Deconstruction and Translation: A Case Study of a Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by James Joyce

Details

Written by Mojgan Heydarali & Sayyed Mohammad Karimi Behbahani

Abstract

For translation of certain texts with deconstructive textual elements, the translation goes for ‘Loss’ and ‘Gain’ and ends in ambiguity which is again a deconstructive element.  This descriptive-comparative study tried to investigate deconstructive textual elements of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (Joyce 2005), and Ulysses (Joyce 1992) as compared to their Persian translations in order to identify deconstructive textual elements at word and sentence levels.  The results indicated that the translators have applied the ‘loss’ strategy 66 times (equal to 64.70%) and the ‘gain’ strategy 35 times (equal to 35.26%).  Therefore, the frequency of the ‘loss’ strategy was remarkably more than the ‘gain’ strategy.  Analyzing these deconstructive texts based on ‘loss’ and ‘gain’ strategy showed that ‘loss’ was more influential for creating the ST style.  Accordingly, it can be concluded  that the ‘loss’ strategy in specific and the ‘gain’ strategy in second place can be considered as a direct tool for providing deconstructive texts or analyzing these text types.  The findings of this paper can have some implications for translation theories, translation assessment, and training.

Key Words:  Deconstruction; Loss; Gain; Translation Strategy

1. INTRODUCTION

Derrida presented the term Deconstruction for the first time in American literature, while the department of literary criticism was seeking new strategies for interpreting literary texts.  According to Derrida (as cited in Bressler 2012: 107), “deconstruction is more a strategic device than a methodology or theory criticism”.  In fact, deconstruction uses previously formulated theories, coins new words for newly established ideas and challenges western culture and belief.

Derrida (as cited in Bressler 2012: 107) asserts that the western metaphysic is based on binary oppositions such as God/Human, Soul/ Body, Good/ Bad, Man/ Woman, Speech/ Writing and called it ‘Phonocenterism’ and coined the phrase Metaphysics of Presence.  These oppositions are hierarchical, because one side is perceived more valuable than the other is.  His idea was influential in other areas, for instance politics, art, literature, architecture, etc.

He borrowed Saussure’s belief that the relation of the linguistic sign and its meaning – Signifier/Signified- is conventional and affirmed that language is a system based on differences and declared, according to this conventional relationship, meaning cannot be permanent, and formulated reading strategy of deconstruction.  According to the deconstruction reading strategy, text has numerous interpretations and each time you can discover a new meaning.  Actually, what the author thinks or says can be entirely different from what is written in the text.  It examines the binary oppositions and slips of the language, aiming that a text’s meaning is undecidable and the idea that “a language or any structure can have a clean-cut edge that is precisely what deconstruction calls into question” (Davis 2014: 20).  He coined the new word ‘Diff’erance’ derived from French word ‘Diff’erer’ – delay, postpone- and ‘to Differ’ – to be different from- for creating ambiguity and taking both meanings at the same time.

The present researchers noticed a problem while translating or analyzing translated texts.  They noticed that in the translation of certain texts with deconstructive textual elements, the translation goes for ‘Loss’ and ‘Gain’ and mostly ends in ambiguity which is again a deconstruction element.  Look at the following examples:

Example 1: “When you wet the bed, first it is warm then gets cold”.  (Joyce 2005: 1)

Persian Translation:/ādam ke ǰāyaš ra tar mī˗konad avvalaš garm ast ba׳d sard mīšavad/.  (Badee 2009:1)

As you see in example 1 as a good example of referential ambiguity and its Persian translation, it is not apparent that the bed gets cold or the pronoun 'you' get cold.

Example 2:“The Vances lived in number seven.  They had a different father and mother.  They were Eileen’s father and mother”.  (Joyce 2005: 2)

Persian Translation:/xān (a) ˗vāda (˗e) vans dar xāna šomar (˗e) haft zenda (e) g˗ī mīkar˗dand.  Yak pedar va mādar dīgar dāš˗tand.  Ānhā pedar va mādar āylīn būdand/.  (Badee 2009: 2)

As you see in example 2 as a good example of Lexical ambiguity and its Persian translation, it is not obvious that her father and mother were unlike to other people or she had more than one parent e.g., being their stepdaughter.

Therefore, deconstructive textual elements of the first and the fifth chapter of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young man (Joyce 2005), and the third chapter of Ulysses (Joyce 1992) as compared to their translated versions (i.e., Daryoush 1991& Badee 2009) were investigated to do a comparative descriptive research in order to identify deconstructive textual elements at word and sentence levels.  Accordingly, the present study aimed to find out which one of ‘loss’ and ‘gain’ could be  more influential on creating the ST style in the TT. 

It is noteworthy that the aim of this research was to present a descriptive-comparative study of modern deconstructive novels i.e., A Portrait of the Artist as a Young man, Rejoice (Burgess 1965) and A Case of Conscience (Blish 1958), but their translations were not available and in the case of Ulysses (Joyce 1992) as one of the source materials just the third chapter was available.  In order to work with manageable data, the current study did focus on the first and the fifth chapter of  a novel entitled A Portrait of the Artist as a Young man, and the third chapter of Ulysses and from all the procedures for analyzing translation, this study did focus on meaning loss and meaning gain strategy.

To achieve the objectives of this study, the following two questions were posed:

1. How are deconstructive textual elements transferred from the Source Texts (ST) into the Target Texts (TT)?
2. Which type(s) of strategy(s) is/are used by the translators for transferring ambiguity-driven loss and gain?

2. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The researcher has attempted to compare two different translation versions of the book entitled The Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man translated by Daryoush (1991) as well as Badee (2009) to see in which points they chose different strategies to save the writer’s style.  Whereas ambiguity is the major characteristic of these text types, it was important to see what kind of changes have occurred in the process of translating these textual elements.  Besides, finding out whether they made use of ‘loss or gain’ strategy for conveying the meaning was another main objective of the study.

The distinction between lexicon and grammar of different language pairs and the concept of fidelity in translation is based on the boundary of ‘Framing Information’ that every change in this frame causes some ‘Addition or information gain’ and ‘Deletion or information loss’ which is not selected deliberately and induced from the linguistic rules or the culture.  For instance, ‘tense’, ‘gender’, ‘singular and plural nouns’ or the information that belongs to sender even as a style or personal habit in various languages remain unavoidable.  The researcher assumed loss and gain could be used as an influential tool for transferring deconstructive elements, while in this specific text type, “Fidelity to the sender’s interest might thus require deleting some of the original framing information and adding some framing information for the benefit of the target language receiver.  (Gile 2009: 63)

3. METHODOGY

In this study, the following two works by James Joyce were chosen to investigate ‘deletion or information loss’ and ‘addition or information gain’.

1. A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by Joyce (2005)
2. Ulysses by Joyce (1992)

Joyce’s two works were chosen as the cases of study, because in addition to their contemporaneity, Derrida’s work to Joyce is significant.  In writing and translation, Joyce pushed the boundaries of language beyond the margins, as Derrida tried to create deliberate mistakes in order to make graphic disorder.  In the same manner, Joyce deliberately deforms language within a colloquial and very much spoken context to reach to similar outcome (Gentzler 2001: 169).  In fact, Joyce’s style of writing can be considered as one of the best examples of Derrida’s deconstruction in which meaning is not stable and every reading provides a new understanding.

In this study, the following Persian translations were chosen because of their availability.

1. The Persian translation of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man entitled /Sīmā-ye mard honarmand darjavān-ī/ by Daryoush (1991),
2. The Persian translation of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man entitled /Čhehra (-e) mard honar āfarīn dar javān-ī/ by Badee (2009),
3. The Persian translation of the third chapter of Ulysses entitled /Awlīs/ by Kakavand (2013),
4. The Persian translation of the third chapter of Ulysses entitled /Awlīs/ by Fani (2014).

To achieve the objectives of this study, the following steps were taken:

1. The principles and traces of Derrida’s neologism ‘deconstruction’ in other scholars’ theories were investigated.
2. 70 Deconstructive textual elements at word and sentence levels were extracted in the selected source and target materials.
3. Then, the frequency of ‘losses and ‘gains’ was calculated in TT.
4. Next, whether ‘loss’ or ‘gain’ has had a major role in saving ST’s style was examined.
5. Finally, whether ‘loss’ or ‘gain’ can be considered as the norms of translating deconstructive text types was visited.

Notably, ‘framing information’ acts as a guide and facilitates conveying the proper message that can be applied consciously or unconsciously.  Every change in this frame causes some deletion or information loss and addition or information gain that mostly happens as the result of the linguistic rules or the culture (i.e., Tense, gender, singular and plural nouns and the information that belongs to sender even as a style or personal habit).  Moreover, making this frame looser or tighter - creates an ambiguous specific style which causes a text can be interpreted in multiple different ways.  The translator, either for conveying all the intended and implied meaning, or for saving the writer’s style of writing, applies compensatory mechanism and  adds a few required or secondary information from the ST into the TT, which is defined as ‘Explicitation Hypothesis’, “according to which target texts tend to be more explicit than source texts”.  (Gile 2009: 64)

According to Mcguire (1980: 30), “Loss is the disappearance of certain features in the target language text which are present in the source language text”, and Gain is “the enrichment or clarification of the source language text in the process of translation”.  Besides, Nozizwe and Ncube (2014: 8) elaborate that because of the lack of close equivalent between words, phrases, concepts, and syntax of the source language and the target language, more probably ‘loss’ happens than ‘gain’.  However, experts often prefer to make advantage of ‘loss’ or ‘gain’ strategy, for the reason that in a literary work, saving the style is more imperative than conveying all the required meaning.  Accordingly, based on the provided explanations, two source texts with their two different Persian translations provided by four different translators were examined to investigate loss, the feature that exists in ST but is not appearing in TT, and gain, the feature that does not exist in ST but appears in TT.

This study was a comparative-descriptive study in which  the source texts -the first and the fifth chapter of the book A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by Joyce (2005) and the third chapter of Ulysses by Joyce (1992)- and the target texts -two Persian translations of A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man by Daryoush (1991) and by Badee (2009) in addition to the Persian translations of the third chapter of Ulysses by Kakavand (2013) and Fani (2014) were examined in order to find ‘deletion or information loss’ and ‘addition or information gain’. Words and sentences would be compared in both STs and TTs to find out the frequency of ‘losses ‘and ‘gains’.

According to the research questions and mentioned procedures, this study was a comparative –descriptive research in which the chosen strategies by the translators for transferring ‘ambiguity’ -as the main deconstructive textual characteristic- were investigated.  This study on six materials –two STs and four TTs- was restricted on words and sentences regarding the occurred ‘losses’ and ‘gains’.  In addition, this research examined which strategy has been used more.  The researcher presented the finding of this research in order to show to what extent the ambiguity as the style of the writer has been transferred through translation.  And to what extent, each of ‘loss’ and ‘gain’ was used to reach to the point if they can be considered as the specific tools for analyzing or translating deconstructive texts or not.  Therefore, the major method of data analysis was a comparative analysis of the source materials and providing the related descriptions for each of instances.

4. RESULTS OF THE STUDY

As previously mentioned, this study tried to investigate rendering deconstructive textual elements from the ST (i.e. English) into the TT (i.e. Persian).  In addition, the types of strategy(s) utilized by the translators for transferring ambiguity-driven loss and gain were also examined in this study.

As you can see in Figure 1, Table 1, ‘loss’ strategy is more frequently applied by both translators.  Daryoush (1991) has applied it 31 times (equal to 70.45%) and Badee (2009) 27 times (equal to 62.79%).  ‘Gain’ strategy in the second place was applied by Daryoush (1991) 13 times (equal to 29.54%) and Badee (2009) 16 times (equal to 37.20%).  In addition, it is noteworthy that Daryoush (1991) (with 44 changes) and Badee (2009) (with 43 changes) have applied similar amount of changes.

Table 1

Strategies Applied by Daryoush and Badee in translating A Portrait of the Artist as Young Man

Figure 1.  Strategies Applied by Daryoush and Badeein translating A Portrait of the Artist as Young Man

As you can see in Figure 2, Table 2, ‘loss’ strategy is more frequently applied by Kakavand (2013).  He has applied the ‘loss’ strategy 5 times (equal to 71.43%), but Fani (2014) has applied this strategy 3 times (equal to 42.85%).  In addition, gain strategy is more frequently used by Fani (2014).  He has applied the ‘gain’ strategy 4 times (equal to 57. 14%) but Kakavand (2013) has applied it 3 times (equal to 37.5%).  In addition, a point is notable that Kakavand (2013) (with eight changes) and Fani (with seven changes) have applied the same amount of changes.

Table 2

Strategies Applied by Kakavand vs. Fani in translating Ulysses

Figure 2.Strategies Applied by Kakavand vs. Fani in translating Ulysses

As it is apparent in Table 3 and Figure 3, the translators have applied ‘loss’ strategy 66 times (equal to 64.70%) and ‘gain’ strategy 36 times (equal to 35.26%).  Therefore, the frequency of ‘loss’ strategy is remarkably more than ‘gain’ strategy.

Table 3

Loss and Gain Applied by the Translators in the Selected Materials

Figure 3.  Loss and Gain Applied by the Translators in the Selected Materials

As previously mentioned, ambiguity is the main characteristic of the deconstructive texts, and Derrida asserts that the language is never present to meaning (as cited in Polley 2009: 64-65).  Therefore, a translator by saving the existing ambiguities of ST or providing ambiguities in TT for creating the style of the ST tries to transfer it.  This notion can provide the basis of the first question’s answer that how are deconstructive textual elements transferred from Source Text (ST) to Target Text (TT)?

The ambiguous points eliminated and the data analysis showed that in many instances, the meaning is not clearly transferred and the reader faces many ambiguous concepts, albeit in some instances the transferred ambiguity belonged to ST text, but in some other instances, the ambiguity was provided through the process of translation in TT.

By applying both types of ambiguities, the translators have tried to transfer the same type of ambiguity in their own translation and tried not to apply compensatory mechanisms that end to clarifying the concept that is known as the explicitation hypothesis.

As previously mentioned, Derrida believes that we cannot say what we mean without ‘loss’ or ‘disloyalty’ to the original meaning.  In other words, meaning is fixed in a particular expression and cannot be identified by definition.  In accordance with Derrida, Nozizwe, and Ncube (2014: 8) explain due to the lack of close equivalent between words, phrases, concepts, and syntax of the source language and the target language, more probably loss happens rather than gain.  In fact, can it be concluded ‘loss’ and ‘gain’ strategy can be a tool for providing deconstructive texts or analyzing these text types? For doing this task and providing an answer for the second question of this research that which type(s) of strategy(s) are used by the translators for transferring ambiguity-driven loss and gain?  The ST and TT texts were examined and a close examination of the elements such as ambiguities and added or deleted concepts, words or sentences to find ‘losses’ and ‘gains’ were applied.  It must be mentioned that in the selected source materials there were problematic or ambiguous words or sentences that the translators for transferring them had to choose one of the ‘loss’ or ‘gain’ strategy.  Albeit, in many text types, translation tends to clarify the problematic or ambiguous points, but it must be regarded that whereas the ‘ambiguity’ is considered as the main characteristic of deconstructive texts and saving the style of the writer is more important, the translators have attempted to keep the style.

Of course, in selected source materials, the frequency of the ‘loss’ strategy was remarkably more than the ‘gain’ strategy and more probably, ‘loss’ has occured than ‘gain’.  As it is shown in Figure 1 and Table 1, ‘loss’ strategy is more frequently applied by the both translators.  Daryoush (1991) has applied it 31 times (equal to 70.45%) and Badee (2009), 27 times (equal to 62.79%), and ‘gain’ strategy in the second place is applied by Daryoush (1991) 13 times (equal to 29.54%) and Badee (2009) 16 times (equal to 37.20%). 

Besides, as you can see in Figure 2, and Table 2, ‘loss’ strategy is more frequently applied by Kakavand (2013).  He has applied the ‘loss’ strategy 5 times (equal to 71.43%), but Fani (2014) has applied this strategy 3 times (equal to 42.85%) and ‘gain strategy is more frequently used by Fani (2014).  He has applied ‘gain’ strategy 4 times (equal to 57. 14%), but Kakavand (2013) has applied it 2 times (equal to 28.57%). 

 In addition, some points were notable.  Firstly, Daryoush (1991) with 44 changes and Badee (2009) with 43 changes have applied similar amount of changes.  Further, Kakavand (2013) with 8 changes and Fani with 7 changes have applied the similar amount of changes, too.  Therefore, it can be said that these translational points were problematic points that either of them have to decide on a strategy to save the ST’s style.  Secondly, in several instances, the ‘loss’ of a concept was ended to a ‘gain’.  It means changing the frame of one concept with aim of loyalty to the ST caused happening of a ‘gain’ from another point.  Thirdly, the results obtained from all materials showed that the translators have applied more frequently the ‘loss’ strategy (66 times equal to 64.70%) than the ‘gain’ strategy (35 times equal to 35.26%).  Although the frequencies and the percentages of applying ‘loss’ and ‘gain’ in each of the translators were somehow different from the other one, but the total results approved that the ‘loss’ strategy can be considered as the main tool  or strategy for analyzing or providing a deconstructive text.  Finally, by looking at the total results from As-Safi’s (n.d.) point of view, a different form of analysis can be provided.  He mentions that there are two kinds of losses: ‘Inevitable loss’ that occurs as a result of “the divergent systems of the two languages…. [And] ‘Avertable loss’ which is attributed to translator’s failure to find the appropriate equivalence” (p. 2).  If we categorize the types of the occured losses in provided data based on the definition provided by As-Safi (n.d.), we can find some examples of the inevitable losses and several avertable.

Moreover, about the ‘gain’ strategy, it must be added that in several instances, for creating the literary style of the text, the translator has decided to make advantage of the repetition of the same word that this kind of added concept has acquired as a type of ‘gain’ strategy in this research.

5. CONCLUSION

As elaborated in earlier sections, the distinction between different language pairs,  lexicon and grammar and the concept of fidelity in translation is based on the boundary of ‘Framing Information’ and every change in this frame causes some ‘Addition or information gain’ and ‘Deletion or information ‘loss’.  Mostly, gain or loss happens unintentionally or induces as the result of the linguistic rules or culture.  These changes provide an ‘ambiguity’ that is the major characteristic of deconstructive text types.  Through the process of translation, the translator tries to keep the ST’s ambiguities with the aim of recreating or transferring the ST’s style.  Based on these notions, the research’s first question how are deconstructive textual elements transferred from ST into TT was constructed.

Therefore, the ambiguous points eliminated and the data analysis showed that in many instances, the meaning is not clearly transferred and the reader faces many ambiguous concepts.  Although in some instances the transferred ambiguity was belonged to ST text, in some other instances, the ambiguity was provided by the translators.  The both types of applied ambiguities by the translators can be considered as a tool for transferring the same type of ST’s ambiguity in translation.  Of course, the translators tried not to apply compensatory mechanisms that end to clarifying the concept that is known as the explicitation hypothesis.

Afterward, for finding the answer for the research’s second question that which type(s) of strategy(s) are used by the translators for transferring ambiguity-driven loss and gain, the STs and TTs were examined and a close examination of the elements such as ambiguities which were resulted from ‘losses’ and ‘gains were applied.  Although, in many text types translation tends to clarify the problematic or ambiguous points, it must be regarded that whereas the ‘ambiguity’ is considered as the main characteristic of deconstructive text and saving the style of the writer is more important, in selected source materials the frequency of the ‘loss’ strategy was remarkably more than the ‘gain’ strategy and more probably ‘loss’ has occured than ‘gain’.  The results showed that the translators were tried to keep the ST’s style.  Although the frequency and percentage of applying ‘loss’ and ‘gain’ for each of the translators was somehow different from the other one, the total results approved that the ‘loss’ strategy can be considered as the main tool  or strategy for analyzing or providing a deconstructive text.

In fact, according to the provided data analysis and the obtained results, it  can be concluded  that the ‘loss’ strategy in specific and the ‘gain’ strategy in second place can be considered as a direct tool for providing deconstructive texts or analyzing these text types.

The findings of the present study can have some important implications for translation theories, assessment, and training.  Many scholars have discussed about the translation theories, in specific about the ‘Deconstruction’.  The findings of the current study by analyzing the deconstructive texts based on ‘loss’ and ‘gain’ strategy showed that ‘loss’ is more influential for creating the ST style; therefore, it can be considered as an effective tool for assessing translations.  Although in most of the text types, TT tends to be more explicit than the ST, but in deconstructive text for saving the ambiguous style of the text, more probably ‘loss’ happens than ‘gain’ that makes the TT concept more explicit than ST concept.

After doing this research, the following three subjects for further research were suggested:

1. A comparison of the translation of a deconstructive text such as A Portrait of The Artist as a Young Man and a modern deconstructive text such as Rejoice by Burgess (1965) or A Case of Conscience by Blish (1958) with aim of finding different translation strategies for transferring ambiguity.
2. A comparison of the translation of a deconstructive text such as A Portrait of The Artist as a Young Man and a modern deconstructive text such as Rejoice by Burgess (1965) or A Case of Conscience by Blish (1958) for investigating avertable and inevitable losses.
3. A comparison of a modern deconstructive text with its different translation versions to investigate different but correct meanings provided by different translators for a ST concept in TTs.

REFERENCES

As-Safi, A. B. (n.d.).  Loss & Gain and Translation Strategies with Reference to the Translations of the Glorious Qur’an.  Petra University.  Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.378.1493&rep =rep1&type=pdf.

Badee, M. (2009).  Čhehra (-e) mard honar āfarīn dar ǰavān -ī. Tehran: Niloofar Publication.

Blish, J.(1958).  A Case of Conscience.  US: Ballantine Books.

Bressler, C. (2012).  Literary Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice.  Boston: Longman.

Burgess, A. (1965).  Rejoice.  New York: W. W. Norton.

Daryoush, H. (1991).  Sīmā-ye mard honar-mand darǰavān-ī.  Asātīr Publication.

Davis, K. (2014).  Deconstruction and Translation.  London: Routledge.

Fani, I. (2014).  Awlīs.  Retrieved from http://drimanfani.persianblog.ir/post/106/

Finkelde, D. (2013).  Post-Structuralism, Gengage Learning.  Retrieved from https://www.hfph.de/hochschule/lehrende/prof-dr-dominik-finkelde-sj/artikel-beitraege/poststructuralism.pdf.

Gentzler, E. (2001).  Contemporary Translation Theories.  UK: Cromwell Press Ltd.

Gile, D. (2009).  Basic Concepts and Models for Interpreter and Translator.  London: John Benjamins Publishing.

Joyce, J. (1992).  Ulysses.  Retrieved from http://www.planetpdf.com/planetpdf /pdfs/free_ebooks/Ulysses_NT.pdf.

Joyce, J., & Johnson, J. (2008).  A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. UK: Oxford University Press.

Kakavand, A. (2013).  Awlīs.  Retrieved from http://www.anat.blogfa.com/post-62.aspx.

Mcguire, S .B. (1980).  Translation Studies.  New York: Methuen.

Nozizwe, D. & Ncube, B. (2014).  “Loss and Gain in Translation: A Case of Court Translations”, African Journal of Scientific Research, 12, p.1.  Retrieved from http://www.journalsbank.com/ajsr_12_2.pdf.

Polley, J. L. (2009).  Opportunities of Contact Derrida and Deleuze/Guattarion Translation (PhDDissertation).  Canada: Department of Philosophy University of Toronto.  Retrieved from https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/ 1807/17479/1/Polley_Joanna _L_200903_PhD_thesis.pdf.