REPRODUCTION OF GEORGE GORDON BYRON’S IDIOSTYLE IN MODERN UKRAINIAN-SPEAKING INTERPRETATIONS OF HIS MYSTERY “CAIN”

Abstract

The purpose of the work is to compare the translators’ idiostyles and conceptions through a comparative analysis of G.G. Byron’s mystery “Cain” and Ukrainian-language interpretations by M. Kabaliuk and O. Hriaznov.

Methods of work. In the research a comparative method is used to compare the original and the translation and compare two translations, literary and stylistic textual analysis, descriptive and contextual methods are used to determine the stylistic dominants of the original and the target work, the method of assessing the adequacy of translation is used to define the translators’ mastery, the method of quantitative calculations is used to determine the degree of reproduction of linguistic and stylistic expression means.

Results. In the article the characteristic features of G.G Byron’s idiostyle, the stylistic features of the original text of the mystery “Cain” are outlined. The degree of style reproduction adequacy of G.G. Byron’s mystery “Cain” in the interpretation by two Ukrainian translators – M. Kabaliuk and O. Hriaznov is determined, the specifics of their translation style are clarified. The history of O. Hiyaznov’s translation with the use of own electronic correspondence is investigated. The literary-critical opinion concerning the named translations is considered. Translation analysis is performed at the phonetic, rhythmic, lexical, morphological and syntactic levels. Information on the translation reception of G.G. Byron’s works in Ukraine has been expanded.

Conclusions. The conducted comparative analysis makes it possible to state that each of these translators has an individual translation style, his own understanding of the author’s intention. M. Kabaiyuk takes into account the requirements for the most accurate reflection of the content in combination with the deepest reproduction of the author’s style, so his translation is marked by a high degree of adequacy. M. Kabaliuk approaches extremely close to the original work, avoiding literalism, preserving the author’s lexemes at most. He tries to convey all the stylistic dominants of the original maximally, pays attention to the subtle nuances of the poetic fabric of the English work; the interpreter’s presence is minimized. O. Hriaznov claims that a translation from an unlike language cannot be accurate; he pays more attention to the content than to the style, and does not reproduce all the features of G.G. Byron’s idiostyle (exclamatory intonation in some places, repetitions, about half of the epithets and exclamations). He is somewhat fluent with the original, often paraphrasing language units based on his own perception.