გოეთეს "არჩევითი ნათესაობა" კონტრასტული ლინგვისტიკისა და თარგმანის თეორიის კონტექსტში (ეძღვნება ნელი ამაშუკელს)

აბსტრაქტი

სტატიიდან აღებული ავტორის ინგლისურენოვანი რეზიუმე:

Contrastive or confronting/contacting linguistics is a considerably new direction, which came into being on the basis of typology. It belongs to the sphere, which studies structures of languages and can be considered as synchronic and diachronic, it can serve to reveal similarities and differences and at the same time aim at practical purposes… In the depth of contrasting linguistics, parallel to the sphere, oriented on the applied direction, another variant has developed, which takes an increasingly intensive part in the formation of the linguistic theory. Every language can be compared to any other language, i.e. it is always possible to find common features between them, enabling us to describe and identify them.

This position is based on the supposition that the characteristic feature of every language is to express the content in a wider sense, which belongs to the sphere of the theory of translation. The eternity of mankind’s values unites the world by the literary meta-language, implying the existence of universal dimensions, expressed on the level of language universalias. (Chomski, Coseriu, Zailer, Leman, etc). How does any person take the genius of any nation? It was an answer to this question that laid foundation to the theory of translation the so called “translaticas” (the author of the term is N. Gogolashvili), which raised the comparative research (typology, contrastive linguistics) on the level of a text and placed it in the international- interdisciplinary area.

Translation is a means of multiplying of “language realias” and its basis is the versatile foundation of languages.(N. Gogolashvili). We live in the epoch of the refinement of contacting technologies: on the contrastive-comparative way, the direction, adequate to every language level cropped up and fully comprised the stratification space. The presented article is devoted to the “Elective Affinities” by Goethe, translated by Nelly Amashukeli. Any of Goethe’s works is a sample of all mankind’s features and symbols and is considered not only through the angle of contrastive linguistics and theory of translation, but it permanently remains the prerogative of cosmic micro-space research.

The title of the novel is transferred from the Swedish scientist Thorber Bergman’s book on Nature: “De attractionibus electives”. Heints Tabor translated it from German as “Wahlverwandtschafen”. The work is an attempt of anthropologization of the theory, borrowed from the field of chemistry and is presented within the frame of this theory. “Nome nest omen” – every name or object has a symbolic value in Goethe’s works. Love collisions are subdued to the principle of Bergman’s theory and thus the term the “Elective Affinities” bears the function of coherence and provides the holistic picture of the text. The main character makes a confrontation between the freedom of choice and the institutional laws, fortified by centuries and destroys the symbols, stated by usage.

The disorganization of symbols’ order – this is the term, given to this process by the scientists of Goethe’s studies. The symbols’ disorganization is also Mlange de Quatre –the exchange between the four. The synthesis of real and unreal (virtual) worlds is given in Charlotte’s and Edward’s son. There are three ritual destructive situations in the novel, creating the symbolic paradigm: 1. Laying the foundation; 2. The roof covering; 3. Baptism. I would add here the scene of the child’s death as the determiner of the tragic final. The scene of baptism is an artistic device of the events, developed in the novel and their acceleration: The child’s name includes all the four parents’ real-virtual names: Otto –Charlitte, Captain –Otto, Edward – the same as Otto and Ottilie.

The events develop at an unusual speed. The baptism is predetermined by death from the very beginning. The priest’s unexpected death during the baptism points to the sad development of the events. The example of sacral symbols’ desymbolization is the exchange of symbolic rank of the priest by the usual service function, i.e. here we deal with the devaluation of sacral symbols, which repeats in the other ritual scenes with elements of parody. The constellation of symbols and symbolic situations creates a multidimensional paradigm that the exhaustive, hermeneutic procedure or process makes it possible only in the perspective. The specially chosen passages of the text point to the effort that the translator – Nelly Amashukeli took to give the Georgian adequacies.

The problem of creating of style equivalents and style invariants is especially significant in the translation. The translation units are not separate words or even sentences for the translator but the whole text and she considers the original and the translated text in the inter-relation, i.e. she does it on the level of the text. (D. Panjikidze). Nelly Amashukeli was the patriarch of Georgian-German relations, the laureate of Schweitzer’s prize, the owner of Germany’s Honorary Order (Red Cross) and other prizes. She translated a lot of literary works, scripts, opera librettos (from German into Georgian and from Georgian into German). At the last stage of her life she came to Goethe.

Being a highly creative person, sheapproached the writer’s works with fine intuition, going rather slowly to the set objectives. Simply and comprehensively the reader becomes a co-creator of the super-genius. The paradigm in Georgian is preserved both by the tone and mood, which is the final aim of translaticas.

გამოქვეყნებულია ჟურნალში „სჯანი“, ტ. 10 (2009), გვ. 134–145. ნაშრომის გახსნა