Nijntje and Miffy: Studying the Retranslation Hypothesis of (Re)translated Children's Literature

(1)

Studying the Retranslation Hypothesis of (Re)translated Children’s Literature Carmen Hoevenaar 10559248 University of Amsterdam Dr. Eric R. G. Metz Amsterdam, 31 December 2017

(2)

ik maak maar vast een

tekening

zo mooi als ik het kan

dacht nijn, met kuikentjes

erop

daar houden baby’s van

I’ll make a picture now, she

thinks,

for baby, as a treat,

with little chicks to look at,

all yellow, small and sweet.

– Dick Bruna, Miffy and the New Baby (2003)

I’ll make a picture now, she

thought

as pretty as can be

a picture of some little chicks

babies love chicks, you see

– Dick Bruna, Miffy and the New Baby (2003) Translated by Patricia Crampton (2002)

(3)

Foreword

I have learned that researching translations is not for the faint-hearted, but requires stamina and grit. Language is a funny thing, it twists and turns and just when you think you have figured it all out, it crumbles and

falls apart right in front of your eyes. The options are infinite when it comes to the meaning of a single paragraph, sentence, or a word. During

the process of writing this thesis, I was constantly reminded of a song by Florence Welch. Especially one verse would repeat over and over in my

mind...

No, words are a language It doesn't deserve such treatment

And all my stumbling phrases

Never amounted to anything worth this feeling All this heaven never could describe

Such a feeling as I'm healing, words were never so useful So I was screaming out a language

That I never knew existed before

‘All This and Heaven Too’, Florence Welch (2011)

Therefore, I want to thank my supervisor dr. Eric R. G. Metz, for his patience and help in writing this thesis. It was a long and sometimes difficult process that I could not have completed if it was not for his help. I

also want to express my gratitude towards my family, my parents and their everlasting support and my siblings who were there for me when I

(4)

Abstract

Research into translations of children's literature has mainly focused on the translation strategy compared to the strategy used in translating adult literature. However, the research into retranslations of literature for children has received lesser attention, but examining retranslations can offer a new perspective on the translation strategy used and possibly allow for a step closer to the an answer to the question of why children’s literature is translated the way it is. This thesis too researches the translation strategy used in translating children's literature, but offers a new perspective by including the variable of time as retranslations of children's literature are examined. In doing so, this thesis puts the “Retranslation Hypothesis” to the test. An analysis was conducted of four children’s picture books by the Dutch author and illustrator Dick Bruna (1927 – 2017) and their concomitant translations and retranslations. The distance between the original text (ST) and the target texts (i.e. TT1 and TT2) was determined. Consequently, a model was developed based on the causal model proposed by Andrew Chesterman (2000). The methodology draws mainly on Juliane House’s (2015) revised Translation Quality Assessment Model in order to make up the model. Furthermore, other models, theories and constructs from the field of translation studies were incorporated in the model. The distance was measured in the amount of translation transformations between the ST and the TT1 and TT2. Moreover, the distance between the texts included the difference in effect between the TTs and the ST on child readers. Ultimately, the goal was to determine whether the Retranslation Hypothesis is correct in the case of British retranslations of Dutch children’s picture books – thus, whether the TT2 is closer to the ST than the TT1. In alignment with this research question and based on previous research (Desmidt 2009 and Skjørnberg 1982 among others) with regard to the Retranslation Hypothesis it was predicted that the Retranslation Hypothesis would not apply to the (re)translations of Dick Bruna’s picture books, and that the TT1 is closer to the ST than the TT2. It was found that indeed the Retranslation Hypothesis did not hold in the case of the British retranslations of Dick Bruna’s picture books. There was a larger distance between the retranslations and the ST than between the TT1 and the ST.

(5)

List of Tables and Figures

Tables

Table 2.1 Processes and alterations for each Register variable 49

Table 4.1 Realia in the TT1 62

Table 4.2 Realia in the TT2 68

Table 6.1 Types of verse translation in the TT1 (above) and TT2 (below) 95

Figures

Figure 2.1 Causal Model as proposed by Andrew Chesterman (2000) 34

Figure 2.2 Degrees of Realia Translation (Salmeri 2014) 41

Figure 4.1 Field analysis: Source texts 56

Figure 4.2 Field analysis: Determinant means of the STs compared to the alterations of the TT1

60

Figure 4.3 Field analysis: Determinant means of the STs compared to the alterations of the TT2

65

Figure 4.4 Field analysis: Delta TT2-TT1 69

Figure 5.1 Tenor analysis: Source texts 73

Figure 5.2 Tenor analysis: Determinant means of the STs compared to the alterations of the TT1

77

Figure 5.3 Tenor analysis: Determinant means of the STs compared to the alterations of the TT2

(8)

Figure 5.4 Tenor analysis: Delta TT2-TT1 84

Figure 6.1 Mode analysis; Source texts 86

Figure 6.2 Mode analysis: Determinant means of the STs compared to the alterations of the TT1

89

Figure 6.3 Mode analysis: Determinant means of the STs compared to the alterations of the TT2

92

Figure 6.4 Mode analysis: Delta TT2-TT1 96

Figure 7.1 Comparison: The total of alterations of the TT1 (blue or the left column) and TT2 (red or the right column)

(9)

1

“Anything we create for children—whether writing, illustrating, or translating—

reflects our views of childhood, of being a child.”

– Riitta Oittinen (2000)

Introduction

In this thesis the “Retranslation Hypothesis” is put to the test in the case of retranslated children’s literature. An analysis is conducted of four children’s picture books by the Dutch author and illustrator Dick Bruna (1927 – 2017) and their concomitant translations and retranslations. In order to be able to research the Retranslation Hypothesis in translated children’s literature the distance between the original text (ST) and the target texts (i.e. TT1 and TT2) must be determined. The distance will be measured in the amount of translation transformations between the ST and the TT1 and TT2. Moreover, the distance between the texts will include the difference in effect between the TTs and the ST on child readers. Consequently, a model is developed based on the causal model proposed by Andrew Chesterman (2000). For this model the methodology draws mainly on Juliane House’s (2015) revised Translation Quality Assessment Model. Furthermore, other models, theories and constructs from the field of translation studies are incorporated in the methodology. Ultimately, the goal is to determine whether the Retranslation Hypothesis is correct in the case of British retranslations of Dutch children’s picture books – thus, whether the TT2 is closer to the ST than the TT1. Accordingly, the research question of this thesis is as follows:

(10)

Does the Retranslation Hypothesis apply to the British-English (re)translations of the Dutch picture books by Dick Bruna (1927 – 2017)?

In alignment with this research question and based on previous research (Desmidt 2009 and Skjørnberg 1982 among others) with regard to the Retranslation Hypothesis and translated literature for children the following prediction is made:

The Retranslation Hypothesis will not apply to the (re)translations of Dick Bruna’s picture books; the TT1 will be closer to the ST than the TT2.

Before finding an answer to the research question and either verify or falsify the hypothesis, the research context, important influences in the research field of children’s literature in translation, other prior research that is relevant to the current research, the theoretical framework, and the status quaestionis are discussed in this chapter. The chapter ends with a full account of the aim of the current study as well as an argument for this thesis’s relevance and contribution to the field of translated children’s literature.

1.1 Children’s Literature in Translation

The genre of children’s literature (CL from now on) has not been acknowledged as an autonomous genre for long and still it is often not considered as proper literature (Volker 1996, p. 10). It was only during the Enlightenment that a separate genre of CL came into being, partly also due to Jean-Jacques Rousseau who wrote Emile ou de l’Education (1762). He was one of the first to write specifically for children, and with his work the genre of CL started to form (Volker 1996, p. 10). Even though a

(11)

adult literature and CL was made. At first, children were seen as smaller versions of adults and hence treated as adults in their exposure to literature and the topics discussed in literature. Only around the end of the 19th_{century, due to the influence of Romanticism, people started to think}

of children as ‘fragile’ and the opinion that they needed to be protected from such topics as death, decease and other (now) taboos arose (Volker 1996, p. 10).

Since children were no longer seen as smaller versions of adults and were seen as requiring a different treatment, literature for children had to be a way for children to enjoy childhood and remain young. Rita Ghesquiere (2014) argues that as a consequence of the changed perception of children “the message in children’s books was presented in a straightforward manner [and] [e]very question came with an answer” (p. 23). Many works of literature meant for children, or adapted for children at a later stage, that followed after this changing view, took up on simplicity and enjoyment as important characteristics of CL. Moreover, many of these works were translated and introduced in other countries. Ghesquiere (2014) writes that it was “[t]hanks to translations and adaptations . . . . [that these works] became classics and had great influence on children’s literature in the target countries” (p. 24). Examples of such literature are

Winnie-The-Pooh (1926) by A. A. Milne, Alice in Wonderland (1865) by

Lewis Carroll, and The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (1900) by L. Frank Baum. The idea that CL must be about topics that are ‘good for the child’ and somehow educate them or are pedagogically justified, prevailed until the eighties and nineties of the previous century. Nowadays, ideas on what

(12)

topics and themes are appropriate for CL still exist, only the focus has shifted away from education and pedagogy and has now turned to realism, entertainment and autonomy (Volker 1996, p. 20).

Along with the changing of opinions concerned with CL, and the perception of CL as a distinct genre, the field of study that focuses on CL in translation started to grow. It has received lesser attention than other fields of study that research (translated) literature because of two reasons. First of all, books and other works for children were for long not considered to be proper literature in western countries. Rather, they were seen equal to common reading matter like newspapers and magazines (Volker 1996, p. 4). As a result, it was not considered in literary studies and translation studies research . On top of that, CL was not seen as an autonomous genre which also caused it to be less researched. However, because of the change in what people believed to be important features in CL, literature for children was increasingly regarded as proper literature and a separate genre. Emer O’Sullivan (2011) has pointed out that this was also due to the development of technologies like Internet, computers, and more recently, the increasing popularity of social media such as Facebook and YouTube (p. 189). Popular CL from dominating cultures on the global market, like the American or British book markets, easily gained access to the markets of smaller cultures, creating a demand for foreign bestsellers (O’Sullivan 2011, p. 189). Hence, more children’s books were translated and read by children. Consequently, questions concerning the effect of translated literature for children and the translation process, among

(13)

others, arose making it into an interesting topic for research (Coillie 2005, 17).

1.2 Translated Children’s Literature: Major Influences

In the field of translated CL there are two scholars that developed theories and constructs which have been of great influence in the field: Göte Klingberg (1918 – 2006) and Zohar Shavit (1951 – ). Göte Klingberg was one of the founders of the International Research Society for Children’s Literature and identified five research problems that researchers of translated CL try to find answers to.

1. Empirical statistical studies of the translation streams;

2. Economic and technical problems in the production of translations; 3. Ways of selecting books for translation;

4. How children’s books are actually translated, definition of the problems which translators encounter, and what recommendations can be given;

5. Reception and influence of translations in the target language area. (Klingberg 1976, p. 84)

The most important of these, Klingberg identifies, is the fourth because Here, the connection between our studies and the linguistic science of translation is the greatest. From this science we can learn about the problems of literal and interpretative translations, the special problems that certain languages present, and the problems of texts of special kinds, as, for example, dialogue, poetry, puns” (p. 85).

Many research into CL in translation has focused on this fourth research problem. Mainly, what has been researched is the adaptive nature of the strategy employed by translators of CL. Göte Klingberg too observed that in translations of CL more than in translations of adult literature translators often tend to adapt many features of the source text to the target culture – a process he termed ‘context adaptation’ (Klingberg 1976). Klingberg

(14)

identified some elements that are most often subject to adaptation. In his paper “The Different Aspects of Research into the Translation of Children’s Books and Its Practical Application” (1976) he observed:

The most common categories of context adaptation I have found to be of personal names, titles, geographical names, names of plant and animal species, measurements, concepts concerning buildings and home furnishing, meals and food, customs and practices, the play and games of children, of singularities in the source language such as word-play, homonymous or similarly spelled words, newly-created words, and foreign language in the source text, further, in mythology and folklore, personal and geographical names as well as terms used for supernatural beings and events, and historical and literary references. (p. 86)

All of which are adapted, he claims, because otherwise the text would become incomprehensible for children of the target language. By adapting the cultural context of a text, translators are able to solve translation problems that arise due to cultural specific references. Also, Klingberg argued that translators often apply context adaptation to increase the readability and comprehensibility of the text for the child. On top of that, every culture has different views on what is good for the child. As a consequence, texts are adapted to fit this image.

With regard to the idea that translators also act according to a cultural ideology Klingberg introduced a construct which he called ‘degree of adaptation’ (Klingberg 1976; Klingberg 2008). With this term, he takes a step back from the cultural context adaptation and assumes that the author of the original text also acts in alignment with the source culture. By means of the degree of adaptation, Klingberg looks at the adaptations the author of the original text has applied in order to make a text

(15)

When the source text is a work for children or young people, this means that the author has in some way considered the presumptive readers, their interests, ways of experiencing, knowledge, reading ability and so on. If we call this an adaptation, the technical term for the extent to which the characteristics of the young readers are considered could be the degree of adaptation. (Klingberg 1976, p. 86) Thus, a source text is already adapted to the child and most likely to the culturally specific generic and social conventions that exist with regard to children and CL in the source system. According to Klingberg, a translator must try to keep the same degree of adaptation when translating a text for children. He argues that the degree of adaptation must be preserved in order to safeguard the quality of the text and not make it more or less difficult for the child to comprehend or more or less interesting, entertaining and so on (Klingberg 2008, p. 14). Whereas Klingberg argues that context adaptation is necessary at times, he does not advocate for modernisation, purification, or didactisation of the target text, which are modifications that are also often found in translated CL.

For the purpose of identifying translation problems that translators of CL encounter, and the possible recommendations of how to solve such problems, Klingberg stresses the need for methods to measure the degree of adaptation in CL. However, since the degree of adaptation is based on the idea that the author and the translator envision an audience, and write specifically for the needs of that audience, it will be very difficult to pinpoint exactly the degree of adaptation of any text. What it actually appears to be about is whether or not the genre is the same for the ST and the TT. Then, the degree should be the same when the ST is translated with the same consideration for the target audience as during the writing

(16)

process, despite the generic conventions. But, every genre is realized differently across cultures and in some cultures it may be more appropriate to add things that make the text more or less interesting for the child, or in some cultures it is found normal to make texts easy and clear cut. Consequently, it would be very difficult to distinguish between whether adaptation is motivated by the translator’s envisioned target audience or generic conventions. Furthermore, it can be argued that the adaptations done by translators and authors and generic conventions are mutually dependent. Adaptations that occur frequently in translated texts, may eventually be seen as generic conventions in the target culture. In a similar fashion, Riitta Oittinen (2000) asks the question whether

. . . . adaptation is always involved in translation, if we think of translators as human beings in special dialogic situations with certain images of culture, language, children, and adults, and with certain images of their future readers, do they not direct their words to those audiences and domesticate the message accordingly? (p. 89)

Thus, it would be very difficult, nearly impossible I would say, to measure the degree of adaptation in any text. Still, Göte Klingberg has influenced other scholars that conducted research with regard to adaptation in translation of literature for children. But, before moving on to these researches, the other scholar that has made a considerable impact on translated CL research is discussed.

The other major figure in the field of translated CL is Zohar Shavit (1951 – ). She based a hypothesis on Polysystem Theory as proposed by Itamar Even-Zohar (1979) that states that translators adapt CL in translation to the target culture system, because it takes a secondary

(17)

position (Shavit 1981). If the issue of translation strategy is approached via Polysystem Theory, then the position of any literature within a cultural literary system influences the overall translation strategy used in translation into that system. Polysystem Theory assumes that every culture has a stratified literary system with a dynamic hierarchy in which translated literature either takes a primary or peripheral position. Literature in the primary position is often canonized and leading when it comes to what literary conventions (e.g. generic norms, conventional forms etc.) are of major influence on what is deemed appropriate in other literature within the same culture. Subsequently, literature that occupies the secondary position follows the literary conventions of literature in the primary position.

The secondary position is in many cultures the ‘natural’ position of translated literature, which is – as Even-Zohar (1979) argues – why the translation strategy is governed by the literary conventions of the literature in the primary position. A translator in a culture where translated literature is secondary will draw on the conventions of the literature in the primary position of the target system. However, stratification is not limited to the primary and secondary position. The positions themselves are stratified as well. Zohar Shavit (1981) has made the argument that if translated literature takes up the secondary position, translations of literature aimed at an adult audience are often higher in hierarchy than translated CL (p. 172). Similar to cases where translated literature is dominant in the literary system at large, translators in cultures where translated literature holds a secondary position will adopt different

(18)

translation strategies according to the stratification of translated literature in this position. Even though translated literature occurs more frequently in the peripheral position, there are cultures and/or have been historical periods where and when translated literature is/was in the primary position. If this is the case, then translators are more prone to break with conventions and translate free of the generic models of the target system (Munday 2012, p. 168).

Following from Polysystem Theory, the strategy used for translating CL is often strongly influenced by the generic conventions of the target culture to the extent that the target text is adapted in such a way that it may even no longer resemble the source text. Shavit (1981) herself conducted a case study of Hebrew translations of famous CL such as Alice

in Wonderland (1865) by Lewis Carroll. Based on this case study, Shavit

argues that

In order to adjust the text to a certain [already existing] model the translator is sometimes even forced into adding to the model elements which do not exist in the original text, but which are considered obligatory in the target model and are thus needed to strengthen the model. (p. 173)

Thus, translators feel obliged to modify CL till it is in line with the generic conventions of the literary target system. There is a strong connection between the generic conventions that exist in a culture and the view people have of the intended readers of such a genre. Hence, translators are not only influenced by the generic conventions, but also by socio-cultural conventions (i.e. ideology) that exist in a socio-cultural system.

(19)

Shavit (1981) has observed that some characteristic features of the translation strategy of translators of CL are related to socio-cultural conventions and are mostly concerned with simplifying the text. First of all, Shavit (1981) notices that CL translators are prone to “adjusting plot, characterization and language to the child's level of comprehension and his reading abilities” (p. 172). In doing so, Shavit (1981) points out, translators “[adapt] the text to the simplified model” and “make the text less sophisticated by changing the relations between elements and functions and making the elements carry fewer functions” (p. 176). Moreover, she states that

the ironical level [is] excluded for at least two reasons: Translators believed that ironical attitudes could not be understood by children and besides, ironical attitudes toward life and grown-ups do not fit, so translators believe, the values a child should acquire through literature (p. 175).

Apparently, the idea exists among translators that CL must be simplified to the extent that it does only represent the ‘right’ interpretation of the text. This idea originates from ideological ideas on what is good for a child. It must be noted, however, that Shavit’s case study is more than 40 years old and that the view on CL and translating CL has changed since then. Moreover, Shavit looked at Hebrew translations of English CL which means her conclusions do not apply in all cases, which also proves this to be a hurdle that scholars in the field of translation studies try to understand and overcome.

Both Göte Klingberg and Zohar Shavit focus on the dichotomy of translation versus adaptation in which translation is presented as more

(20)

positive and adaptation as negative. Thus, the always returning debate on literal versus free translation, foreignising versus domesticating (Venuti 1995), the ‘given’ versus the ‘created’ (Oittinen 2000) is also at play in the field of translated CL. Because the current thesis also researches this dichotomy (i.e. the dependent variable of distance in the current study is expressed in differences between ST and TT which are categorised either as foreignising or domesticating) some relevant researches that have been influenced by this dichotomy, Klingberg’s (1976 and 2008) constructs and Shavit’s (1981) hypothesis are discussed in the following section.

1.3 Translated Children’s Literature: Research and Theories

Many has already been written on the strategy of translators when translating literature in general (Vinay and Darbelnet 1958; Catford 1965; Catford 2000; and Langeveld 2013 to name a few), but the case of children’s books has not yet been explored as extensively. Actually, most research into translations of CL has focused on the adaptation itself, where adaptations occur most frequently, and how they have been installed into the text. Some research has endeavoured to identify why adaptations occur and why translators apply them. However, to give a clear answer to the ‘why’ question generalisations must be made, which makes this a fuzzy topic. Often such research is accompanied by a case study, but these are limited to specific language and culture combinations, which makes it even more difficult to draw conclusions that apply to the translation strategy of CL in general.

(21)

Research that has looked into the adaptations themselves often also include where exactly these adaptations are found and how they affect the effect the text has on readers – always in comparison to the original text. For example, Göte Klingberg (2008) proposed a taxonomy of types of adaptations in translated CL which also include a motivational part – that is, why they have been applied to the text and the intended effect. Another example is Zohar Shavit’s case study, mentioned in the previous section, where various elements prone to be adapted in the translation were identified along with the resulting effect as opposed to the ST.

Gillian Lathey (2011), shows another example of a research that looked into adaptations, where they occur and what effect is achieved through these adaptations. Together with scholars from multiple countries, she conducted a research on a corpus of translations of the work by a single children’s author, and found that “[t]o a far greater degree than in fiction for adults, translators and editors localize names, coinage, foodstuffs, intertextual references, or even the settings of children's stories and novels” (pp. 203-204). Lathey (2011) links the occurrence of these types of adaptations to ideology and manipulation in translations of CL. Accordingly, she argues that these adaptations can be seen in some cases as censorship of the ST. Even though this study did not necessarily assume Shavit’s hypothesis a priori, the results correspond to Shavit’s case study considering that the adaptations align the target texts with the generic conventions of CL in the target system. Moreover, Lathey (2011) takes a step towards a definition of ‘why’ translators modify texts in translations and identifies the aim of alterations in translated CL as a way “to bring the

(22)

target text into line with the values of the parents, teachers, librarians, critics, and all those who regard themselves as responsible for the moral welfare of the young” (pp. 202-203). The aim identified by Lathey (2011) echoes Shavit’s argument that socio-cultural conventions are also at play in the translation strategy and translational choices of the translator, but it is still built on assumptions.

Mieke K. T. Desmet (2007) conducted a study that did take Shavit’s hypothesis as research hypothesis and found proof that – at least – translated popular girls’ fiction takes a peripheral position in the literary systems of the Netherlands and Flanders and is adapted accordingly. The texts she examined were translations from English to Dutch and were meant for the Dutch and Flemish market. The results showed not only that the translated popular girls’ fiction took a peripheral position in the polysystem of both cultures, but that translators and editors took great liberty in culturally adapting the texts. On top of that, the cultural references were almost solely Dutch instead of Flemish. Consequently, these results may also say something about the hierarchy that exists among cultures themselves. Even-Zohar (1979) also stipulated this in his Polysystem Theory; that literary systems are not limited to one culture, but also exist between cultures.

Jan van Coillie (2008) researched the double audience in translations of CL by means of an empirical study of a corpus that included Dutch, English, French, German, Spanish and Italian translations of Hans Christian Andersen’s fairytale “The Emperor’s New Clothes” (Coillie 2008). He based

(23)

‘ambivalent audience’ (p. 66), which she has identified as another reason for the adaptive nature of the strategy used for translating CL. Apart from just children, this idea includes adults in the reading audience of both the target text and the original text. Coillie (2008) looked at how the translators of Andersen’s famous fairytale dealt with the dual audience that is addressed in the original text and how they transferred or did not transfer the address of a double audience to the translation. He found that “the use of the dual audience approach depends largely, though by no means exclusively, on the translator’s decision to use a source-text or target-audience oriented approach” (p. 560). Moreover, Coillie (2008) concluded that “texts that are most clearly oriented towards children and/or adults who read aloud strongly deviate from the source text generally” (p. 561). These findings show that the strategy that translators associate with ambivalent audiences strongly influences what adaptations translators apply. Also, the study reveals how different types of translation shifts, that ultimately change the function of a text, are related to the translation strategy developed by the translator. Such findings as Coillie’s are indeed useful to determine what translators find appropriate for a specific audience or text type.

Furthermore, apart from merely focussing on how text is translated in CL, there is also a branch that researches the translation and adaptation strategies with regard to illustrations in children’s picture books. When translating picture books, illustrations might pose a problem for the translator if they contain culture specific information. Consequently, it might happen that illustrations are translated as well. Nilce M. Pereira

(24)

(2008), for example, advocates for a theory of illustrations as intersemiotic translations of text. That is, as translating words into images. She draws on the definition of ‘intersemiotic translation’ by Roman Jakobson and Max Bense’s three types of information (i.e. documentary, semantic and aesthetic information) as developed by Haroldo de Campos to be applied to poetry. Pereira (2008) argues that the same translation procedures apply to the translation of the illustrations as to the poems, puns, and text in the books she examined. She bases this argument on her analysis (Pereira 2007) of illustrations in Brazilian translations of Alice in

Wonderland by Lewis Carroll which she views as the ‘source text’ for the

intersemiotically translated illustrations. Another example of a research that focused on the translation of picture books (and the only research that looked into the translation of the Dutch picture books by Dick Bruna) is one conducted by Sara van Meerbergen (2012) on the Swedish translation of Nijntje in de Sneeuw by Dick Bruna. She proposes a multimodal model for the analysis of illustrations in picture books and uses the picture book of Nijntje in de Sneeuw to illustrate the model. She bases her model on multimodal text analysis as introduced by Kress and Van Leeuwen and Halliday and Matthiessen. In her analysis, she also includes potential meanings illustrations could have and how the translator used these potential meanings to solve culture specific translation problems. Because, contrary to the illustrations in the books of Alice in Wonderland, the illustrations in Nijntje in de Sneeuw are not translated. However, again empirical research that truly proves a multimodal model to be fruitful lacks and thus such conclusions keep the character of assumptions.

(25)

Surprisingly enough, to my knowledge, Meerbergen is the only one who conducted research related to translation strategy on a translation of a Nijntje picture book. Still, researching translations of the Nijntje picture books, especially in combination with the retranslations, can be fruitful when it comes to gaining more insight into the translation strategy adopted by translators of Dutch CL. In the next section, the usefulness of researching translations in comparison with retranslations is elaborated on. Also, the Retranslation Hypothesis is explained and discussed as well as why it is helpful to research whether the Retranslation Hypothesis applies to retranslations of CL.

1.4 Retranslation and the “Retranslation Hypothesis”

Before moving on to the Retranslation Hypothesis and its concomitant relevant research, asking the question why people put effort into researching retranslation is also significant, because it illustrates how researching retranslations is valuable to the field of translation studies. Koskinen and Paloposki (2010) have articulated some reasons why research into retranslation is valuable. They write:

Retranslations of literature have proved to be useful data for a number of research questions in Translation Studies: with the source text and the target language being constant, the variable of time allows one to study issues such as the changing translation norms and strategies, the standardization of language, or the effects of the political or cultural context. (p. 295)

Especially, researching translation strategies in retranslation is what the current study will also set out to do. If knowledge is gained on translation strategies across translations and retranslations, what influences certain adaptations might be more easily researched. Andrew Chesterman (2000)

(26)

stresses the importance of research into retranslations, not only because it allows for more insight into the translation strategy and the translation process itself. But, also because if more is known about factors that influence the translator and maybe cause certain shifts in translations as opposed to the ST, the circumstances under which translators translate might be improved as well as the overall quality of translations (pp. 26-27).

Knowledge on the translation strategy can be especially gathered from studying retranslation because, as Lawrence Venuti (2003) remarked

[r]etranslations typically highlight the translator's intentionality because they are designed to make an appreciable difference. The retranslator's intention is to select and interpret the foreign text according to a different set of values so as to bring about a new and different reception for that text in the translating culture. (p. 9)

The differences in the effect a translation has on the target readers result from the differences in strategy employed by the translators. In turn, differences in strategy are a result of different circumstances (i.e. time, space, and active agents in the translation process) under which the translations are produced. The desire described by Venuti (2003) to improve the perception or reception of a translation in the target culture is driven by multiple motivations. Piet van Poucke (2017) identified these motivations as five of the most mentioned causes for retranslation.

(1) a new edition or new interpretation of the ST; (2) deficiencies in earlier translations; (3) the absence of a direct connection between the ST and the TT, for instance in cases of ‘indirect translation’; (4) a change in the function or skopos of the translated work in the TC, due to institutional or ideological changes in the receiving culture; and (5) changing norms of translation that turn earlier translations into “less readable” works, leading publishers and translators to provide the reader with updated versions, whether this is done by means of

(27)

These causes or motivations are all more or less driven by the desire to create a new, possibly better, effect on the target reader than the first translation. The Retranslation Hypothesis is concerned with this ‘better’ effect due to a ‘better’ subsequent translation and can thus be seen as some sort of umbrella term for all motivations for retranslation.

The Retranslation Hypothesis originates from an idea formulated by Antoine Berman (1942 – 1991) who argued for two motivations for retranslation. First of all, he explained that in a way the first translation can be seen as somehow ‘lacking’ or ‘poor’ and the retranslation is there to enrich the older translation in order for such translations to become ‘great’. He argued that a retranslation is ‘greater’ than the first translation since the retranslator can draw both on the first translation and the source text. S/he will then be better attired to transfer the essence of the original text to the retranslation (Koskinen and Paloposki 2010, p. 295). Moreover, what Berman was truly saying with this hypothesis, is that all first translations are always lacking, and only retranslations are capable of being great translations. Ultimately, what the Retranslation Hypothesis states is that TT2 is closer to the ST than the TT1 due to the possibility for the translator of the retranslation to use the interpretation of the translator of the TT1. This movement back to the ST Desmidt (2009) linked to the idea behind the Retranslation Hypothesis that first translations are produced with the idea to establish the reputation of the author in the target culture. Once the reputation is established and the literary work has a certain status in the target culture, retranslations can be produced that

(28)

move back towards the ST, inciting the target reader to move towards the author.

Apart from the translation hypothesis, Berman also introduced a second motive for retranslation; namely, aging (Poucke 2017, p. 94). The concept of aging entails that translations are revised or entirely replaced by new translations when publishers or other figures in the book publishing industry, believe the language used in a translation to be outdated (Poucke 2017, p. 95). In turn, the concept of aging may also cause retranslations to become greater than previous translations. Because, if texts are modernized by means of a retranslation, then it may be assumed that this second translation will appeal more to the target readers than the first translation, allowing the subsequent translation to become ‘great’. Piet van Poucke (2017) has stressed the need for research into this concept, because as of yet it has not been studied to the same extent as the Retranslation Hypothesis.

Contrary to the concept of aging, many research has been done into whether the Retranslation Hypothesis applies to retranslations in practice. However, since the Retranslation Hypothesis involves an answer to the question of why retranslations are made, results from various studies often do not agree (Koskinen and Paloposki 2010, p. 295). Verification or falsification often depends on the language combination at hand. That is, some languages and cultures are simply incongruous, so whether a translation is considered to be poor and lacking might be due to the view one has on the translating language. Moreover, whether the Retranslation

(29)

how closeness or distance is defined. Poucke (2017) has argued that the Retranslation Hypothesis does not hold, but Koskinen and Paloposki (2010) have argued it does in some cases. The fact that there still exists disagreement on the value of the Retranslation Hypothesis signals that more research must be done and also that a right method or a model must be developed that allows for a proper measurement and operationalisation of distance between the ST and the TTs. Eventually, this can lead to consistent research results that are comparable across researches which can provide an answer to whether the hypothesis holds or not. That is, if they all use the same methodology. In the next section, relevant research that looked into retranslation of CL and the Retranslation Hypothesis with regard to translated literature for children is discussed.

1.5 Retranslation of Children’s Literature: Theories and Research

Research into retranslations of CL is closely linked to research into translation strategy of CL, and many features that are researched in studies that look into the translation strategy used for translating CL also apply to research that includes the Retranslation Hypothesis in CL. That is, because in researching adaptations in translated CL, distance is operationalized by means of foreignization or domestication and in researching the Retranslation Hypothesis, distance is operationalized as well. It is often found that retranslations of CL tend to go against what is stated in the hypothesis. Instead of moving towards the original text, retranslated CL moves away from the ST. Considering that CL in translation is already seen as being translated more freely than adult literature, the observation that retranslations of CL move even further away could lead to

(30)

interesting insights into the roles ideology, culture, and time may play in these (re)translations.

Multiple reasons have been identified that could explain why it is that retranslations of CL tend to go against what is stated in the Retranslation Hypothesis. Kari Skjønsberg (1926 – 2003) linked it to a change in what was valued in CL and translated CL. She argued that before simplicity and comprehensiveness were valued in texts for children, translators did not feel the need to adapt the text to the target culture. But, as the view on literature for children changed, translations of CL also changed and adaptations became more frequent in translated CL (Skjønsberg 1982, p. 41). Her argument is in line with the development of the genre of CL and the shift towards a more entertainment-focused literature for children. However, Skjønsberg (1982) argues this based on rather old CL and classic children’s books. Isabelle Desmidt (2009) pointed out that it are often classics that suffer the fate of adaptation. She writes: “classics are often considered as common property also in the target culture and as a consequence the justification of change may be taken for granted” (p. 678).

Desmidt (2009) was not the first to point this out. Lawrence Venuti (2003) has argued for the mutual dependence between retranslations and literary canon formation. If texts become classics and as a result of that, part of the literary canon in a target cultural literary system, they can be considered ‘common property’. If a retranslation of CL is motivated by prospects on profit and other financial benefits, then it follows that

(31)

argued in the previous section, in the process of retranslating, translations are often changed in order to be more appealing to the target audience. Examples of such classics are Alice in Wonderland (1865) by Lewis Carroll or Robinson Crusoe (1719) by Daniel Defoe, which at least in the Netherlands have often been retranslated and have obtained the status of English literary classic. When texts appeal more to the audience, more copies are sold. Consequently, Venuti (2003) also draws a connection between the translation strategy used in retranslation and the ideology of the culture in which they are created. He writes: “retranslations of marginal texts are likely to be motivated by a cultural political agenda in which a particular ideology guides the choice of a foreign author or text and the development of a retranslation strategy” (p. 3). In turn, linking this to the Retranslation Hypothesis, whether a retranslation is found necessary and eventually ‘better’ depends on temporary trends and fashion in literature as well as existing literary movements.

Some important research that looked into the retranslation of CL and the Retranslation Hypothesis with regard to CL is conducted by Vanderschelden (2000) and Du-Nour (1995), Desmidt (2009) and Pokorn (2012) among others. In these researches, again the themes of adaptation and translation strategy return as well as the position of CL in the polysystem. The fact that these themes return in this research is not surprising, since also in research into retranslations of CL an answer to the question of why translators adapt the text so freely is attempted to reach. First of all, Isabelle Vanderschelden (2000) studied the motives for retranslating French children's books classics and argued that

(32)

“[r]etranslation . . . . corresponds to historical updating, in the form of modernization of the TT, to accommodate the evolution of linguistic norms and changes in idiomatic usage” (p. 5). That is, the quality improves with retranslation because the text is adapted to the contemporary linguistic norms. Moreover, Vanderschelden argues that retranslators have more freedom in adapting elements of the text which the first translator would not have gotten away with. These adaptations are then seen as also further improving the quality of the text. Eventually Vanderschelden argues that, ‘great translations’ can only exist once they have gained a long-term status in the target culture because only then will translators have the liberty to install the mentioned adaptations (2000, p. 11).

Du-Nour (1995) looked further than the quality of retranslations as opposed to first translations and looked at a corpus of Hebrew translations of CL in order to identify patterns with regard to differing linguistic and translational norms across time. On overall she found that in later retranslations, translators try to eliminate the high-literary style and aim for a more simplified model. Based on the results of her empirical research, Du-Nour (1995) assigns this urge of translators to simplify a text to cultural changes that apply specifically to norms of translation and views on adaptation in CL. Thus, there is an attempt to improve the readability in later translations in Hebrew.

Nike Pokorn (2012) took another angle and focused more on ideology, manipulation and censorship in translations and especially, retranslations of CL that were published in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

(33)

there were some retranslations motivated by modernization of linguistic and stylistic norms. However, this concerned only two retranslations of the entire corpus (p. 39). The main part of the adaptations was due to ideological corrections. She found that in the retranslations ideological references to religion were deleted in order to tone down the manipulative character of the text. But, Pokorn argues that this creates a new type of manipulation in the text. On overall, she concluded that the retranslation hypothesis did not hold for the retranslations she researched.

Desmidt (2009) also looked at retranslations of CL, but whereas the other researches’ main focus was not on the Retranslation Hypothesis (i.e. they used retranslations to research other phenomena, and discussed the Retranslation Hypothesis only briefly), Desmidt (2009) researched whether the Retranslation Hypothesis held in the case of Dutch and German retranslations of a Swedish classic for children. In her analysis, translating is viewed as a problem-solving activity that is done in order to overcome the language barrier. By looking into textual changes on chapter, paragraph and sentence level to determine how ‘far away’ or ‘close’ a retranslation was to the ST, Desmidt (2009) was able to conclude that the Retranslation Hypothesis does not hold in the case of retranslations of the Swedish classic children’s book. Instead of moving towards the ST, the retranslations differed more radically from the original text with regard to geographical names, historical and cultural references, and paragraphs where Swedish tradition and culture was discussed.

However, research into retranslations of CL in the English-Dutch language combination is very scarce. To my knowledge, there is one study

(34)

(Weide 2010) – which happens to be a master’s thesis too – in which an English translation and retranslation of a Dutch children’s book are analysed to identify translation problems and examine how the solution the translators found can be placed in their respective times. This is remarkable considering that retranslations can help understand what values and norms regarding translation change over time, how changes in culture may be of influence on the meaning transferred in a translation (i.e. only if the effect these changes have on the mental framework of the translator are considered as well), how language standardises, and how views on source cultures can influence the translation and indirectly effect the target readers. Considering these benefits of researching retranslations to the field of CL in translation and translation studies, more research is necessary. First of all, because more research into the Retranslation Hypothesis is needed in order to make a full assessment of whether it carries value. And second of all, because researching retranslations of CL, as Desmidt (2009) argues, might allow for

a new view on [whether] the concept “(re)translation” is plausible both theoretically and practically. A newer and broader vision that would include various text types and genres and which consequently would not only take into account the traditional and most prototypically accepted forms of (re)translation, i.e., direct interlingual (re)rewriting (the fact that direct and interlingual translation is conceived as the most prototypical form of rewriting) . . . . but also indirect and intralingual and intermedial (re)rewriting. (pp. 679-680)

Since very little research has been conducted into retranslations and translations of CL of English-Dutch language combinations has been done

(35)

so far, the current study will look into the English-Dutch language combination in retranslations.

All in all, what is most significant to the contribution of research into retranslations as compared to primary translations is, that it provides the opportunity to assign particular adaptations (or mismatches) to influences that originate from the dimensions of time and space at the moment the (re)translation is created. If changes occur across time, for example, this does not merely indicate that they are caused by problems that are independent of time (e.g. the incongruity of language structures on short term), but also might demonstrate that norms and values have changed. Consequently, such outcomes allow for extra verification of a) the existence of culture specific translation norms and values; and b) the fact that they influence solutions (which may occur in the form of adaptations in the sense of the word as used by the research discussed above) to translatorial problems.

1.6 Aim of this Thesis

Considering the little amount of research that has so far been conducted with regard to retranslations of CL and the many benefits of such research that have been mentioned up until now, this thesis will contribute to that particular branch of research by conducting an analysis of four children’s picture books by the late Dutch author and illustrator Dick Bruna and the concomitant translations and retranslations in light of the Retranslation Hypothesis. The titles of these four picture books are

(36)

and Nijntje in de Dierentuin (1963). The concomitant British English translations and retranslations are titled Miffy and Melanie (translated in 2000 and retranslated in 2014), Miffy’s Birthday (translated in 1995 and retranslated in 2014), Miffy and the New Baby (translated in 2002 and retranslated in 2014), and Miffy at the Zoo (translated in 1995 and retranslated in 2014) respectively. The reason for examining these four picture books originates from the fact that these picture books, and even more so, their translations are popular worldwide and can as such be considered classics. In general, over 85 million copies of Dick Bruna's children's books have been sold worldwide and his work has been translated into 50 different languagesResearching these four picture books and their retranslations will provide insights into the adaptations characteristic for this type of genre and language combination. On top of that, as retranslations are included too, the generic conventions with regard to CL that exist in the target system and what is appropriate for the child are exposed if similarities and changes between how adaptations are applied in the text are found between the translation and the retranslation. Also, the way translators solve problems in the language/culture pair Dutch-English will be highlighted. Furthermore, based on these two culture and language specific outcomes, knowledge can be obtained on how much influence the dimensions of time and space have on decisions made by translators. Finally, the eventual effect the translations and retranslations have on the target culture and audience is taken into consideration too, by means of which a first step is made towards answering the question of ‘why’ these adaptations occur.

(37)

The ultimate goals of this thesis are to develop a causal model, prove that the distance between ST, TT1 and TT2 can be measured in terms of the alterations with regard to the effect on the target reader and expressed in the amount of differences between the ST and TTs – thus operationalise the concept of ‘distance’, and demonstrate that this causal model will allow to find proof for other hypotheses of the predictive and explanatory type. Because of the operationalisation of the concept of 'distance', this thesis will be able to answer the following research question:

Does the Retranslation Hypothesis apply to the British-English (re)translations of the Dutch picture books by Dick Bruna?

The initiative for the retranslation came from the new publishers of the English translations for the British market. The motivation for a retranslation of the Dick Bruna picture books is two-fold and at the same time mutually dependent. On the one hand, the language use and syntax of the first translations were considered outdated and not suited for the target audience. On the other hand, as a consequence of the aged character of the initial translations, they were not expected to sell all too well. It follows that these two motives reinforce each other. The publishers wanted to sell a profitable product and in order for a product to be profitable it must live up to the demands and expectations of the target audience. Apart from the critique on the outdated language use, the new British publisher wished for a more ‘feeling-oriented’ or emotive translation (i.e. ‘gevoelsvertaling’ as Mercis described it (Zwieten 2017)), as this is considered more suitable for the envisioned target audience (i.e. the further motivation for which, was not made clear by either of the

(38)

publishers). Because the Retranslation Hypothesis is based on the idea that the retranslation manages better to transfer the ‘true essence’ of the original text than the initial translation, it follows that the retranslation somehow adheres closer to the original. But, as the perceived closeness of the TT1was critiqued by the publisher and somehow seen as what made the translation ‘lacking’ in comparison to the retranslation, the prediction is made that

The Retranslation Hypothesis will not apply to the (re)translations of Dick Bruna’s picture books; the TT1 will be closer to the ST than the TT2.

This prediction is in line with other research discussed in the previous section. It must also be remarked that the definition given to ‘distance’ plays an important role in whether the Retranslation Hypothesis applies. But, as previous research has defined distance in terms of the alterations and the effect caused by them, it is assumed that the prediction will hold and the Retranslation Hypothesis will not apply in the case researched in this thesis.

2

“Translation is both a cognitive procedure which occurs in a human being’s,

the translator’s, head, and a social, cross-linguistic and cross-cultural practice.

Any valid theory of translation must embrace these two aspects.” – Juliane House (2015)

Methodology

In this chapter, a methodology is proposed for researching the Retranslation Hypothesis, which will also be the methodology used in this

(39)

thesis. In order to research the Retranslation Hypothesis, a clear methodology is necessary which allows for gathering relevant data; a need that has been expressed by Andrew Chesterman (2000) among others (i.e. Desmidt (2009); Skjønsberg 1982; and Lathey 2016). The methodology comprises of a model that is based in part on the causal model proposed by Andrew Chesterman (2000) and on the revised Translation Quality Assessment Model by Juliane House (2015). First, background knowledge is provided and an argument is made for the relevance of the incorporation of theories and models from the field of discourse analysis. Then, an overview of the model as it is used in this thesis is given. Finally, the application of the model will be explained.

2.1 Towards a model for Retranslation Assessment

Koskinen and Paloposki (2010A) pointed out that it was Andrew Chesterman (2000) who first formulated the Retranslation Hypothesis as it is often stated now. Chesterman (2000) operationalised the ideas by Antoine Berman in his suggestion of a causal model for the analysis of translations and retranslations in order to be able to research multiple types of hypotheses at once (p. 25). The causal model he proposes is shown in Figure 2.1.

(40)

Figure 2.1 Causal Model as proposed by Andrew Chesterman (2000) In a causal model, both source language and source text are seen as part of the causal conditions of the translation and the translation itself is an effect of these conditions, as well as a cause itself that produces an effect in the target culture. This allows for finding proof for hypotheses seeking to find answers to questions of ‘what’, ‘how’ and ‘why’ (Chesterman 2000, p. 19). It also takes in account other causal conditions, such as culture and ideology, which, considering that the translation strategy of CL and its much discussed adaptive nature are a result of the culturally determined mental framework of the translator, would make the model appropriate for researching distance or closeness between translations and source texts in terms of the effect.

(41)

Chesterman is right in arguing for a model that includes culture as an important influence on translation. Theories and constructs from the field of discourse analysis are concerned with how people across different cultures understand communication and recognise meaning. Which is probably also why theories from the field of discourse analysis already have a long history of being applied to the field of translation studies. On top of that, the main aim in the field of discourse analysis is, as Johnstone (2002, p. 8) pointed out, to ask the questions of ‘why’. “Why is this text the way it is? Why is it no other way? Why are these particular words in this particular order?” Which corresponds to Chesterman’s (2000) argument that whereas process and comparative models answer the ‘what’ and ‘how’ questions, the causal model can help answer the ‘why’ questions, because it includes the causal element lacking in the other models.

Especially, Systemic Functional Linguistics – which was introduced by Michael Halliday – has often been used in methodologies and models for the analysis of translations. Halliday’s theory is well-suited for analysing translations because it views language as communication and sees meaning in the linguistic choices of the writer or speaker and systematically relates these to the social cultural framework at large. Especially, if the Hallidayan model of language is considered. This model views the sociocultural environment as conditioning the discourse, and via discourse, as conditioning genre and finally, genre as conditioning Register. Firstly, discourse could be seen then as parallel to the translation event and the translation act in Chesterman’s model. Secondly, the

(42)

translation profile in Chesterman’s model corresponds to genre. Finally, the genre determines the Register a translator uses and so the cognitive, behavioural and sociocultural effects that are caused.

In the case of this thesis too, the pragmatic approach to language and communication can offer insights into how people’s behaviour towards and the expectations they have of a particular communication at hand is what enables people to make sense of what is communicated. First of all, people need to be able to recognise text (in the widest sense of the word, i.e. how it is understood in the field of discourse analysis) as communicating anything at all. People use their – what Michael Halliday (1978) called – ‘awareness’ of textual, generic and eventually also social conventions to discriminate between a text and a random sequence of sentences. Awareness of such conventions allows people to interpret the choices made by others – that is, why a choice was made for one sentence structure, or lexical item and not for another – and thus recognise meaning in language. This awareness is determined by their mental framework. Halliday describes how awareness of conventions creates meaning in people’s minds as follows: “In our folk linguistic terminology, the ‘meaning’ is represented as ‘wording’ - which in turn is expressed as ‘sound’ (‘pronouncing’) or as ‘spelling’. The folk linguistic, incidentally, shows our awareness of the tri-stratal nature of language” (p. 122). Thus, our awareness of the way texts are structured (i.e. the textual conventions) in combination with the form and choices made allows us to recognize meaning, which in its turn signals that the text makes sense and has meaning instead of being a random sequence of sentences.

(43)

Apart from this pragmatic approach, the sociological approach offers interesting insights into the reasons behind different realisations of generic conventions across cultures as well. Patterning of communication and the way in which members of the same language community recognize what action is expected of them in response to an utterance or text (‘conditional relevance’ Sacks and Schegloff 1973) demonstrate the dependence of people on textual conventions in order to be able to comprehend what is being communicated. But, as cultures (and ideologies) differ, language does too, as well as the expectations, behaviour and textual conventions. Sometimes to the extent that they are incompatible, that is, one language and culture cannot be comprehended by another language and culture without either completely changing the context of the text, or translating the text by means of a foreignising (Venuti 1995) or overt (House 2015) translation strategy. Since sociological approaches see meaning conveyed in language as the way language is patterned and as signalling through its patterning to a receiver what is communicated, this may explain why a literal translation does not have the same effect on the target audience as the source text has on the source audience. Target audience readers do not recognize the pattern and consequently the effect is different. If we then view translated CL in the light of the sociological approach, it becomes clear that although adult readers might realise that it is a translation and the pattern must be understood in the cultural context of the source culture, children may not be competent enough readers to understand this. In turn, this could be seen as one of the reasons why translated CL is often adapted and modified to the target culture.

Nijntje and Miffy: Studying the Retranslation Hypothesis of (Re)translated Children's Literature

ik maak maar vast een

tekening

zo mooi als ik het kan

dacht nijn, met kuikentjes

erop

daar houden baby’s van

I’ll make a picture now, she

thinks,

for baby, as a treat,

with little chicks to look at,

all yellow, small and sweet.

I’ll make a picture now, she

thought

as pretty as can be

a picture of some little chicks

babies love chicks, you see

Foreword

Abstract

Table of Contents

List of Tables and Figures

Tables

Figures

1

Introduction

2

Methodology