Social and cultural aspects of translation quotations from William Shakespeare - Курсовая работа

Tracing - just adding new words in a language, borrowed from other languages, such as neologisms, internationalisms, actually are appeared together with meanings of borrowed objects that they represent. Also translation is not a selection of translated words to the terms of the target language, which are not appropriate sense of the translated words. The interpretation of foreign words leads to a kind of linguistic entropy - allocation to one or another notion of the meaning, that doesn’t match it. In this failure of understanding you can’t blame the interpreter - just impossible to translate it adequately and not to distort the first meaning. If just a language has no adequate translation of the given word, because there is no appropriate denotation. This interpretation is called «creative translation»,» violence against the original version in favor of the traditions of literature» and exactly with the results of «creative translation», mass reader meets more or less rough interpretation of meaning of the translated text. No less ambiguous is also the term «interpretation» which is synonymous to «translation» and is used to denote the way or manner of presenting the ides of the work in translation orally. These may be artistic, genre and stylistic peculiarities rendered by the translator in his particular way, which is somewhat different from that of the author’s. The thing is that «interpretation» unlike «translation», admits some more freedom of the translator in his treatment (at least in certain places or cases) of the matter under translation. To the letter belong the famous free interpretations of Virgil’s Adenoid in Ukrainian by «I. Kotlyarevskyi» practically «adapted» are also Shakespearean’s masterpieces. Byron’s writings and many other poetic and prose works. Consequently, «interpretation» may denote apart from the oral method of translation also a peculiar, as well as the only way of presenting a prose or poetic work in translation («Interpretation» may also denote the style of a peculiar translator and his way of presenting a particular literary work). BNC text are more likely to omit that and use contractions; the TEC text are more likely to include that and not use contractions. Early Modern English as a literary medium was unfixed in structure and vocabulary in comparison to Greek and Latin, and was in a constant state of flux. When William Shakespeare began writing his plays, the English language was rapidly absorbing words from other languages due to wars, exploration, diplomacy and colonization. By the age of Elizabeth, English had become widely used with the expansion of philosophy, theology and physical sciences, but many writers lacked the vocabulary to express such ideas. To accommodate, writers such as Edmund Spenser, Sir Philip Sidney, Christopher Marlowe and William Shakespeare expressed new ideas and distinctions by inventing, borrowing or adopting a word or a phrase from another language, known as neologizing. Scholars estimate that, between the years 1500 and 1659, nouns, verbs and modifiers of Latin, Greek and modern Romance languages added 30,000 new words to the English language. 2. «Translated» Shakespeare 2.1 Introduction to Shekespeare Any discussion of Shakespeares life is bound to be loaded with superlatives. In the course of a quarter century, Shakespeare wrote some thirty-eight plays. Taken individually, several of them are among the worlds finest written works; taken collectively, they establish Shakespeare as the foremost literary talent of his own Elizabethan Age and, even more impressively, as a genius whose creative achievement has never been surpassed in any age. In light of Shakespeares stature and the passage of nearly four centuries since his death, it is not surprising that hundreds of Shakespeare biographies have been written in all of the worlds major languages. Scanning this panorama, most accounts of the Bards life (and certainly the majority of modern studies) are contextual in the sense that they place the figure of Shakespeare against the rich tapestry of his «Age» or «Times» or «Society.» This characteristic approach to Shakespeare biography is actually a matter of necessity, for without such fleshing out into historical, social, and literary settings, the skeletal character of what we know about Shakespeare from primary sources would make for slim and, ironically, boring books. As part of this embellishment process, serious scholars continue to mine for hard facts about the nature of Shakespeares world. The interpretation of their meaning necessarily varies, often according to the particular school or ideology of the author. Whatever the differences of opinion, valid or at least plausible views about Shakespeare, his character and his personal experience continue to be advanced. Yet even among modern Shakespeare biographies, in addition to outlandish interpretations of the available facts, there persists (and grows) a body of traditions about such m