A literary work – Translation and original

Target ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leena Laiho

The focus of this paper lies on the translatability of a literary work of art. The phenomenon is approached as a conceptual challenge subsumed under the question Can the identity of a literary work of art be retained when the work is translated? Since the question of translatability as posed here belongs to the realm of philosophy of art, the problematic nature of ‘original’, ‘translation’ and ‘identity’ is discussed first in the theoretical context of analytic philosophy. I then consider the issue within the framework of Translation Studies. By showing the definitional diversity the necessity of contextual embedding and theoretical explicitness is highlighted. A genuine exchange of ideas and views, between and within disciplines, presupposes conceptual transparency.

Hikma ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (15) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfredo Hermosillo López

<p>Resumen:</p><p>Este artículo analiza la teoría de los cuatro estratos del filósofo polaco Roman Ingarden. Tiene el propósito de mostrar que sus conceptos sobre la lectura activa y la obra de arte literaria, además de ser el punto de partida de los estudios de recepción desarrollados más ampliamente por Hans-Robert Jauss y Wolfgang Iser, pueden utilizarse como fundamento teórico para el análisis de traducciones literarias.</p><p> </p><p><em>A</em><em>bstract:</em></p><p>This article analyses the theory of the four strata proposed by the Polish philosopher Roman Ingarden. Its main purpose is to show that Ingarden’s concepts regarding the active reading and the literary work of art, besides from being the starting point of the literary reception studies, developed more widely by Hans-Robert Jauss and Wolfgang Iser, can also be used as a theoretical foundation for the analysis of literary translations.</p>


Author(s):  
Endre Kiss

Gadamer’s hermeneutic philosophy avoids the problem of literary objectiveness altogether. His approach witnesses the general fact that an indifference towards literary objectiveness in particular, leads to a peculiar neglect of par excellence literariness as such. It seems obvious, however, that the constitutive aspects of the crisis of literary objectiveness cannot be shown to contain the underlying intention of bringing about this situation. At this point, one can identify what could probably be the most important element in a definition of literary objectiveness. In contrast to ‘natural’ objectiveness and objectiveness based on various societal conventions, the legitimacy of a literary work is solely guaranteed by its elements being organized in accordance with the rules of literary objectiveness. Thus when the crisis of literary objectiveness intensifies, literariness will also find itself in a crisis. This crisis detaches new, quasi-literary formations from various definitions of literariness. When literary objectiveness ceases, however, to be understood as a system constituted by various objective formations aiming to correspond in one way or another to the ‘world’, scientific analysis of literary objectiveness will be rendered impossible. The crisis of literary objectiveness thus brings about the crisis of the theory of literature and the philosophy of art. Gadamer explicitly argues that the scientific approach proves to be inadequate in the analysis of artistic experience. This attitude results in the categorical rejection of a scientific orientation (and so in a complete indifference towards literary objectiveness), but he seems to overemphasize an otherwise correct thesis on the non-reflexive character of artistic experience. It is the anti-mimetic and Platonic character of Gadamer’s aesthetic hermeneutics that determines the status of literary (artistic) objectiveness in his system of thought. What is of crucial importance, however, is to point out that this aesthetics entails a fundamental reduction of the significance of literary objectiveness. As soon as the essence of aesthetic object-constitution is taken to be re-cognition (plus the emanating aesthetic possibilities), the absolutely natural interest in the original object represented by a work of art.Undoubtedly, Gadamer’s conception answers a number of questions that tend to be ignored by other theories. It is just as obvious, however, that Gadamer completes here the aesthetic devaluation of the objective domain. It is not the characteristics of the ‘original’ that constitute the image, but in effect the image turns the original into an original. Paraphrasing this claim one arrives at a near paradox: not objectiveness makes a work of art possible, but a work of art lends objects their objectiveness.


Author(s):  
Adam Trybus ◽  
Bernard Linsky

This is the first English translation of Leon Chwistek’s “Tragedia werbalnej metafizyki (Z powodu książki Dra Ingardena: Das literarische Kunstwerk),” Kwartalnik Filozoficzny, Vol. X, 1932, 46–76. Chwistek offers a scathing critique of Roman Ingarden’s Das literarische Kunstwerk (translated into English as The Literary Work of Art) and of the entire Phenomenology movement. The text also contains many hints at Chwistek’s own philosophical and formal ideas. The book that Chwistek reviews attracted wide attention and was instrumental in winning Ingarden a position as Professor of Philosophy at the University of Lwów in 1933. Chwistek’s alienation from his fellow logicians of the Lvov-Warsaw school is clear from his ridicule of Leśniewski’s project.


Author(s):  
Horst Ruthrof

Phenomenological literary theory has its roots in Edmund Husserl’s studies of the directional acts of consciousness in the first half of the 20th century and Roman Ingarden’s The Literary Work of Art and The Cognition of the Literary Work of Art, arguing that literary works can come into existence only in the act of reading. Under the influence of Martin Heidegger, phenomenology absorbed hermeneutic insights from Dilthey, Gadamer, and Ricoeur, as well as existentialist features, foremost from Jean-Paul Sartre, with Merleau-Ponty contributing a corporeal accent by reiterating Husserl’s distinction between the biophysical body (Körper) and the animate body (Leib). George Poulet of the Geneva school and the early Yale critics added an author-oriented form of literary criticism, while Ingarden’s work was taken up by the Konstanz school theorists Wolfgang Iser and Hans Robert Jauss, the latter challenging ontological approaches by a historically anchored form of reception aesthetics. In the United States, the idea of phenomenology in literature has been prominently pursued by Maurice Natanson. At the same time, phenomenological literary theory is undergoing a revival in the wake of the neo-phenomenology of Hermann Schmitz, notably in such writings as Rita Felski’s Uses of Literature.


Author(s):  
Rudyard Kipling

The Jungle Books can be regarded as classic stories told by an adult to children. But they also constitute a complex literary work of art in which the whole of Kipling’s philosophy of life is expressed in miniature. They are best known for the ‘Mowgli’ stories; the tale of a baby abandoned and brought up by wolves, educated in the ways and secrets of the jungle by Kaa the python, Baloo the bear, and Bagheera the black panther. The stories, a mixture of fantasy, myth, and magic, are underpinned by Kipling's abiding preoccupation with the theme of self-discovery, and the nature of the ‘Law’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document