The adequate translation as a methodological tool
Dante’s onomastic wordplay in English
Published online: 27 May 2002
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.13.1.02cri
https://doi.org/10.1075/target.13.1.02cri
This paper argues that the question of theoretical translatability is crucial both to source-oriented and target-oriented approaches. Reflecting on translatability requires a discussion of Toury’s notion of ‘adequate translation’, which has two senses: the general or ideal approximation to source-text norms, and the tertium comparationis represented by a source-text-oriented translation (i.e. showing how the original ‘can’ be translated). It is argued that both senses have heuristic value in Translation Studies. The explanatory power of target-orientedness is demonstrated by discussing the various strategies pursued by seven Anglo-American translators of Dante who either re-create or avoid rewriting grotesque onomastic wordplay in Inferno. Zero translation policy of Dante’s names is not considered to be evidence of their inherent ‘untranslatability’ since for an empiricist nothing is untranslatable. Evocative names may be translated in a creative way provided the rewriter is willing (or allowed) to be innovative.
Résumé
L’article soutient que le principede la traductibilité est d’un intérêt crucial, tant pour les « sourciers » que pour les « ciblistes ». Au départ,il y a lieu deseréférer à la notion de ‘traduction adéquate’ (Toury); cette notion est douée de deux significations: le rapprochement général ou idéal de normes du texte-source, et le tertium comparationis constitué par une traduction orientée vers le texte-source (et chargé de montrer comment l’original ‘peut’ êtretraduit). Les deux significations ont une portée heuristique dans les études de traduction.D’autre part, l’orientation vers le pôle-cible possède à son tour une valeur explicative, ce qu’illustre l’analyse des diverses stratégies déployées par sept traducteurs anglo-américains de Dante, qui soit recréent, soit évitent la réécriture de jeux de mots onomastiques à caractère grotesque de L’Enfer.Quant à la traduction-zéro des noms, elle n’est pas un argument en faveur de leur ‘non-traductibilité’, puisqu’aux yeux d’un empiriste rien n’est proprement intraduisible. Des noms évocateurs peuvent êtrel’ objet d’une traduction créatrice, pourvuque le traducteur est disposé (ou autorisé) à innover.
Article outline
- 1.Translatability and the notion of ‘adequate translation’
- 2.Onomastic wordplay and the issue of (un)translatability
- 3.Onomastic wordplay in Dante’s Inferno and the construction of a hypothetical ‘adequate translation’
- 4.An explanation of the avoidance policy (or zero translation strategy)
- 5.The rewriting of Dante’s onomastic wordplay
- 6.Conclusions
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (47)
Texts
Alighieri, Dante. 1966–1967. La Commedia secondo l’antica vulgata, ed. G. Petrocchi, 41 vols. Milan: Mondadori.
Cary, Henry Francis tr. 1844. The Vision or Hell, Purgatory and Paradise of Dante Alighieri. London: George Bell and Sons.
Secondary sources
Aphek, Edna and Yishai Tobin. 1984. “The Place of ‘Place’ in a Text fromAgnon: On the Untranslatability of Metaphor and Polysemy in Modern Hebrew”. Babel 30. 148–158.
Bannet, Tavor Eve. 1993. “The Scene of Translation: After Jakobson, Benjamin, de Man and Derrida”. New Literary History. 24: 3577–595.
Coleridge, Samuel Taylor. 1818. “Dante (from Lecture X, 1818)”. I.A. Richards, ed. The Portable Coleridge. New York: The Viking Press, 1950. 405–409.
Crisafulli, Edoardo. 1996. “Dante’s Puns in English and the Question of Compensation”. The Translator 2: 2. 259–276.
. 1999. “The Translator as Textual Critic and the Potential of Transparent Discourse”. The Translator 5:1 5: 1. 83–107.
Delabastita, Dirk. 1991. “A False Opposition in Translation Studies: Theoretical versus/and Historical Approaches”. Target 3: 2. 137–152.
. 1993. There’s a Double Tongue: An Investigation into the Translation of Shakespeare’s Wordplay. Amsterdam and Atlanta, GA: Rodopi.
. 1994. “Focus on the Pun: Wordplay as a Special Problemin Translation Studies”. Target 6: 2. 223–243.
Eco, Umberto. 1992. “Overinterpreting Texts”. Stefan Collini, ed. Interpretation and Overinterpretation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. 45–66.
Edinburgh Magazine. 1818. “Observations on the Poetical Character of Dante”. Edinburgh Magazine 3: 2. 223–229.
Embleton, Sheila. 1991. “Names and Their Substitutes: Onomastic Observations on Astérix and Its Translations”. Target 3: 2. 175–206.
Hermans, Theo. 1985. “Translation Studies and a New Paradigm”. Introduction to Theo Hermans, ed. The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary Translation. London & Sydney: CroomHelm, 1985. 7–15.
. 1999. Translation in Systems: Descriptive and Systemic Approaches Explained. Manchester: St. Jerome.
House, Juliane. 1973. “Of the Limits of Translatability”. Babel 191. 166–167.
Iser, Wolfgang. 1995. “On Translatability: Variables of Interpretation”. The European English Messenger 4: 1. 30–38.
Jakobson, Roman. 1959. “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation”. Reuben A. Brower, ed. On Translation. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1959. 232–239.
Lefevere, André. 1992. Translation, Rewriting & the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge.
Manini, Luca. 1996. “Meaningful Literary Names: Their Forms and Functions, and Their Translation”. The Translator 2: 2. 161–178.
North American Review. 1819. “Review of Dante’s Alighieri Divine Comedy and H.F. Cary’s The Vision”. North American Review 8: 3. 322–347.
Padoan, Giorgio. 1970–1978. “Demologia”. Enciclopedia dantesca, 6 vols. Rome: Istituto dell’Enciclopedia Italiana II. 368–374.
Pym, Anthony and Horst Turk. 1998. “Translatability”. Mona Baker, ed. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge, 1998. 273–277.
Rickard, Peter. 1975. “Alice in France, or: Can Lewis Carroll Be Translated?”. Comparative Literature Studies 121. 45–66.
Robey, David. 1985. “Literary Theory and Critical Practice in Italy”. Comparative Criticism71. 73–101.
Spitzer, Leo. 1988. “The Farcical Elements in Inferno XXI-XXIII”. A. Forcione, H. Lindenberger and M. Sutherland, eds. Leo Spitzer: Representative Essays. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1988. 172–177.
Toury, Gideon. 1980. In Search of a Theory of Translation. Tel Aviv: The Porter Institute for Poetics and Semiotics.
. 1995. Descriptive Translation Studies and beyond. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Pablé, Adrian
2005. The importance of re-naming Ernest?. Target. International Journal of Translation Studies 17:2 ► pp. 297 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
