligo.dreamwidth.org/408821.html.
comments on that entry. Comments on Dreamwidth preferred.