Revision as of 05:04, 14 December 2021

History of Translation Theories

Overview Page of History of Translation Theories

30 Chapters（0/30)

Back to translation project overview Zur To-Do-Liste

Chapter 5 History of Translation Theories from Early Russia to the Soviet Union

从古罗斯到苏联前的翻译理论史

张怡然 Zhang Yiran,Hunan Normal University,China

Abstract

Translation as a means of intercultural communication, each country has a distinctive translation ideology. This article focuses on the history of translation in pre-Soviet Russia. Through analyzing the history of translation, can find that Russia has formed a literary tradition of translation studies in the late 18th century. In the 19th century, Pushkin, Lermontov, Turgenev and other outstanding poets and literary scholars were keen on translation, especially in the middle of the century when Belinsky and other famous literary critics published a series of comments on literary translation, which emphasized the literary tradition of Russian translation to an unparalleled extent, which is rare in the history of translation in the world. The general principles of Russian literary translation thought were also formed during this period: namely, to insist on commenting on the merits of a translation in terms of the overall effect of the work, to emphasize the ideological content and literary value of the translation, and that the translation should serve the reader and be people-oriented. The above ideas influenced the formation of translation theory in the Soviet period. Therefore, a study of the history of translation theory in pre-Soviet Russia will help learners of Russian to better understand the characteristics of their translations and to improve the accuracy and peopleliness of their translations.Written by--Zhang Yiran (talk) 12:57, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Translation is a means of intercultural communication, and each country has its own distinctive translation theory system. This paper focuses on the history of translation in pre-Soviet Russia. By analyzing the history of translation, it is obvious that a literary tradition of translation studies has been formed in Russia in the late 18th century. In the 19th century, Pushkin, Lermontov, Turgenev and other outstanding poets and literary scholars were keen on translation, especially in the middle of the century when Belinsky and other famous literary critics published a series of comments on literary translation, which emphasized the literary tradition of Russian translation to an unparalleled extent, which is rare in the history of translation in the world. The general principles of Russian literary translation thoughts were also formed during this period: namely, to insist on commenting on the merits and weakness of a translation in terms of the overall effect of the work, to emphasize the ideological content and literary value of the translation, and the translation should serve the reader and be people-oriented. The above ideas influenced the formation of translation theory in the Soviet period. Therefore, a study of the history of translation theory in pre-Soviet Russia will help learners of Russian to understand the characteristics of their translations profoundly and to improve the accuracy and fluency of their translations.Corrected by--Yin Yuan (talk) 03:03, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Key words

Translation theories, Translation ideas，History of Translation

摘要

翻译作为一种跨文化交际的手段，每个国家都有独具特色的翻译思想。本文主要探讨苏联前俄国的翻译历史。通过梳理其翻译史可发现，俄国于18世纪末期就已形成了翻译研究的文学传统。进入19世纪后, 普希金、莱蒙托夫、屠格涅夫等优秀诗人、文学家对翻译的热衷, 尤其是世纪中叶别林斯基等著名文学评论家发表一系列关于文学翻译的评论, 更是把俄国翻译的文学传统强调到无以复加的程度, 这在世界翻译史上都是罕见的。俄国文学翻译思想的总原则也在这一时期形成:即坚持从作品的整体效果上来评论译作优劣, 强调译作的思想内容和文学价值, 翻译应为读者服务, 译文应具有人民性。上述思想影响了苏联时期翻译理论的形成。因此，对苏联前俄国翻译理论史的研究有利于俄语学习者在翻译时更好的理解其翻译特点，提高翻译的准确性和人民性。

关键词

翻译理论翻译思想翻译史

Introduction

This essay provides a comprehensive and concise overview of the history of translation in Russia: Russian written translations began in the Kievan Rus' era, when religious subjects were the main focus of translations, especially the Bible, which was translated from Greek. Religious translations continued to flourish under the Moscow principality, represented by Maksim Gleick (МаксимГрек). At the same time, the national character of Russian translations began to emerge, and the languages of translation expanded from Greek to Latin, German and West Slavic, and the subjects covered included Western chivalric fiction, geographical literature, alchemy and medicine. In the eighteenth century, Peter the Great introduced a number of measures to focus on translation, making this period a turning point in the history of Russian translation. The proliferation of specialised translations (e.g. of legal texts) was the main feature of translation activity in the early eighteenth century. After this period Russian translators began to translate literary works.The main translators were Lomonosov (М.В. Ломоносов) and Tretyakovsky (V.K. Тредьяковский). In the second half of the eighteenth century, translation was given greater importance in Russia, and the Society for the Translation of Foreign Books was founded by Ekaterina II, in which a large number of outstanding translators emerged. The nineteenth century was a golden period in the history of Russian translation. Karamzin (Н.М.Карамзин) and Zhukovsky (В.А.Жуковский) both produced many excellent translations. Pushkin (A.С.Пушкин) and Lermontov (M.Ю.Лермонтов) contributed greatly to the development of Russian literature in translation, while Fetter concentrated on love poetry. In the twentieth century, the Russian translation community made significant achievements in theoretical translation studies. In particular, the rapid development of the philological school and the debate between the literary and philological schools made Soviet translation theory one of the leading theories of translation in the world.(Guo Lin,2006:5)Written by--Zhang Yiran (talk) 12:57, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

This paper provides a comprehensive and concise overview of the history of translation in Russia: Russian written translations began in the Kievan Rus' era, when religious subjects were the main focus of translations, especially the Bible, translated from Greek. Religious translations continued to flourish under the Moscow principality, represented by Maksim Gleick (МаксимГрек). At the same time, the national character of Russian translations began to emerge, and the languages of translation expanded from Greek to Latin, German and West Slavic, and the subjects covered included Western chivalric fiction, geographical literature, alchemy and medicine. In the eighteenth century, Peter the Great introduced a number of measures to focus on translation, leading this period to a turning point in the history of Russian translation. The proliferation of specialised translations (e.g. of legal texts) was the main feature of translation activity in the early eighteenth century. After this period Russian translators began to translate literary works.The main translators were Lomonosov (М.В. Ломоносов) and Tretyakovsky (V.K. Тредьяковский). In the second half of the eighteenth century, translation was paid greater attention in Russia, and the Society for the Translation of Foreign Books was founded by Ekaterina II, in which a large number of outstanding translators emerged. The nineteenth century was a golden period in the history of Russian translation when Karamzin (Н.М.Карамзин) and Rukovsky (В.А.Жуковский) both produced many excellent translations. Pushkin (A.С.Пушкин) and Lermontov (M.Ю.Лермонтов) contributed greatly to the development of Russian literature in translation, while Fetter concentrated on love poetry. In the twentieth century, the Russian translation community made significant achievements in theoretical translation studies. In particular, the rapid development of the philological school and the debate between the literary and philological schools made Soviet translation theory one of the leading theories of translation in the world. Corrected by--Yin Yuan (talk) 03:14, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

1.The history of Russian translation and the period of enlightenment of its translation theory.

1. The emergence and development of literary translation.

Translation activity has a long history in Russia, the beginnings of which can be traced back to the time of Kievan Rus'. A relatively sophisticated system of writing, literature and translation was already in place in ancient Russia in the ninth century AD. Frequent cultural and trade exchanges with Byzantine, German, French and Scandinavian countries contributed significantly to the development of translation in Russia at that time, as did contacts with Eastern countries. From Kievan Rus' onwards, Russian translation methods oscillated between two main tendencies, either to follow the original texts exactly, up to the point of translating them word for word, or to be arbitrary, even to the point of rewriting, adding or deleting at will. The first tendency is the main characteristic of translations of the Bible and other sacred books, while the second, though not absolute, can be said to characterize most secular works.(Feng Xin,2009:8)(Wu Keli,2006:4)

2.Initiation of translation activities-religious translation.

In 864 AD, the Byzantine king sent two Greek priests, Kirill (Кирилл) and Mephodi (Мефодий), to spread Christianity among the Slavic people. At the beginning of their mission, they created a new alphabet (now known as the Kirill alphabet) and used this writing system to translate many religious texts from Greek into the ancient Church Slavonic. Among the results were the New Testament, hymnals and prayer books.(Feng,2009:8)

In 988 AD, Rus was baptised and Kievan Rus was converted to Christianity. A large number of translations appeared instantly to help Protestants become familiar with the new religious philosophy and ethical system and to understand the rituals and customs of the Church. These translations were in a variety of genres, including the Acts of the Saints, sermons, chronicles and so on. In addition, apocryphal books telling magical and fantastical stories were also popular, and some of them had similarities with the later 'fantasy novels'. Most of these translations were done in Bulgaria and were popularised in Rus. At that time, translations of religious texts were mostly word-for-word. There were also a small number of works that, unlike the 'elaborate copies of the original', had a separate literary value. In one case, a large number of details of Russian life were added to the storyline of a sermon (e.g. The Tales of Achild the Wise). In another case, military historical narratives are interspersed with the terminology of the ancient Russian feudal system and certain literary images from the stories of ancient Russian warriors (e.g. Joseph Flav's History of the Jewish War). This translation can be considered one of the most successful of the period. In the translation, the translator succeeded in avoiding many word-for-word translations). In a third case, the manuscripts copied by Ancient Rus, although based on Greek epic poetry (e.g. The Great Work of Digenes Akritas), often borrowed from Russian folk poetry, so that a large number of folk compositions appeared. As a result of this literary process, the translated literature was smoothly enriched by Russian manuscripts, which contributed to the development of original Russian literature and consolidated its links with the medieval literary process. Unfortunately, at that early stage in the development of translation, the translators were not signed, so it is impossible to verify whether the works were translated at home or abroad.(Feng,2009:9)

During the difficult period of 'Mongol rule' (1228-1480), translations continued to play an important role in the cultural life of the country. The remaining chapters of the Bible were translated one after another, and previous translations were again proofread and revised. In addition to religious translations, more translations of non-religious subjects emerge, such as The Kingdom of India and The Trojan War. Most of the works were still translated from Greek, while works probably translated from Latin and ancient Hebrew also appeared. During this period, Russian began to take shape through the interaction of Old Slavonic (Church Slavonic) and local national languages. However, religious texts were still only translated into Church Slavonic, and the use of this language was by then restricted to ecclesiastical matters. At the same time, political and commercial exchanges with other countries were more likely to be in Russian, which was becoming increasingly sophisticated: elements of the combination of Old Slavonic and Russian can also be found in original works.（Wu,2006:6)

14-15th century literature in translation by Rus was characterised by an obsession with new themes. These were mainly new works of tranquillity-abstinence literature, or works recommended by and familiar to the tranquillists. This mystical genre was introduced to Rus after it had swept through the Byzantine and Yugoslav peoples. It was reflected in the semi-secular translations popular at the time (for example, The Trojan War).

In the 16th century AD, Moscow eventually became the political centre of Russia, as well as the translation centre of the country. In 1515, the Grand Duke of Moscow, Vassily III (Василий Ⅲ), asked a Greek monastery to send a learned translator to Moscow. This man, who accompanied the Greek mission to Moscow in 1516, was the historically famous Maksim Gleick (Максим Грек). Maksim Gleick worked as a translator throughout his life, studying most of the religious texts and some of the non-religious works during this period. In addition, he also proofread and annotated previously existing translations.(Wu,2006:7)

At the beginning, Maksim knew neither Russian nor Old Slavonic, so he divided the translation into two steps: first, he translated from Greek to Latin, and then his assistant translated from Latin to Old Slavonic. In the process of revising existing translations, he often broke with established tradition and was therefore denounced as blasphemous. Maksim was also a prolific writer, educator and philosopher. His writings contain many insights into the art of translation - the earliest recorded treatise on translation in Russia. Maksim insisted that the original text must be carefully analysed in order to grasp its full subtleties and implications. Therefore, the translator must not only master the language of the original, but also have a broad knowledge of the language and prepare for the translation. To support his argument, Maksim used Greek lexicography, phonetic organisation and phonetics involved in translation. His other major contribution was the compilation of a dictionary containing Greek, Latin and Hebrew nouns, which was also the first of its kind in Russian history. Although it was recognised at the time that translators should have a command of both languages as well as a profound background knowledge, the practitioners of translation at the time lacked the necessary qualities and their translations were not as good as they could have been.(Wu,2006:7)Written by--Zhang Yiran (talk) 13:39, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

1. The emergence and development of literary translation.

Translation activity has a long history in Russia, the beginnings of which can be traced back to the Time of Kievan Rus'. A relatively sophisticated system of writing, literature and translation was already in ancient Russia in the ninth century AD. Frequent cultural and trade exchanges with Byzantine, German, French and Scandinavian countries contributed significantly to the development of translation in Russia at that time, as did contacts with Eastern countries. From Kievan Rus' onwards, Russian translation methods oscillated between two main tendencies, either to follow the original texts exactly, up to the point of translating them word by word, or to be arbitrary, even to the point of rewriting, adding words or deleting at will. The first tendency is the main characteristic of translations of the Bible and other sacred books, while the second, though not absolutely, can be said to characterize most secular works.

2.Initiation of translation activities-religious translation.

In 864 AD, the Byzantine king sent two Greek priests, Kirill (Кирилл) and Mephodi (Мефодий), to spread Christianity among the Slavic people. At the beginning of their mission, they created a new alphabet (now known as the Kirill alphabet) and used this writing system to translate many religious texts from Greek into the ancient Church Slavonic. Among the results were the New Testament, hymnals and prayer books. In 988 AD, Rus was baptised and Kievan Rus was converted to Christianity. A large number of translations appeared instantly to help Protestants become familiar with the new religious philosophy and ethical system and to understand the rituals and customs of the Church. These translations were in a variety of genres, including the Acts of the Saints, sermons, chronicles and so on. In addition, apocryphal books telling magical and fantastical stories were also popular, and some of them had similarities with the later 'fantasy novels'. Most of these translations were done in Bulgaria and were popularised in Rus. At that time, translations of religious texts were mostly word-for-word. There were also a small number of works that, unlike the 'elaborate copies of the original', had a separate literary values. In one case, a large number of details of Russian life were added to the storyline of a sermon (e.g. The Tales of Achild the Wise). In another case, military historical narratives are interspersed with the terminology of the ancient Russian feudal system and certain literary images from the stories of ancient Russian warriors (e.g. Joseph Flav's History of the Jewish War). This translation can be considered one of the most successful of the period. In the translation, the translator succeeded in avoiding many word-for-word translations). Thirdly, the manuscripts copied by Ancient Rus, although based on Greek epic poetry (e.g. The Great Work of Digenes Akritas), often borrowed from Russian folk poetry, so that a large number of folk compositions appeared. As a result of this literary process, the translated literature was smoothly enriched by Russian manuscripts, which contributed to the development of original Russian literature and consolidated its links with the medieval literary process. Unfortunately, at that early stage in the development of translation, the translators were not signed, so it is impossible to verify whether the works were translated at home or abroad. During the difficult period of 'Mongol rule' (1228-1480), translations continued to play an important role in the cultural life of the country. The remaining chapters of the Bible were translated one after another, and previous translations were again proofread and revised. In addition to religious translations, more translations of non-religious subjects emerge, such as The Kingdom of India and The Trojan War. Most of the works were still translated from Greek, while works probably translated from Latin and ancient Hebrew also appeared. During this period, Russian began to take shape through the interaction of Old Slavonic (Church Slavonic) and local national languages. However, religious texts were still only translated into Church Slavonic, and the use of this language was by then restricted to ecclesiastical matters. At the same time, political and commercial exchanges with other countries were more likely to be in Russian, which was becoming increasingly sophisticated: elements of the combination of Old Slavonic and Russian can also be found in original works. 14-15th century literature in translation by Rus was characterised by an obsession with new themes. These were mainly new works of tranquillity-abstinence literature, or works recommended by and familiar to the tranquillists. This mystical genre was introduced to Rus after it had swept through the Byzantine and Yugoslav peoples. It was reflected in the semi-secular translations popular at the time (for example, The Trojan War). In the 16th century AD, Moscow eventually became the political center of Russia, as well as the translation center of the country. In 1515, the Grand Duke of Moscow, Vassily III (Василий Ⅲ), asked a Greek monastery to send a learned translator to Moscow. This man, who accompanied the Greek mission to Moscow in 1516, was the historically famous Maksim Grek (Максим Грек). Maxim Greek worked as a translator throughout his life, studying most of the religious texts and some of the non-religious works during this period. In addition, he also proofread and annotated previously existing translations. At the beginning, Maxim knew neither Russian nor Old Slavonic, so he divided the translation into two steps: first, he translated from Greek to Latin, and then his assistant translated from Latin to Old Slavonic. In the process of revising existing translations, he often broke with established tradition and was therefore denounced as blasphemous. Maxim was also a prolific writer, educator and philosopher. His writings contain many insights into the art of translation - the earliest recorded treatise on translation in Russia. Maxim insisted that the original text must be carefully analysed in order to grasp its full subtleties and implications. Therefore, the translator must not only master the language of the original, but also have a broad knowledge of the language and prepare for the translation. To support his argument, Maxim used Greek lexicography, phonetic organisation and phonetics involved in translation. His other major contribution was the compilation of a dictionary containing Greek, Latin and Hebrew nouns, which was also the first of its kind in Russian history. Although it was recognized at the time that translators should have a command of both languages and profound background knowledge, the practitioners of translation at the time lacked the necessary qualities and their translations were not as good as they should have been. Corrected by--Yin Yuan (talk) 03:42, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

2. Overview of the Russian school of Translation.

2.1 18th century Russian translation.

The eighteenth century is an important period in the history of Russian translation. The status of translation in social culture has undergone a qualitative change, and this is due to Peter the Great's reform. At the beginning of the century, translation was still mostly related to professional documents such as laws and contracts. Later, the translator's tentacles gradually expanded to literary translation, for example, French poetry translation. The famous translators of this period are Sumarokov(А.П.Сумароков), Lomonosov(М.В.Ломоносов), Tretyakovsky (В.К.Тредьяковский) and so on. In the second half of the 18th century, the Association for the Translation of Foreign Books officially put forward the importance of translation. The organization has been active for 15 years with over 100 members（Wu,2006:10).

1.Imperial support for translation. The political reforms introduced by Peter the Great also led to intensive economic and cultural exchanges between Russia and European countries. This created a huge demand for translations of scientific and technical literature and literary works. Translators were required to produce works of a high standard.

Peter the Great issued a special decree on translation, requiring "faithful" communication of the original text. In a directive issued to his subordinates in 1709, he explicitly stated that when translating foreign books, word-for-word translations were to be avoided and that the content of the original text should be clearly expressed in one's own language, based on an understanding of its content. On the other hand, Peter the Great's subversion of the written language initially caused confusion in Russian translation circles. A large number of foreign languages entered the Russian language, and the piles of foreign syntactic structures distracted attention. In any case, Peter the Great's reforms did set a new norm and a new direction for translation(Wu,2006:11).

In terms of content, Peter the Great's reforms were, from the very beginning, inextricably linked to the translation of scientific and technical texts, such as the many books on military defence engineering that he ordered to be translated and used to strengthen Russia's military forces. Peter the Great also placed great importance on the translation of prose, poetry and other literary works. During this period, the Russian language began to develop its own literary model, and many educated Russians saw translation as a way of enriching the language and enhancing its uniqueness and expressiveness.

From around the 1830s, the importance of translating Western European scientific and technical texts gradually gave way to literary works such as prose and poetry. Writers who were also translators turned their attention to the work of new Western European writers, mainly poets, especially French poets. At the same time, the legacy of the Greco-Roman period also entered their minds. They began to translate the works of philosophers and historians, which - on the one hand - gave rise to difficulties in literary rhetoric and scientific terminology and, on the other, played an important role in the formation of a standard Russian language(Feng,2009:10)(Guo,2006:8).

From that time onwards, translation also became an organised activity, with the emergence of specific bodies responsible for the organisation and management of translation work. 1735 saw the establishment of the first specialised translation organisation, the Russian Society, at the St Petersburg Academy of Sciences. The Society had a professional group of translators and some of the academy's scholars, such as Lomonosov and Tretyakovsky, were among its members. The Association was responsible for selecting works, defining the rules or principles of translation, commenting on translations, and training translators. It is worth mentioning that the Academy of Sciences also set up a school of foreign languages to train official translators. In 1748, the Academy implemented Queen Elizabeth's decree to increase the number of translations of non-religious books and publicly appealed to "the nobility and other classes of intellectuals" to take an active part in the translation process(Guo,2006:8)(Feng,2009:10).

In the second half of the 18th century, Ekaterina II's efforts to create a 'civilised state' not only led to the development of literature, but also gave preferential treatment to writers. For example, in order to select the best original texts, she ordered the establishment of the Society for the Translation of Foreign Books (1768 - 1783). The Society was dedicated to providing excellent conditions for translation work throughout Russia. The purchase of manuscripts was financed out of Ekaterina's own funds. Later, the Society also discussed a proposal to establish a translation bureau under the Academy of Sciences (1790). The 114 members of the Society included such notable figures as Tretyakovsky, Sumarokov and Radishev. For 14 years the Association was active, producing numerous literary translations and likewise contributing to the discussion of theoretical issues in translation(Guo,2006:9).

2.The emergence of poetry translation. Translation of poetry also developed in Russia in the 18th century, and later became one of the jewels of the country's literature. The great Russian scholar and poet Lomonosov was a major contributor to this process. A great deal of the work created by Lomonosov and his contemporaries Sumarokov and Tretyakovsky was poetry in translation. They often translated while exploring theoretical issues in translation: they would explain in their works why they translated this way and not that way; they stressed the importance of translation work and the creative value it contained. Among the most prestigious writers and translators in Russian literature at the time, there were several interesting competitions in which two or three poets translated the same work at the same time, and their translations were published in journals. It was often the case that different translations of the same work were published at the same time, without the translator's name, for the judgement of "literary lovers and peers". This phenomenon also supports the idea that the 18th century was a period of 'experimentation' in the history of Russian translation(Feng,2006:11).

Lomonosov's translations from Latin, German, French and Greek are numerous and varied, showing his talent for both rhyming and free verse. He was keen to reproduce the rhythmic structure of the original texts, using a variety of iambic and iambic meter to convey the Alexandrian style of French epic and the hexameter style of Greek tragedy. Russian poetry was not very developed at the time and was still based on syllables. Lomonosov's innovations enriched Russian poetry and established new forms and traditions of Russian poetic style and rhyme.

In contrast, Kantymir (Д.М.Кантемира) and Tretyakovsky's greatest quest was to insist on a faithful translation of the original. In the process, the translators had to contend with the problems of reams of vocabulary and rhetorical rules. Tretyakovsky became famous for his successful use of Russian rhyme to translate many verses of the original in his translation of Paul Thielmann's A Journey to Love Island. In the introduction to the novel, the translator states his approach to translation: "The translator is only one person away from the author. I would add that if the author is original, the translator should be even more original (I am not referring to myself, but to a good translator)". He believes that "prose to prose" and "poetry to poetry" can be as good as the original, and that a good translation is one that "describes the full meaning of each verse". Kantymir 's translation of Horace's Letters and other poetic works in Latin and French, although less well-known than the former, is equally valuable(Wu,2006:16).--Zhang Yiran (talk) 14:40, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

The eighteenth century is an important period in the history of Russian translation. The status of translation in social culture has undergone a qualitative change, and this is due to Peter the Great's reform. At the beginning of the century, translation was still mostly related to professional documents such as laws and contracts. Later, the translator's tentacles gradually expanded to literary translation, for example, French poetry translation. The famous translators of this period are Sumarokov(А.П.Сумароков), Lomonosov(М.В.Ломоносов), Tretyakovsky (В.К.Тредьяковский) and so on. In the second half of the 18th century, the Association for the Translation of Foreign Books officially put forward the importance of translation. The organization has been active for 15 years with over 100 members. The following points reflected the reasons why translation was paid more attention in the eighteenth century.

1.Imperial support for translation.

The political reforms introduced by Peter the Great also led to intensive economic and cultural exchanges between Russia and European countries. This created a huge demand for translations of scientific and technical literature and literary works. Translators were required to produce works of a high standard.Peter the Great issued a special decree on translation, requiring "faithful" communication of the original text. In a directive issued to his subordinates in 1709, he explicitly stated that when translating foreign books, word-for-word translations were to be avoided and that the content of the original text should be clearly expressed in one's own language, based on an understanding of its content. On the other hand, Peter the Great's subversion of the written language initially caused confusion in Russian translation circles. A large number of foreign languages entered the Russian language, and the piles of foreign syntactic structures distracted attention. In any case, Peter the Great's reforms did set a new norm and a new direction for translation. In terms of content, Peter the Great's reforms were, from the very beginning, inextricably linked to the translation of scientific and technical texts, such as the many books on military defence engineering that he ordered to be translated and used to strengthen Russia's military forces. Peter the Great also placed great importance on the translation of prose, poetry and other literary works. During this period, the Russian language began to develop its own literary model, and many educated Russians saw translation as a way of enriching the language and enhancing its uniqueness and expressiveness.

From around the 1830s, the importance of translating Western European scientific and technical texts gradually gave way to literary works such as prose and poetry. Writers who were also translators turned their attention to the work of new Western European writers, mainly poets, especially French poets. At the same time, the legacy of the Greco-Roman period also entered their minds. They began to translate the works of philosophers and historians, which - on the one hand - gave rise to difficulties in literary rhetoric and scientific terminology and, on the other, played an important role in the formation of a standard Russian language.

From that time onwards, translation also became an organised activity, with the emergence of specific bodies responsible for the organisation and management of translation work. 1735 saw the establishment of the first specialised translation organisation, the Russian Society, at the St Petersburg Academy of Sciences. The Society had a professional group of translators and some of the academy's scholars, such as Lomonosov and Tretyakovsky, were among its members. The Association was responsible for selecting works, defining the rules or principles of translation, commenting on translations, and training translators. It is worth mentioning that the Academy of Sciences also set up a school of foreign languages to train official translators. In 1748, the Academy implemented Queen Elizabeth's decree to increase the number of translations of non-religious books and publicly appealed to "the nobility and other classes of intellectuals" to take an active part in the translation process.

In the second half of the 18th century, Ekaterina II's efforts to create a 'civilised state' not only led to the development of literature, but also gave preferential treatment to writers. For example, in order to select the best original texts, she ordered the establishment of the Society for the Translation of Foreign Books (1768-1783). The Society was dedicated to providing excellent conditions for translation work throughout Russia. The purchase of manuscripts was financed out of Ekaterina's own funds. Later, the Society also discussed a proposal to establish a translation bureau under the Academy of Sciences (1790). The 114 members of the Society included such notable figures as Tretyakovsky, Sumarokov and Radishev. For 14 years the Association was active, producing numerous literary translations and likewise contributing to the discussion of theoretical issues in translation.

2.The emergence of poetry translation.

Translation of poetry also developed in Russia in the 18th century, and later became one of the jewels of the country's literature. The great Russian scholar and poet Lomonosov was a major contributor to this process. A great deal of the work created by Lomonosov and his contemporaries Sumarokov and Tretyakovsky was poetry in translation. They often translated while exploring theoretical issues in translation: they would explain in their works why they translated this way and not that way; they stressed the importance of translation work and the creative value it contained. Among the most prestigious writers and translators in Russian literature at the time, there were several interesting competitions in which two or three poets translated the same work at the same time, and their translations were published in journals. It was often the case that different translations of the same work were published at the same time, without the translator's name, for the judgement of "literary lovers and peers". This phenomenon also supports the idea that the 18th century was a period of 'experimentation' in the history of Russian translation.

Lomonosov's translations works in Latin, German, French and Greek are numerous and varied, showing his talent for both rhyming and free verse. He was keen to reproduce the rhythmic structure of the original texts, using a variety of iambic and iambic meter to convey the Alexandrian style of French epic and the hexameter style of Greek tragedy. Russian poetry was not very developed at the time and was still based on syllables. Lomonosov's innovations enriched Russian poetry and established new forms and traditions of Russian poetic style and rhyme.

In contrast, Kantymir (Д.М.Кантемира) and Tretyakovsky's greatest quest was to insist on a faithful translation of the original. In the process, the translators had to contend with the problems of reams of vocabulary and rhetorical rules. Tretyakovsky became famous for his successful use of Russian rhyme to translate many verses of the original in his translation of Paul Thielmann's A Journey to Love Island. In the introduction to the novel, the translator states his approach to translation: "The translator is only one person away from the author. I would add that if the author is original, the translator should be even more original (I am not referring to myself, but to a good translator)". He believes that "prose to prose" and "poetry to poetry" can be as good as the original, and that a good translation is one that "describes the full meaning of each verse". Kantymir 's translation of Horace's Letters and other poetic works in Latin and French, although less well-known than the former, is equally valuable. Corrected by--Yin Yuan (talk) 12:39, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

2.2 First half of the19th century Russian translation.

The nineteenth century was a golden age in the history of Russian translation. If translation had established itself as a profession in the first hundred years, it was elevated to the level of art in this century. The nineteenth century produced a number of masters of translation, including Karamzin (Н.М.Карамзин), Zhukovsky (В.А.Жуковский), Pushkin (А.С.Пушкин), Lermontov (М.Ю.Лермонтов) and Fetter (А.Фет)(Wu,2006:23).

The new Russian school of translation owes its formation to the historian Nikolai Karamzin and the poet Zhukovsky. Karamzin published a number of translations in several magazines between the end of the 18th and the beginning of the 19th century. He saw translations as a good help in perfecting a writer's style: a source of information that would satisfy human curiosity, inform historical facts, entertain women and provide material for new magazines. As a young man, Karamzin was strongly opposed to the alteration of and disloyalty to the original texts, but later became a champion of free translation, famously saying: "Whoever follows the author of the original text step by step is no different from a servant who serves his lord". Karamzin's translations cover an admirable range of genres and languages: he translated works by both classical and contemporaneous authors, in Greek, French, Latin, German, English, Italian and some Oriental languages(Feng,2009:12).

Pushkin called Zhukovsky "a genius of translation". After graduating from the Moscow Noble Boarding University in 1802, Zhukovsky devoted himself to translation. It was thanks to his efforts that Russian readers were able to access the works of world literary giants such as Schiller, Goethe, Byron and Walters Scott. Zhukovsky's creative translation activities also ranged from Charles Bello to Grimm's Fairy Tales. From Charles Bellow to Grimm's fairy tales, from Homer's epic Odyssey to the poetic history of ancient Rus' Igor's Expedition, all became his original texts. There is no denying that Zhukovsky is a master in the history of Russian translation. Like Karamzin, Zhukovsky was a fan of free translation, sometimes rewriting the original or even creating a new story from its subject: sometimes transferring the setting of events to Russia and giving Russian names to the characters. For example, in his 1808 translation of the German Romantic poet Bilge's narrative poem Lenore, he changed the heroine's name from Lenore to Lyudmila and moved the story to the time of the Livonian War in 16th-century Russia. Zhukovsky believed that the "unsavoury character" of the work should be weakened while retaining the original author's ideas. His talent enabled him to reproduce the style, rhythm and tone of the original poems, while some of his best works were also faithful to the original. In later years, however, his view of translation changed in response to the tendency to stay close to the original, and he retranslated several of his previous translations to make them more faithful to the original, including Lenore. The Russian school of translation owes much to the tradition of translation created by Zhukovsky(Wu,2006:24-30)(Feng,2009:13)(Guo,2006:9).

Pushkin and Lermontov are also two poets who set the stage for an epoch in the history of Russian translation. Although only a small proportion of their poetry was translated, they made a significant contribution to the improvement of the art of translation in Russia. In their rewriting and imitation of poetry, they were able to reproduce the most important features of foreign poetry, the key point being that their creative translations were no less valuable in their own right than the originals. Their free translation became a model for other translators, and in addition they established the important principle that a good artistic translation must also be a good work in the national literature of the translated language. Pushkin played an indelibly important role in the development of the Russian school of translation. He was always interested in the question of translation, and his critical views on translation were objective and profound. Before translation he stressed the importance of the choice of the original work, and in translation he demanded that the translator should be faithful to the original, while at the same time displaying his deep creative skills and his own literary style. In one of his unfinished posthumous works, 'On Milton and Chateaubriand's translation of Paradise Lost', Pushkin wrote: 'Chateaubriand's translation (verbatim) compensates to some extent for the faults of the young French writers (free translation), for they have insulted the great man very cruelly, though in a perfectly innocent manner. There is no doubt that Chateaubriand, while striving to translate Milton word for word (слов в слова), failed to achieve correctness of meaning and expression in his own translation. A word-for-word translation can never be correct. Each language has its own terminology, its own rhetorical conventions, its own way of expressing itself, and it is impossible to translate into another language with the corresponding vocabulary". These insights had a positive impact on the best Russian translators of the 19th and 20th centuries. In addition, Pushkin's discussion of translation coincided with a turning point in the history of Russian literature, when the Romantic era was being replaced by a new era with a predominantly realist orientation, and a process of 'separation' between translated and national literature was under way. Pushkin's discussion of the work of the translator as distinct from that of the writer contributed to the independence of literature in translation from indigenous literature(Guo,2006:10)(Wu,2006:37-41).

During this period, while most people advocated free translation, there were a few translators who insisted on maximum fidelity to the original and advocated the word-for-word method, even at the expense of the work's willingness to be translated. Among these were such well-known writers as P.A. Vyazemsky (П.А.Вяземский) and N.I. Gnedzic (Н.И.Гнедич). In fact, they did not always live up to their principles, and sometimes their talent and artistic intuition ended up breaking the bonds of verbatim translation. Vyazemsky's translations of Benjamin Constant and Adam Mickiewicz were not without literary and artistic merit, and his translation of Homer's epic Iliad in particular was highly praised by Pushkin. It was Fetter who was the most insistent on the idea of a verbatim translation. Fetter translated many famous works, and his philosophy throughout was one of sentence-for-sentence, word-for-word translation, retaining all the words of the original. Fetter's extreme word-for-word approach had a negative impact on most of his translations, although he was sometimes able to come up with some effective methods of translation(Feng,2009:14).

Free translations were also sometimes used to promote democratic ideas in the original that could not pass official scrutiny. A number of translators, such as V. Kurochkin (В.Курочкин), D. M. Minayev (Д.Минаев) and M. M. Mikhalov (М.Михайлов), achieved this by selecting appropriate original works or by using texts in their translations that were superficially imperceptible in their allusion to the conditions in Russia at the time. It was from that time onwards that the use of translation as a weapon to express dissent became part of the Russian tradition(Feng,2009:14).--Zhang Yiran (talk) 14:41, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

The nineteenth century was the golden age in the history of Russian translation. If translation had established its status in the first hundred years, it was elevated to the level of art in this century. The nineteenth century produced a number of masters of translation, including Karamzin (Н.М.Карамзин), Zhukovsky (В.А.Жуковский), Pushkin (А.С.Пушкин), Lermontov (М.Ю.Лермонтов) and Fetter (А.Фет).

The new Russian school of translation owes its formation to the publishment of a number of translations of historian Nikolai Karamzin and the poet Zhukovsky. Karamzin in several magazines between the end of the 18th and the beginning of the 19th century. He regarded translation as a good help in perfecting a writer's style: a source of information that satisfies human curiosity, informs historical facts, entertains women and provides materials for new magazines. As a young man, Karamzin was strongly opposed to the disloyalty to the original texts, but later became a champion of free translation. His famous saying was: "Whoever follows the author of the original text step by step is no different from a servant who serves his lord". Karamzin's translations cover an admirable range of genres and languages: he translated works by both classical and contemporaneous authors, in Greek, French, Latin, German, English, Italian and some Oriental languages.

Pushkin called Zhukovsky "a genius of translation". After graduating from the Moscow Noble Boarding University in 1802, Zhukovsky devoted himself to translation. It was thanks to his efforts that Russian readers were able to access the works of world literary giants such as Schiller, Goethe, Byron and Walters Scott. Zhukovsky's creative translation activities also ranged from Charles Bello to Grimm's Fairy Tales. From Charles Bellow to Grimm's fairy tales, from Homer's epic Odyssey to the poetic history of ancient Rus' Igor's Expedition, all became his original texts. There is no denying that Zhukovsky is a master in the history of Russian translation. Like Karamzin, Zhukovsky was a fan of free translation, who sometimes rewrites the original or even creates a new story from its subject, transfers the setting of events to Russia and gives Russian names to the characters. For example, in his 1808 translation of the German Romantic poet Bilge's narrative poem Lenore, he changed the heroine's name from Lenore to Lyudmila and moved the story to the time of the Livonian War in 16th-century Russia. Zhukovsky believed that the "unsavoury character" of the work should be weakened while retaining the original author's ideas. His talent enabled him to reproduce the style, rhythm and tone of the original poems, while some of his best works were also faithful to the original. In later years, however, his view of translation changed in response to the tendency to stay close to the original, and he retranslated several of his previous translations to make them more faithful to the original, including Lenore. The Russian school of translation owes much to the tradition of translation created by Zhukovsky.

Pushkin and Lermontov are also two poets who gave perfect preparations for an epoch in the history of Russian translation. Although only a small proportion of their poetry was translated, they made a significant contribution to the improvement of the art of translation in Russia. In their rewriting and imitation of poetry, they were able to reproduce the most important features of foreign poetry, the key point being that their creative translations were no less valuable in their own right than the originals. Their free translation became a model for other translators, and in addition they established the important principle that a good artistic translation must also be a good work in the national literature of the translated language. Pushkin played an indelibly important role in the development of the Russian school of translation. He was always interested in the question of translation, and his critical views on translation were objective and profound. Before translation he stressed the importance of the choice of the original work, and in translation he demanded that the translator should be faithful to the original, while at the same time displaying his deep creative skills and his own literary style. In one of his unfinished posthumous works, 'On Milton and Chateaubriand's translation of Paradise Lost', Pushkin wrote: 'Chateaubriand's translation (verbatim) compensates to some extent for the faults of the young French writers (free translation), for they have insulted the great man very cruelly, though in a perfectly innocent manner. There is no doubt that Chateaubriand, while striving to translate Milton word for word (слов в слова), failed to achieve correctness of meaning and expression in his own translation. A word-for-word translation can never be correct. Each language has its own terminology, its own rhetorical conventions, its own way of expressing itself, and it is impossible to translate into another language with the corresponding vocabulary". These insights had a positive impact on the best Russian translators of the 19th and 20th centuries. In addition, Pushkin's discussion of translation coincided with a turning point in the history of Russian literature, when the Romantic era was being replaced by a new era with a predominantly realist orientation, and a process of 'separation' between translated and national literature was under way. Pushkin's discussion of the work of the translator as distinct from that of the writer contributed to the independence of literature in translation from indigenous literature.

During this period, while most people advocated free translation, there were a few translators who insisted on maximum fidelity to the original and advocated the word-for-word method, even at the expense of the work's willingness to be translated. Among these were such well-known writers as P.A. Vyazemsky (П.А.Вяземский) and N.I. Gnedzic (Н.И.Гнедич). In fact, they did not always live up to their principles, and sometimes their talent and artistic intuition ended up breaking the bonds of verbatim translation. Vyazemsky's translations of Benjamin Constant and Adam Mickiewicz were not without literary and artistic merit, and his translation of Homer's epic Iliad in particular was highly praised by Pushkin. It was Fetter who was the most insistent on the idea of a verbatim translation. Fetter translated many famous works, and his philosophy throughout was one of sentence-for-sentence, word-for-word translation, retaining all the words of the original. Fetter's extreme word-for-word approach had a negative impact on most of his translations, although he was sometimes able to come up with some effective methods of translation.

Free translations were also used to promote democratic ideas in original that could not pass official scrutiny. A number of translators, such as V. Kurochkin (В.Курочкин), D. M. Minayev (Д.Минаев) and M. M. Mikhalov (М.Михайлов), achieved this by selecting appropriate original works or by using texts in their translations that were superficially imperceptible in their allusion to the conditions in Russia at the time. It was since then that the use of translation was used as a weapon to express dissent became part of the Russian tradition. Corrected by--Yin Yuan (talk) 13:05, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

2.3 Second half of the19th century Russian translation.

The mid-nineteenth century was a period of increasingly intense political and ideological struggle in Russian literature, and a great debate raged in the Russian literary world over the question of 'art for the people' or 'art for art's sake'. The debate was mainly about the choice of material for translation and the method of translation. As far as the choice of material was concerned, the democratic and revolutionary writers who supported 'art for the people' chose to translate works with progressive ideological content and a democratic orientation, such as Heine. The aristocratic and liberal intellectual writers, on the other hand, opted for philosophical poetry with a chanting and individualistic feel. Of course, this is not absolute: "Mikhailov and Dobrolyubov of the democratic revolutionary school also translated Heine's moody love poems The Songbook, while Tolstoy of the aristocratic and liberal school translated some of Goethe's more progressive poems, such as The Fiancée of Corinth and The Whore of God. In terms of their approach to translation, the Democratic-Revolutionary translators, based on the reproduction of the original as a whole, approached their translations very liberally, even adding in many elements typical of Russian culture. The latter, on the other hand, usually adopted a direct translation, focusing on conveying the formal details of the original work. This divergence was mainly due to the different starting points of the two groups of translators, with the democratic revolutionaries seeking to convey advanced ideas to the Russian general public and the aristocratic intellectuals believing that works of art were irrelevant to the people and that artistic creations should not be exposed to "vulgar" reality.

There were a large number of outstanding literary writers and literary critics who made brilliant statements about literary translation in that era, none more so than Belinsky (В.Г.Белинский), Chernyshevsky (Н.Г.Черныщевский) and Dubrolyovsky (Н.Г.Добролюбов). Belinsky was one of the greatest Russian literary critics of the 19th century. He believed that translations should not be word-for-word, but should reproduce the spirit of the original, in much the same way as Pushkin's view of translation theory. On the other hand, he also opposed arbitrary 'paraphrasing': the ideal translation should not add or delete arbitrarily to the original text, but should enable the reader to understand the foreign work truly and accurately through the translation. Such a viewpoint seems to us to be quite convincing even now. Belinsky played a decisive role in completely burying the 'rewriting' and 'adapting it to Russian custom' arguments. This issue dominates his writings. He argues that the preservation of the national character of the original is the crux of the vitality of the translation, and this is one of the criteria by which he judges its merits. He points out, for example, that the greatest strength of Gnedzic's translation of the Iliad is that it "exudes the atmosphere of ancient life" and "the spirit of the ancient Greeks". However, the contradiction between national identity and translatability was once a problem for Belinsky. Initially believing that it was impossible to translate works with a strong national character into other languages, he was only convinced by the success of Turgenev's collaboration with Louis Viardot in translating Gogol's novels into French in 1846, and then became increasingly determined to recognise translatability in translation. Belinsky's career as a translator was marked by a series of revisions that led to a complete and rigorous system of translation theory, the first of its kind in the history of Russian translation theory.

Translation in Russia developed in the second half of the 19th century. From the 1960s onwards, the Russian readership of non-language speakers began to expand, and these readers were keen to see the translation 'replace' the original. This demand led to an unprecedented expansion in the choice of subjects and translations of Russian literature. Interest in foreign theatrical works was particularly high at this stage, and a strong interest in European classical literature also developed. Dickens, Saclay, Victor Hugo, Dumas, Balzac, Flaubert, Tudor, Maupassant and Zola, as well as lesser-known writers of today, were successively brought to the attention of a wide range of Russian readers in the form of translations. At that time, European theatre classics like Shakespeare's plays were translated into Russia in large numbers. Many professional translators were involved, the most successful being the translator P.N.V. Weinberg. He translated foreign literature from the standpoint of progressive Russian literature of the time. His translation of Othello, for example, is notable for its vividness in the Russian language, and has always been recognised as the best translation in terms of conveying the totality of scenes, plots and long dialogues, even though the translation is wordy compared to the original.

Although there has been a quantitative surge in translations of Russian literature during this period, the quality has generally been poor, manifesting itself in word-for-word translations, redundant sentences and poor vocabulary, not to mention inventiveness. In addition, the language of the characters in the translation is heavily Russified, with Russian proverbs, sayings and idioms that the foreign characters could never have known, and the introduction of Russian-specific life circumstances that cause contradictions with the plot and details of the original work. For example, В Тулу со своим самоваром ехать (Bring your own samovar to Tula - it's superfluous). The reason for this is that the literary world did not attach much importance to the translation of fiction and prose, and there were no specialists working on this task. Another point is that at this stage there was little progress in the study of Russian translation theory, and no valuable theoretical insights emerged. The linguist A.A. Потебня (1835-1891) expressed his views on translation from a psychological standpoint in his essay "Language and Peopleliness ". In his view, it was impossible to express in another language what was originally intended to be expressed in a certain language. He, like many other literary scholars, denied the translatability of language.--Zhang Yiran (talk) 14:41, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

The mid-nineteenth century was a period of increasingly intensively political and ideological struggle in Russian literature, and a great debate raged in the Russian literary world over the question of 'art for the people' or 'art for art's sake'. The debate was mainly about the choice of materials for translation and the methods of translation. As far as the choice of material was concerned, the democratic and revolutionary writers who supported 'art for the people' chose to translate works with progressive ideological content and a democratic orientation, such as Heine. The aristocratic and liberal intellectual writers, on the other hand, opted for philosophical poetry with a chanting and individualistic feel. It's undoubtful that this is not absolute: "Mikhailov and Dobrolyubov of the democratic revolutionary school also translated Heine's moody love poems The Songbook, while Tolstoy of the aristocratic and liberal school translated some of Goethe's more progressive poems, such as The Fiancée of Corinth and The Whore of God. In terms of their approach to translation, the Democratic-Revolutionary translators, based on the reproduction of the original as a whole, approached their translations very liberally, when they even added in many elements typical of Russian culture. The latter, on the other hand, usually adopted a direct translation, focusing on conveying the formal details of the original work. This divergence was mainly due to the different starting points of the two groups of translators, with the democratic revolutionaries seeking to convey advanced ideas to the Russian general public and the aristocratic intellectuals believing that works of art were irrelevant to the people and that artistic creations should not be exposed to "vulgar" reality.

There were a large number of outstanding literary writers and literary critics who made brilliant statements about literary translation in that era, none more so than Belinsky (В.Г.Белинский), Chernyshevsky (Н.Г.Черныщевский) and Dubrolyovsky (Н.Г.Добролюбов). Belinsky was one of the greatest Russian literary critics of the 19th century. He believed that translations should not be word-for-word, but should reproduce the spirit of the original text, in much the same way as Pushkin's view of translation theory. On the other hand, he also opposed arbitrary 'paraphrasing': the ideal translation should not add or delete arbitrarily to the original text, but should enable the reader to understand the foreign work truly and accurately through the translation. Such a viewpoint seems to us to be quite convincing even now. Belinsky played a decisive role in completely burying the 'rewriting' and 'adapting it to Russian custom' arguments. This issue dominates his writings. He argues that the preservation of the national character of the original is the crux of the vitality of the translation, and this is one of the criteria by which he judges its merits. He points out, for example, that the greatest strength of Gnedzic's translation of the Iliad is that it "exudes the atmosphere of ancient life" and "the spirit of the ancient Greeks". However, the contradiction between national identity and translatability was once a problem for Belinsky. Initially believing that it was impossible to translate works with a strong national character into other languages, he was only convinced by the success of Turgenev's collaboration with Louis Viardot in translating Gogol's novels into French in 1846, and then became increasingly determined to recognise translatability in translation. Belinsky's career as a translator was marked by a series of revisions that led to a complete and rigorous system of translation theory, the first of its kind in the history of Russian translation theory.

Translation in Russia developed in the second half of the 19th century. From the 1960s onwards, the Russian readership of non-language speakers began to expand, and these readers were keen to see the translation 'replace' the original. This demand led to an unprecedented expansion in the choice of subjects and translations of Russian literature. Interest in foreign theatrical works was particularly high at this stage, and a strong interest in European classical literature also developed. Dickens, Saclay, Victor Hugo, Dumas, Balzac, Flaubert, Tudor, Maupassant and Zola, as well as lesser-known writers of today, were successively brought to the attention of a wide range of Russian readers in the form of translations. At that time, European theatre classics like Shakespeare's plays were translated into Russia in large numbers. Many professional translators were involved, the most successful being the translator P.N.V. Weinberg. He translated foreign literature from the standpoint of progressive Russian literature of the time. His translation of Othello, for example, is notable for its vividness in the Russian language, and has always been recognised as the best translation in terms of conveying the totality of scenes, plots and long dialogues, even though the translation is wordy compared to the original.

Although there has been a quantitative surge in translations of Russian literature during this period, the quality has generally been poor, manifesting itself in word-for-word translations, redundant sentences and poor vocabulary, not to mention inventiveness. In addition, the language of the characters in the translation is heavily Russified, that is, contents with Russian proverbs, sayings and idioms that the foreign characters could never have known, and the introduction of Russian-specific life circumstances that cause contradictions with the plot and details of the original work. For example, В Тулу со своим самоваром ехать (Bring your own samovar to Tula - it's superfluous). The reason for this is that the literary world did not attach much importance to the translation of fiction and prose, and there were no specialists working on this task. Another point is that at this stage there was little progress in the study of Russian translation theory, and no valuable theoretical insights emerged. The linguist A.A. Потебня (1835-1891) expressed his views on translation from a psychological standpoint in his essay "Language and Peopleliness ". In his view, it was impossible to express in another language what was originally intended to be expressed in a certain language. Just like many other literary scholars, he denied the translatability of language. Corrected by--Yin Yuan (talk) 13:13, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

3.Translation ideas of famous writers of the 18-19th centuries.

3.1. Pushkin 's ideas on translation.

Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin (Александр Сергеевич Пушкин, 1977-1837), a famous Russian poet and writer of the nineteenth century, was also very much a translator. Although he left behind few works on translation, his ideas on translation are worth studying. Pushkin's translations of poetry were associated with classicism in the early stages of his work and later with romanticism. Although these translations are far removed from the original in a literal sense, they are almost close to composition. Pushkin's significance as a translator, however, lies in 1) the reproduction of foreign originals in the standard Russian language he established in his translations and 2) the full expression of the realist artistic method in the heyday of his compositions: the focus on typical features and the technique of outlining the historical and individual characteristics that reflect the original.

Pushkin's translations have their own characteristics and style. He did not translate all of his works word for word from the original, and in some places he deleted what he considered to be redundant sentences in order to avoid the verbosity of the original, occasionally replacing the translation with a general paraphrase. He advocates respect for the characteristics of foreign readers, while at the same time opposing word-for-word translations, which can lead to the trampling of the mother tongue. He therefore advocated translations which, on the one hand, required fidelity to the original in terms of meaning and, on the other, should preserve the original's distinctive features. As he says in his unfinished 'On Milton and Chateaubriand's translation of Paradise Lost', commenting on Chateaubriand's translation: 'There is no doubt that Chateaubriand, while striving to translate Milton word for word (слов в слова), has failed to achieve correctness of meaning and expression in his own translation. A word-for-word translation can never be correct. Each language has its own terminology, its own conventional rhetorical devices, its own habitual expressions, and it is impossible to translate all this into another language using the corresponding vocabulary." Pushkin's rejection of word-for-word translation can be seen.

Pushkin's influence on the cause of translation in Russia was immense, and this influence refers neither to his few translations nor to his theoretical views, but to the fact that Pushkin pioneered the translation of Russian literature. Although his ideas on translation cannot be called a theory, they do provide certain translation ideas for later generations of literary translators.--Zhang Yiran (talk) 14:42, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Alexander Sergeyevich Pushkin (Александр Сергеевич Пушкин, 1977-1837), a famous Russian poet and writer of the nineteenth century, was also an outstanding translator. Besides he left behind few works on translation, his ideas on translation are worth studying. Pushkin's translations of poetry were associated with classicism in the early stages of his work and with romanticism later. Although these translations are far removed from the original in a literal sense, they are almost close to composition. Pushkin's significance as a translator, however, lies in the reproduction of foreign originalities in the standard Russian language he established in his translations and the full expression of the realist artistic method in the heyday of his compositions: the focus on typical features and the technique of outlining the historical and individual characteristics that reflect the original.

Pushkin's translations have their own distinctive characteristics and style. He did not translate all of his works literally from the original context, but in some places he deleted what he considered to be redundant sentences in order to avoid the verbosity of the original, occasionally replacing the translation with a general paraphrase. He advocates to give enough respect for the characteristics of foreign readers, while at the same time opposing word-for-word translations, which may lead to the trampling of the mother tongue. Therefore, He advocated translations which, on the one hand, required fidelity to the original text in terms of meaning and, on the other hand, should preserve the original's distinctive features.

As he says in his unfinished 'On Milton and Chateaubriand's translation of Paradise Lost', he comments on Chateaubriand's translation: 'There is no doubt that Chateaubriand, while striving to translate Milton word for word (слов в слова), has failed to achieve correctness of meaning and expression in his own translation. A word-for-word translation can never be correct. Each language has its own terminology, its own conventional rhetorical devices, its own habitual expressions, and it is impossible to translate all this into another language using the corresponding vocabulary." Pushkin's rejection of word-for-word translation can be revealed clearly.

Pushkin's influence on the cause of translation in Russia was huge, and his influence refers neither to his few translations nor to his theoretical views, but to the fact that Pushkin pioneered the translation of Russian literature. Although his ideas on translation cannot be called a theory, they do provide certain unique and new translation ideas for later generations of literary translators. Corrected by--Yin Yuan (talk) 13:29, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

3.1. Belinsky's ideas on translation.

Vissarion Grigorievich Belinsky (Виссарион Григорьевич Белинский, 1811-1848) was a famous literary critic of the nineteenth century and one of the most involved in the world of translation among Russian literary activists of his time. Belinsky was fluent in French and as a young man translated for two magazines, Miscellany and Telescope. Later, after a career in literary criticism, he published numerous articles on translation and criticism of translated works. Belinsky's and Pushkin's views on translation were very similar, both advocating that translations should not be word-for-word. Belinsky first introduced the term 'theory' of translation, and in his 1838 review of Polevoy's translation of Hamlet, he first proposed the need for a theory of translation. He considered the role of theory: "Any object that man perceives has a theory of its own, and a theory is the knowledge of the laws by which the object exists."

Belinsky argues that in translation: "Closeness to the original is not a matter of conveying the literal meaning of the original, but of conveying the spirit of the original. Each language has its own distinctive expressions, characteristics and qualities; these are so distinctive that to correctly convey a certain image or sentence, it is sometimes necessary to change them completely in the translation. The corresponding image, like the corresponding sentence, does not necessarily lie in a superficial agreement of words: the inner life of the translation should be made to correspond to the inner life of the original". It can be seen that Belinsky, like Pushkin, was also opposed to word-for-word rigid translations, his view being that the task of translating a language lies in reproducing the spirit of the original. He believed that the preservation of the national character of the original is the crux of the vitality of a translation, so the question of the interrelationship between national character and translatability has always troubled Belinsky. He pointed out that 'there is only one rule for translating a literary work - to convey the spirit of the work being translated, and this can only be done by translating it into Russian as the author himself would have written it in Russian, if he had been Russian' (The Complete Works of Belinsky Volume 2).

Belinsky's career as a translator was marked by a number of achievements, and his view of translation as a whole is a complete and rigorous system. His view of translation was developed gradually, and in the process it was dominated by an increasingly firm recognition of the possibility of a successful solution to the task of translation, that is, of translatability. Belinsky believed that a translation must be discerning in its content and form in relation to the original. He has pointed out that "approaching the original is not the same as conveying the letters, but rather the spirit of the original." It is also suggested that the translator and the original author are two different kinds of people. But in order to convey the 'spirit' of the original in the translation, the translator's genius needs to reach a certain tacit understanding with this 'spirit'. He advocates the preservation of exoticism in translation, opposes naturalisation, the arbitrary distortion of the face of the original work, the overwhelming of the original author with the personality of the translator's style, the emphasis on both likeness and likeness, etc. However, while recognising the importance of reproducing the poetic form of the original work in translation, Belinsky also took into account the state of development of Russian literature in translation. This also led him to look favourably on translating good poetry in prose, seeing such translations as a form of transition for Russian readers to the treasures of world literature.

Although Belinsky wrote little about literary translation, his theoretical views contain the kernel of the realist principles of translation proposed by contemporary Soviet literary translators. His ideas on translation had a very profound influence on the formation of translation theory in the Soviet period.--Zhang Yiran (talk) 14:42, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Vissarion Grigorievich Belinsky (Виссарион Григорьевич Белинский, 1811-1848) was a famous literary critic of the nineteenth century and one of the most active in the world of translation among Russian literary activists of his time. Belinsky was fluent in French and when he was a young man he translated for two magazines, Miscellany and Telescope. Later, after a career in literary criticism, he published numerous articles on translation and criticism of translated works.

Belinsky's and Pushkin's views on translation were very similar, both advocating that translations should not be word-for-word. Belinsky first introduced the term 'theory' of translation, and in his 1838 review of Polevoy's translation of Hamlet, he first proposed the need for a theory of translation. He considered the role of theory: "Any object that man perceives has a theory of its own, and a theory is the knowledge of the laws by which the object exists."

Belinsky argues that in translation: "Closeness to the original is not a matter of conveying the literal meaning of the original, but of conveying the spirit of the original. Each language has its own distinctive expressions, characteristics and qualities; these are so distinctive that to correctly convey a certain image or sentence, it is sometimes necessary to change them completely in the translation. The corresponding image, like the corresponding sentence, does not necessarily lie in a superficial agreement of words: the inner life of the translation should be made to correspond to the inner life of the original". It can be seen that Belinsky, like Pushkin, was also opposed to word-for-word rigid translations, his view being that the task of translating a language lies in reproducing the spirit of the original. He believed that the preservation of the national character of the original is the crux of the vitality of a translation, so the question of the interrelationship between national character and translatability has always troubled Belinsky. He pointed out that 'there is only one rule for translating a literary work - to convey the spirit of the work being translated, and this can only be done by translating it into Russian as the author himself would have written it in Russian, if he had been Russian' (The Complete Works of Belinsky Volume 2).

Belinsky's career as a translator had a number of achievements, and his view of translation as a whole is a complete and rigorous system. His view of translation was developed gradually, and in this process it was dominated by an increasingly firm recognition of the possibility of a successful solution to the task of translation, that is, of translatability. Belinsky believed that a translation must be discerning in its content and form in relation to the original. He has pointed out that "approaching the original is not the same as conveying the letters, but rather the spirit of the original." It is also suggested that the translator and the original author are two different kinds of people. But in order to convey the 'spirit' of the original in the translation, the translator's genius needs to reach a certain tacit understanding with this 'spirit'. He advocates the preservation of exoticism in translation, opposes naturalisation, the arbitrary distortion of the face of the original work, the overwhelming of the original author with the personality of the translator's style, the emphasis on both likeness and likeness, etc. However, while recognising the importance of reproducing the poetic form of the original work in translation, Belinsky also took into account the state of development of Russian literature in translation. This also led him to look favourably on translating good poetry in prose, seeing such translations as a form of transition for Russian readers to the treasures of world literature.

Although Belinsky wrote little about literary translation, his theoretical views contain the kernel of the realist principles of translation proposed by contemporary Soviet literary translators. His ideas on translation had a very profound influence on the formation of translation theory in the Soviet period. Corrected by--Yin Yuan (talk) 13:56, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

4.Conclusion

Translation has demonstrated its importance in social activity since antiquity, yet it was only in the twentieth century that it became a widely followed professional discipline. This article reviews Russian translation activity and translation thought in pre-Soviet Russia, exploring its development before the formation of a theoretical system. Throughout the history of translation, Russian scholars have contributed greatly to the development of translation literature in the world. Through combing through the history of Russian translation, we learn that the translation ideas of a number of outstanding writers, though not theoretical, have had an unmistakable impact on later generations. When discussing the translation ideas of 19th-century writers, we are inspired to insist on the principle that "closeness to the original is not a matter of conveying the literal meaning of the original, but of conveying the spirit of the original", emphasizing the ideological content and literary value of the translation, that the translation should serve the readers, and that the translation should be people-oriented. These ideas influenced, to a greater or lesser extent, the formation of translation theory in the Soviet period. Therefore, the study of the history of translation in pre-Soviet Russia is not only conducive to sorting out Russian translation ideas Russian learners can better understand the characteristics of their translations when translating and improve the accuracy of their translations.--Zhang Yiran (talk) 14:44, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Translation has played its important role in the social activities since antiquity, yet it was until in the twentieth century that it became a widely followed professional discipline. This paper reviews Russian translators and translation thoughts in pre-Soviet Russia, exploring its development before the formation of a theoretical system. Throughout the history of translation, Russian scholars have contributed greatly to the development of translation literature in the world. By combing through the history of Russian translation, we learn that the translation ideas of a number of outstanding writers, though not very theoretical, have had an unmistakable impact on later generations. When discussing the translation ideas of 19th-century writers, we are inspired to insist on the principle that "closeness to the original is not a matter of conveying the literal meaning of the original, but of conveying the spirit of the original", emphasizing the ideological content and literary value of the translation that the translation should serve the readers, and that the translation should be people-oriented. These ideas influenced, to a greater or lesser extent, the formation of translation theory in the Soviet period. Therefore, the study of the history of translation in pre-Soviet Russia not only is conducive to sorting out Russian translation ideas, but also make Russian learners better understand the characteristics of their translations when translating and improving the accuracy of their translations. Corrected by--Yin Yuan (talk) 14:02, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

5.References

1.Wu, Keli 吴克礼（2006）.俄苏翻译理论流派综述 The Translation Methods and Studies in USSR. 上海外语教育出版社 Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.

2.Guo Lin 郭琳（2006）.俄罗斯语言学派翻译理论若干问题研究[D] A Study of Some Problems of Translation Theory of the Russian School of Philology.首都师范大学 Capital Normal University.

3.Feng Xin 冯欣（2009）. 俄罗斯翻译理论史及其影响研究[D] A study of the history of Russian translation theory and its influence.上海外国语大学 Shanghai International Studies University.

4.Wang，Yulun；Jiang,Wanzhu 王育伦,姜万砫（1989).别林斯基论文学翻译[J] Belinsky on Literary Translation .中国翻译 Chinese translators Journal ,(03):53-55.

5.Li Zheng, Fan Min 李铮,范敏（2010）. 普希金与翻译[J] Pushkin and Translation. 现代交际 Modern Intercourse Journal,(05):69.

Difference between revisions of "Hist Trans Theo EN 5"