Download:

PDF

Author: Liudmila B. Karpenko
Information about the author:

DSc in Philology, Professor, Department of Russian Language and Mass Communication, Samara National Research University, Moskovskoe Shosse, 34, 443086 Samara, Russia.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8432-1164

E-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

For citation:

Karpenko, L.B. “Concepts of State in the Novel Crime and Punishment: Problems of Intercultural Translation of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Artistic Language.” Dostoevsky and World Culture. Philological journal, no. 4 (28), 2024, pp. 215–253. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2024-4-215-253

Received: 08 Oct. 2024
Published: 25 Dec. 2024
Issue: 2024 no. 4 (28)
Department: DOSTOEVSKY: TRANSLATION PROBLEMS
Pages: 215-253
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22455/2619-0311-2024-4-215-253
EDN:

https://elibrary.ru/IXEIKX

UDK: 821.161.1.0+ 81.25+821.162.0
BBK: 83.3(2Рос=Рус)+81.18
Keywords: Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment, state concepts, problems of translatability of grammar, Russian language, Bulgarian language.
Abstract: The article deals with the ways of expressing concepts of state in Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment and the peculiarities of their reproduction in the translation of the novel into Bulgarian by the poet and translator Georgi Konstantinov. The relevance of the work is determined by the insufficient study of Dostoevsky’s linguistic techniques in conveying the state of the characters and the environment, as well as the peculiarities of translating the concepts of state from Russian into Bulgarian. The problem of translatability of grammar, the dependence of discrepancies between the original and translation on the systemic features of languages is investigated. Research methods: comparative, contextual, structural-grammatical, lexico-semantic. The material is collected from the parallel Russian and Bulgarian texts of the novel and the Russian/Bulgarian subcorpus of the National Corpus of the Russian Language. The author of the article concludes that Georgi Konstantinov managed to convey both the global universal meanings of Fyodor Dostoevsky’s novel Crime and Punishment and the individual originality of the writer’s language. At the same time, the study reveals natural discrepancies between the original novel and its translation, which are explained by a number of reasons: 1) partial differences in the linguistic conceptualization of the world in the two languages: the Russian language picture of the world is characterized by objectspatial dominance, spatial models serve as a basis for the design of different types of relations, including state concepts; Bulgarian language focuses on the state as an action or a dynamic characteristic of a person; 2) systemic differences between modern Russian and Bulgarian languages, discrepancies in their grammatical, lexicallinguistic, lexical-semantic resources, which is regularly observed in the transition from Russian impersonal sentences to Bulgarian bipartite or definite-personal sentences, from prepositional-padding combinations of Russian to Bulgarian verb forms; 3) the translator’s skill, the nature of his perception of the content of the text, key and precedent words.

References

1. Apresian, Iu.D. “Obraz cheloveka po dannym iazyka: popytka sistemnogo opisaniia” [“The Image of a Person According to the Language”]. Voprosy iazykoznaniia, no. 1, 1995, pp. 37–67. (In Russ.)

2. Arutiunova, N.D. “Stil’ Dostoevskogo v ramke russkoi kartiny mira” [“Dostoevsky’s Style in the Frame of the Russian Picture of the World”]. Arutiunova, N.D. Iazyk i mir cheloveka [The Language and the World of Man]. Moscow, Iazyki russkoi kul’tury Publ., 1999, pp. 846–870. (In Russ.)

3. Blagova, E., and R.M. Tseitlin. Staroslavianskii slovar’ (po rukopisiam X–XI vekov) [Old Slavonic Dictionary (of Manuscripts of the 9th–11th Centuries)]. Moscow, Russkii iazyk Publ., 1994. 842 p. (In Russ.)

4. Bokova, O.A. “Bytiinye predlozheniia v russkoi iazykovoi kartine mira i tvorchestve F.M. Dostoevskogo” [“Existential Sentences in the Russian Language Picture and in F.M. Dostoevsky’s Work”]. Bokova, O.A. Funktsional’no-kommunikativnye i lingvokul’turologicheskie aspekty izucheniia teksta i diskursa [Functional-Communicative and Cultural Linguistical Aspects of Research about Text and Speech]. Lipetsk, LGPU Publ., 2011, pp. 123–131. (In Russ.)

5. Buras, M.М., and M.A. Krongauz. “Zhizn’ i sud’ba gipotezy lingvisticheskoi otnositel’nosti” [“The Life and Fate of the Hypothesis of Linguistic Relavity”]. Nauka i zhizn’, no. 8, 2011. Available at: https://elementy.ru/nauchno-populyarnaya_biblioteka/431410/Zhizn_i_sudba_gipotezy_lingvisticheskoy_otnositelnosti?ysclid=lx33ib5jro454191684 (Accessed 10 Feb. 2024) (In Russ.)

6. Vasil’eva, T.V. Roman F.M. Dostoevskogo “Prestuplenie i nakazanie” v interpretatsii nemetskikh perevodchikov [Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Novel Crime and Punishment as Interpreted by German Translators: PhD Thesis, Summary]. Vologda, 2008. 22 p. (In Russ.)

7. Vezhbitskaia, A. Iazyk. Kul’tura. Poznanie [Language. Kulture. Knowledge]. Trans. from English. Moscow, Russkie slovari Publ., 1996. 416 p. (In Russ.)

8. Humboldt, Wilhelm von. Izbrannye trudy po iazykoznaniiu [Selected Works on Linguistics]. Trans. and ed. by G.V. Ramishvili. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1984. 397 p. (In Russ.)

9. Dal’, V.I. Tolkovyi slovar’ zhivogo velikorusskogo iazyka: v 4 tomakh [Explanatory Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language: in 4 vols], vol. 4. Moscow, Russkii iazyk Publ., 1980. 684 р. (In Russ.)

10. Dostoevskii, F.M. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii: v 30 tomakh [Complete Works: in 30 vols]. Leningrad, Nauka Publ., 1972–1990. (In Russ.)

11. Izard, Carrol Ellis. Psikhologiia emotsii [Psychology of Emotions]. Trans. from English by V. Misnik, A. Tatlybaeva. St. Petersburg, Piter Publ., 1999. 460 p. (In Russ.)

12. Karpenko, L.B. “Sposoby vyrazheniia lokal’nosti v russkom i bolgarskom iazykah” [“Ways of Expressing Locality in Russian and Bulgarian Languages”]. Sapostavitelno ezykoznanie, no. 1, 1984, pp. 20–28. (In Russ.)

13. Komissarov, V.N. Teoriia perevoda (lingvisticheskie aspekty) [Translation Theory (Linguistic Aspects)]. Moscow, Vysshaia shkola Publ., 1990. 253 p. (In Russ.)

14. Kristeva, Iu. “Dostoevskii: pis’ma stradaniia i proshcheniia, fragmenty” [“Dostoevsky: Letters, Suffering and Forgiveness”]. Kristeva, Iu. Dostoevskii v zarubezhnoi retseptsii: ot klassiki do postmoderna: Antologiia [Foreign Reception of Dostoevsky: From Classics to Postmodern: An Antology], part 2. St. Petersburg, Russkaia Khristianskaia gumanitarnaia akademiia Publ., 2021, pp. 553–569. (In Russ.)

15. Kubriakova, E.S. Iazyk i znanie: na puti polucheniia znanii o iazyke: chasti rechi s kognitivnoi tochki zreniia. Rol’ iazyka v poznanii mira [Language and Knowledge: On the Way to Gaining Knowledge about the Language: Parts of Speech from a Cognitive Point of View. The Role of Language in Understanding the World]. Moscow, Iazyki slavianskoi kul’tury Publ., 2004. 560 p. (In Russ.)

16. Leontovich, O.A. Vvedenie v mezhkul’turnuiu kommunikatsiiu [Introduction to Intercultural Communication]. Moscow, Gnozis Publ., 2007. 368 p. (In Russ.)

17. Radchenko, O.A. Iazyk kak mirosozidanie: lingvofilosofskaia kontseptsiia neogumbol’dtianstva [Language as the Universe: The Linguistic and Philosophical Concept of Neo- Humboldtianism]. Moscow, URSS Publ., 2006. 310 p. (In Russ.)

18. Retsker, Ia.I. Teoriia perevoda i perevodcheskaia praktika [Translation Theory and Translation Practice]. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia Publ., 1974. 216 p. (In Russ.)

19. Romanova, E.S. “Fedor Mikhailovich Dostoevskii — vyrazitel’ dushevnykh sostoianii” [“Fyodor Dostoevsky as the Exponent of Mental States”]. Sistemnaia psikhologiia i sotsiologiia, no. 1 (33), 2020, pp. 5–21. (In Russ.)

20. Toporov, V.N. “O strukture romana Dostoevskogo v sviazi s arkhaichnymi skhemami mifologicheskogo myshleniia (Prestuplenie i nakazanie)” [“On the Structure of Dostoevsky’s Novel in Connection with Archaic Schemes of Mythological Thinking (Crime and Punishment)”]. Toporov, V.N. Mif. Ritual. Simbol. Obraz: issledovaniia v oblasti mifopoeticheskogo: izbrannoe [Myth. Ritual. Symbol. Image: Research on Mythopoetic: Selected Works]. Moscow, Progress: Kul’tura Publ., 1995, pp. 193–258. (In Russ.)

21. Whorf, B.L. “Nauka i iazykoznanie” [“Science and Linguistics”]. Novoe v lingvistike, issue 1, 1960, pp. 169–182. (In Russ.)

22. Shakespeare, William. Gamlet, prints datskii. Tragediia [Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Tragedy]. Trans. from English by B.L. Pasternak. Moscow, Khudozhestvennaia literatura Publ., 1941. 172 p. (In Russ.)

23. Shcherba, L.V. “O chastiakh rechi v russkom iazyke” [“About Parts of Speech in Russian Language”]. Shcherba, L.V. Izbrannye raboty po russkomu iazyku [Selected Works on Russian Language]. Moscow, Uchpedgiz Publ., 1957, pp. 63–84. (In Russ.)

24. Iakobson, R. “Vzgliady Boasa na grammaticheskoe znachenie” [“Boas’s Views on Grammatical Meaning”]. Iakobson, R. Izbrannye raboty [Selected Works]. Moscow, Progress Publ., 1985, pp. 231–238. (In Russ.)

25. Dostoevski, F. Prestaplenie i nakazanie [Crime and Punishment]. Full text in Bulgarian, translation by Georgi Konstantinov. 1960. Available at: https://bg.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prest#plenie_i_nakazanie (Accessed 06 Feb. 2024) (In Bulgarian)

26. Pym, Anthony. “Natural and directional equivalence in theories of translation.” Gambier, Y., and L. van Doorslaer, eds. The metalanguage of translation. Amsterdam, Philadelphia, John Benjamin’s Publ., 2009, pp. 81–104. (In English)

27. Sapir, Edward. “The Grammarian and his Language.” The American Mercury, no. 1, 1924, pp. 149–155. (In English)

28. Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. Available at: https://www.monologuearchive.com (Accessed 01 Oct. 2024) (In Russ.)