The Psycholinguistic Factors of Indirect Translation in Ukrainian Literary and Religious Contexts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of indirect translations (IT) into Ukrainian, viewed from a psycholinguistic perspective, will contribute to a better understanding of Soviet national policies and the post-Soviet linguistic and cultural condition. The paper pioneers a discussion of the strategies and types of IT via Russian in the domains of literature and religion. In many cases the corresponding Russian translation, which serves as a source text for the Ukrainian one, cannot be established with confidence, and the “sticking-out ears” of Russian mediation may only be monitored at the level of sentence structure, when Russian wording underlies the Ukrainian text and distorts its natural fluency. The discussion substantiates the strategies and singles out the types of IT, in particular, (1) Soviet lower-quality retranslations of the recent, and mostly high-quality, translations of literary classics, which deliberately imitated lexical, grammatical, and stylistic patterns of the Russian language (became massive in scope in the mid1930s); (2) the translation-from-crib type, or translations via the Russian interlinear version, which have been especially common in poetry after WWII, from the languages of the USSR nationalities and the socialist camp countries; (3) overt relayed translations, based on the published and intended for the audience Russian translations that can be clearly defined as the source texts for the IT into Ukrainian; this phenomenon may be best illustrated with Patriarch Filaret Version of the Holy Scripture, translated from the Russian Synodal Bible (the translation started in the early 1970s); and, finally, (4) later Soviet (from the mid1950s) and post-Soviet (during Independence period) hidden relayed translations of literary works, which have been declared as direct ones but in fact appeared in print shortly after the publication of the respective works in Russian translation and mirrored Russian lexical and stylistic patterns. References Белецкий, А. Переводная литература на Украине // Красное слово. 1929. № 2. С. 87-96. Цит за вид.: Кальниченко О. А., Полякова Ю. Ю. Українська перекладознавча думка 1920-х – початку 1930-х років: Хрестоматія вибраних праць з перекладознавства до курсу «Історія перекладу» / Укладачі Леонід Чернований і Вячеслав Карабан. Вінниця: Нова Книга, 2011. С. 376-391. Бурґгардт, Осв. Большевицька спадщина // Вістник. 1939. № 1, Кн. 2. С. 94-99. Dollerup, C. (2014). Relay in Translation. Cross-linguistic Interaction: Translation, Contrastive and Cognitive Studies. Liber Amicorum in Honour of Prof. Bistra Alexieva published on the occasion of her eightieth birthday, Diana Yankova, (Ed.). (pp. 21-32). St. Kliminent Ohridski University Press. Retrieved from https://cms13659.hstatic.dk/upload_dir/docs/Publications/232-Relay-in-translation-(1).pdf Dong, Xi (2012). A Probe into Translation Strategies from Relevance Perspective—Direct Translation and Indirect Translation. Canadian Social Science, 8(6), 39-44. Retrieved from http://www.cscanada.org/index.php/css/article/viewFile/j.css.1923669720120806.9252/3281 Дзера, О.. Історія українських перекладів Святого Письма // Іноземна філологія. 2014. Вип. 127, Ч. 2. С. 214–222. Філарет, Патріарх Київський та всієї Руси-України, Василь Шкляр, Микола Вересень, В’ячеслав Кириленко. Розмова В’ячеслава Кириленка із Патріархом Київським та всієї Руси-України Філаретом. Віра. У кн.: Три розмови про Україну. Упорядник та радактор В. Кириленко. Х.: Книжковий Клуб «Клуб Сімейного Дозвілля», 2018. С. 9-92. Flynn, P. (2013). Author and Translator. In Yves Gambier, Luc van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies, 4, (pp. 12-19). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Gutt, E.-A. (1990). A theoretical account of translation – without a translation theory. Retrieved from http://cogprints.org/2597/1/THEORACC.htm Коломієць Л. В. Український художній переклад та перекладачі 1920-30-х років: матеріали до курсу «Історія перекладу». Вінниця: «Нова книга», 2015. Іларіон, митр. Біблія – найперше джерело для вивчення своєї літературної мови / Митр. Іларіон // Віра і культура. 1958. Ч. 6 (66). С. 13–17. Іларіон, митр. Біблія, або Книги Святого Письма Старого и Нового Заповіту. Із мови давньоєврейської й грецької на українську дослівно наново перекладена. United Bible Societies, 1962. Jinyu L. (2012). Habitus of Translators as Socialized Individuals: Bourdieu’s Account. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(6), 1168-1173. Leighton, L. (1991). Two Worlds, One Art. Literary Translation in Russia and America. DeKalb, Ill.: Northwestern Illinois UP. Лукаш М. Прогресивна західноєвропейська література в перекладах на українську мову // Протей [редкол. О. Кальниченко (голова) та ін.]. Вип. 2. X.: Вид-во НУА, 2009. С. 560–605. Майфет, Г. [Рецензія] // Червоний шлях. 1930. № 2. С. 252-258. Рец. на кн.: Боккаччо Дж. Декамерон / пер. Л. Пахаревського та П. Майорського; ред. С. Родзевича та П. Мохора; вступ. ст. В. Державіна. [Харків]; ДВУ, 1929. Ч. 1. XXXI, 408 с.; Ч. 2. Цит за вид.: Кальниченко О. А., Полякова Ю. Ю. Українська перекладознавча думка 1920-х – початку 1930-х років: Хрестоматія вибраних праць з перекладознавства до курсу «Історія перекладу» / Укладачі Леонід Чернований і Вячеслав Карабан. Вінниця: Нова Книга, 2011. С. 344-356. Munday, J. (2010). Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. 2nd Ed. London & New York: Routledge. Pauly, M. D. (2014). Breaking the Tongue: Language, Education, and Power in Soviet Ukraine. Toronto Buffalo London: University of Toronto Press. Pieta, H. & Rosa, A. A. (2013). Panel 7: Indirect translation: exploratory panel on the state-of-the-art and future research avenues. 7th EST Congress – Germersheim, 29 August – 1 September 2013. Retrieved from http://www.fb06.uni-mainz.de/est/51.php Плющ, Б. O. Прямий та неопрямий переклад української художньої прози англійською, німецькою, іспанською та російською мовами. Дис. …канд. філол. наук., Київ: КНУ імені Тараса Шевченка, 2016. Ringmar, M. (2012). Relay translation. In Yves Gambier, Luc van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies, 4 (pp. 141-144). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Simeoni, D. (1998). The pivotal status of the translator’s habitus. Target, 10(1), 1-39. Солодовнікова, М. І. Відтворення стилістичних особливостей роману Марка Твена «Пригоди Тома Сойера» в українських перекладах: квантитативний аспект // Перспективи розвитку філологічних наук: Матеріали ІІІ Міжнародної науково-практичної конференції (Хмельницький, 24-25 березня). Херсон: вид-во «Гельветика», 2017. С. 99-103. Sommer, D, ed. (2006). Cultural Agency in the Americas. [Synopsis]. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Špirk, J. (2014). Censorship, Indirect Translations and Non-translation: The (Fateful) Adventures of Czech Literature in 20th-century Portugal. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Venuti, L. (2001). Strategies of Translation. In M. Baker (ed.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, (pp. 240-244). London & New York: Routledge. References (translated and transliterated) Beletskii, A. (1929). Perevodnaia literatura na Ukraine [Translated literature in Ukraine]. Krasnoe Slovo [Red Word], 2, 87-96. Reprint in: Kalnychenko, O. A. and Poliakova, Yu. (2011). In Leonid Chernovatyi and Viacheslav Karaban (Eds.). Ukraiins’ka perekladoznavcha dumka 1920-kh – pochatku 1930-kh rokiv: Khrestomatiia vybranykh prats z perekladosnavstva do kursu “Istoriia perekladu” [Ukrainian translation studies of the 1920s – early 1930s: A textbook of selected works in translation studies for a course on the “History of Translation”]. (pp. 376-391). Vinnytsia: Nova Knyha, Burghardt, O. (1939). Bolshevytska spadschyna [The Bolsheviks’ heritage]. Vistnyk [The Herald], Vol. 1, Book 2, 94-99. Dollerup, C. (2014). Relay in Translation. Cross-linguistic Interaction: Translation, Contrastive and Cognitive Studies. Liber Amicorum in Honour of Prof. Bistra Alexieva published on the occasion of her eightieth birthday, Diana Yankova, (Ed.). (pp. 21-32). St. Kliminent Ohridski University Press. Retrieved from https://cms13659.hstatic.dk/upload_dir/docs/Publications/232-Relay-in-translation-(1).pdf Dong, Xi (2012). A Probe into Translation Strategies from Relevance Perspective—Direct Translation and Indirect Translation. Canadian Social Science, 8(6), 39-44. Retrieved from http://www.cscanada.org/index.php/css/article/viewFile/j.css.1923669720120806.9252/3281 Dzera, O. (2014). Istoriia ukraiinskykh perekladiv Sviatoho Pysma [History of Ukrainian translations of the Holy Scripture]. Inozemna Filologiia, 127, Part 2, 214-222. Filaret, Patriarch of Kyiv and all Rus-Ukraine et al. (2018). Rozmova Viacheslava Kyrylenka iz Patriarkhom Kyivskym ta vsiiei Rusy-Ukrainy Filaretom. Vira [A Conversation of Viacheslav Kyrylenko with Patriarch of Kyiv and all Rus-Ukraine Filaret. Faith]. In: Try rozmovy pro Ukrainu [Three Conversations about Ukraine], compiled and edited by V. Kyrylenko. Kharkiv: Family Leisure Club, 9-92. Flynn, P. (2013). Author and Translator. In Yves Gambier, Luc van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies, 4, (pp. 12-19). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Gutt, E.-A. (1990). A theoretical account of translation – without a translation theory. Retrieved from http://cogprints.org/2597/1/THEORACC.htm Kolomiyets, L. (2015). Ukraiinskyi khudozhniy pereklad ta perekladachi 1920-30-kh rokiv: Materialy do kursu “Istoriia perekladu” [Ukrainian Literary Translation and Translators in the 1920s-30s: “History of translation” course materials]. Vinnytsia: Nova Knyha. Ilarion, Metropolitan (1958). Bibliia – naipershe dzherelo dlia vyvchennia svoiei literaturnoi movy [The Bible is the first source for studying our literary language]. Vira i kultura [Faith and Culture], No. 6 (66), 13–17. Ilarion, Metropolitan. 1962. Bibliia abo Knyhy Sviatoho Pusma Staroho
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".