The translated text as re-textualisation

Abstract

All texts seem to be, in one way or another, dependent upon other texts, but a translated text is dependent upon one particular text in a very peculiar way. When writing a normal text the writer is in principle free to organise a set of words, clauses and paragraphs, according to his or her intentions and abilities. Yet we all know that this liberty is more apparent than real, since our memory of previous texts, as well as the cultural norms we have internalised, restrict, as a rule, many of our textual movements. The translator, however, works under different conditions. The text he or she writes will be based on a message that already exists in a textual form in another language. The original text constrains the new text in a number of ways. The most inmediate one is that in order to be recognised as a translation, the translator's text must have a great degree of similarity with its original counterpart. In translation studies this similarity is currently labelled equivalence. Many definitions of equivalence have been offered. One of the most comprehensive is that of the translation theorist Toury, who is

<b>Reconsidering Poe's Readership:A Comparative Study of two translations of The Fall of the House of Usher</b><br>DOI: 10.5007/2175-7968.2010v1n25p153

“…Usually called "children's adaptations" or "graded readers", translations which have so specific audiences depend on a number of considerations and decisions concerning both the form and the content of the source text and their implications on translation choices that may satisfy/respect their audience's reading repertoire. Therefore, these choices and considerations should take into account the audience in order to adapt the source text and succeed in retextualizing (Costa, 1992) it into the linguistic universe of its intended readers. It is known that adaptations are salient to the process of enriching young readers' literary reading experiences.…”

“…As a matter of fact, the translator's commitment to the elements derived from the source text becomes more malleable, in view of the fact that the target audience's limitations and expectations are imperative. Yet, according to Costa (1992), adaptations differ from translations for a very subjective reason. Whereas a translation seeks a closer relation with its source, an adaptation is seen as "a text inspired but not governed by a source text" (Costa, 1992: 42).…”

“…Any analysis of a translation and adaptation of Poe's work must turn its attention to the fact that Poe, as a storyteller and poet, did not write in any language other than English, and did not write particularly to youngsters. The enterprise of 'retelling' his stories -both to a special readership and to a non-English-speaking readership -is, as Costa (1992) puts it, a process of retextualization. The translator/mediator of a Poe's text will inevitably face multiple instantiations where choices of widening or narrowing the 'original' semantic scope have to be made in a way that fits the target audience (see, for example, Poe, 2000, adapted by Wharry; Poe, 2009, adapted by Rollason) as well as with the possibilities available in the target language.…”