Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
Theories and Realities in Translation & Writing, İstanbul, Türkiye, 15 Mayıs 2021
Translation of taboo language has always been a
thorny issue within the context of Turkish retranslations in the Republican Era.
Scholarship on retranslation, today, is more based on describing the
socio-cultural norms governing the process of retranslation, rather than handling
the existing translations on the basis of the worn-out ‘retranslation
hypothesis’. It goes without saying that in the case of censorship,
retranslations may not necessarily serve as products that subvert the taboos in
former translations. With this in mind, each retranslation can be seen as a
piece of mosaic that helps one to discern the total portrayal and understanding
of the original work in the target culture. Based upon this analogical
perspective, this paper is an attempt to describe and compare Turkish (re)translations
of Lady Chatterley’s Lover in terms
of taboo concepts. To this end, (re)translations by Avni İnsel (1945 and 1960),
Akşit Göktürk (1968 and 1982), Meram Arvas (2012), Mehtap Gün Ayral (2012) and
Meriç Selvi (2013) are to be delineated through a comparative Critical
Discourse Analysis with respect to taboo elements. In line with this purpose, following
research questions will be the focus of analysis: (i) Do more recent retranslations
of Lady Chatterley’s Lover tend to be
closer to the source text? (ii) What are the ways the so-called taboo concepts
in the novel, e.g. obscenity, as a stylistic and discourse marker, shape each (re)translation?
(iii) What are the motivations and socio-political conditions that (re)shaped each
translation? And (iv) to what extent an integrative and holistic look into the mosaic
of retranslations leads one to the source meaning? It can be noted that all Turkish
retranslations of Lady Chatterley’s Lover
comprise a mosaic, if not a complete one. In this sense, each
retranslation, along with the socio-cultural conditions shaping it, is part of
this mosaic. In fact, retranslations in different years by the same translators
(namely Avni İnsel and Akşit Göktürk) differ considerably in the way the
subversive elements of the original work are rendered, which is an indication
of a deviation from Berman’s retranslation hypothesis. It is thought that the mosaic
analogy, in the interface of retranslation and taboo concepts, can run and
direct one closer to the discourse and style of the source only if all
retranslations are taken into consideration. In this respect, the present study
is expected to provide a new perspective on retranslation, integrating the idea
of ‘retranslations as a mosaic’ and obscenity as a discourse marker. It will
also be the first case which handles Turkish translations of D.H. Lawrence’s
masterpiece with reference to the concept of retranslation.
Key words: Censorship, literary translation, retranslation,
taboo, critical discourse analysis