Reinterpretation and Resignification: A Study of the English Translation of Le Roman de la Rose
- 161 Downloads
Abstract
Literary translation, by its very nature, is a subjective process; not only the language, but also the context, style and socio-cultural information of the source text are filtered through the translator’s personal and socio-cultural interpretation. An analysis of a translated text allows us to perceive the nature of the translator’s exegetical reading, and through this to gain an insight into the text’s reception into a different time or culture. This study uses modern translation analysis methodologies, namely James S. Holmes’s ‹mapping’ technique, to assess the nature and extent of reinterpretation in the Middle English translation of the Roman de la Rose. The conclusion reveals a systematic reinterpretation of the French text’s ambiguous language, multivalent symbolism and hermeneutic, based on the codes of courtly love; through consistent methods of concretisation and disambiguation, the author/translator of the early part of Romaunt of the Rose effects a resignification of key aspects of the source text.
Keywords
Translation Holme Romaunt RosePreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- Baumgartner, E. (1992). The play of temporalities, or, the reported dream of Guillaume de Lorris. In K. Brownlee & S. Huot (Eds.), Rethinking the romance of the rose: Text, image, reception (pp. 22–39). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
- Benjamin, W. (1999). The task of the translator. In H. Arendt (Ed.), (trans.: H. Zorn) Illuminations: Walter Benjamin (pp. 70–80). London: Pimlico.Google Scholar
- Blumenfeld-Kosinski, R. (1997). Classical mythology and its interpretations in medieval French literature. California: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
- Capps, T. E., et al. (Eds.). (1916). Metamorphoses. London: Heinneman.Google Scholar
- Ciceronian. In Roger Ellis (Ed.), The medieval translator: The theory and practice of translation in the middle ages (pp. 15–35). Cambridge: D.S. Brewer.Google Scholar
- Copeland, R. (1989). The fortunes of non verbum pro verbo: Why Jerome is not a Ciceronian. In R. Ellis (Ed.), The medieval translator: The theory and practice of translation in the middle ages (pp. 15–35). Cambridge: D.S. Brewer.Google Scholar
- Copeland, R. (1991). Rhetoric, hermeneutics and translation in the middle ages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Dahlberg, C. (Ed.). (1999). The Romaunt of the Rose. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
- Gaddis Rose, M. (1997). Translation and literary criticism. Manchester: St. Jerome.Google Scholar
- Holmes, J. S. (1988). Translated! Papers on literary translation and translation studies. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
- Kumamoto, S. (1991). Some observations of the rhyme words in the romance of the rose. In M. Kawai (Ed.), Language and style in English literature: Essays in honour of Michio Masui (pp. 322–342). Tokyo: Eihosha.Google Scholar
- Kurath, H., et al. (1952–2001). Middle English dictionary. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
- Lommatzsch, E., & Tobler, A. (1952). Altfranzösisches Wörterbuch. Wiesbaden: Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
- Luria, M, (1982). A Reader's Guide to the Roman de la Rose. Hamden, Conn: Archon books.Google Scholar
- Mersand, J. (1937). Chaucer’s romance vocabulary. New York: Comet Press.Google Scholar
- Nordhal, H. (1978). Ars fidi interpretis (un aspect rhétorique de l’art de Chaucer dans sa traduction du Roman de la Rose). Archivum Linguisticum, 9, 24–31.Google Scholar
- Schoch, A. D. (1906). The differences in the English Romaunt of the rose and their bearing upon Chaucer’s authorship. Modern Philology, 3, 339–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Strubel, A. (1984). Guillaume de Lorris, Jean de Meun, Le roman de la rose. Imprint Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
- Sutherland, R. (Ed.). (1992). The Romaunt of the Rose and Le Roman de la Rose. Paris: Libraire Générale Française.Google Scholar