The Foregrounding Function of Praesens Historicum in Russian Translated Adventure Narratives (20th Century)

Anastasia V. Urzha

The Foregrounding Function of Praesens Historicum in Russian Translated Adventure Narratives (20th Century)

Anastasia V. Urzha

Abstract

This research focuses on the functioning of praesens historicum forms which Russian translators use to substitute for English narrative forms referring to past events. The study applies the Theory of Grounding and Russian Communicative Functional Grammar to the comparative discourse analysis of English-language adventure stories and novels created in the 19th and 20th centuries and their Russian translations. The Theory of Grounding is still not widely used in Russian translation studies, nor have its concepts and fruitful ideas been related to the achievements of Russian Narratology and Functional Grammar. This article presents an attempt to find a common basis in these academic traditions as they relate to discourse analysis and to describe the role of praesens historicum forms in Russian translated adventure narratives. The corpus includes 22 original texts and 72 Russian translations, and the case study involves six Russian translations of The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, focusing on the translation made by Korney Chukovsky, who employed historic present more often than in other translations of the novel. It is shown that the translation strategy of substituting the original English-language past forms with Russian present forms is realized in foregrounded and focalized segments of the text, giving them additional saliency. This strategy relates the use of historic present to the functions of deictic words and words denoting visual or audial perception, locating the deictic center of the narrative in the spacetime of the events and allowing the reader to join the focalizing WHO (a narrator or a hero). Translations that regularly mark the foreground through the use of the historic present and accompanying lexical-grammatical means are often addressed to young readers.

Keywords

historic present; foregrounding; adventure narrative; translation; deictic center; focalization

Full Text:

PDF

References

Bassnett S., Translation Studies, New York, London, 2002.

Bjorling F., “As Time Goes by. . . Tentative Notes on Present Tense Narration in Contemporary Fiction,” in: K. Grelz, S. Witt, eds., Telling Forms. Essays in Honour of Peter Alberg Jensen, Stockholm, 2004.

Bondarko A. V., Vid i vremia russkogo glagola (znachenie i upotreblenie), Moscow, 1971.

Brecht R., “The Aspectual Properties of Achievements in Russian,” in: M. Flier, R. Brecht, eds., Issues in Russian Morphosyntax (= UCLA Slavic Studies, 11), Columbus, 1985, 9–34.

Brinton L., “The Historical Present in Charlotte Brontë’s Novels: Some Discourse Functions,” Style, 26/2, 1992, 221–244.

Bulygina T. V., Shmelev A. D., Iazykovaia kontseptualizatsiia mira (na materiale russkoi grammatiki), Moscow, 1997.

Chvany C., “Background Perfectives and Plot Line Imperfectives: Toward a Theory of Grounding in Text,” in: M. Flier, A. Timberlake, eds., The Scope of Slavic Aspect (= UCLA Slavic Studies, 12), Columbus, 1985, 247–273.

Chvany C., “Foregrounding, ‘Transitivity,’ Saliency (in Sequential and Non-sequential Prose),” Essays in Poetics, 10/2, 1985, 1–27.

Chvany C., “Verbal Aspect, Discourse Saliency, and the So-called ‘Perfect of Result’ in Modern Russian,” in: N. Thelin, ed., Verbal Aspect in Discourse, Amsterdam, Philadelphia, 1990, 213–235.

Duchan J., Bruder G., Hewitt L., eds., Deixis in Narrative: A Cognitive Science Perspective, Hillsdale, NJ, 1995.

Fleischman S., “Discourse Functions of Tense-Aspect Oppositions in Narrative: Toward a Theory of Grounding,” Linguistics, 23, 1985, 851–882.

Fleischman S., Tense and Narrativity. From Medieval Performance to Modern Fiction, Austin, 1990.

Hill H., “The Composition and the Structure of Tom Sawyer,” American Literature, 32/4, 1961, 379–392.

Hopper P., Thomson S. A., “Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse,” Language, 56/2, 1980, 251–299.

Huddleston R., Pullum G. K., The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language, Cambridge, 2002.

Iriskhanova O. K., Igry fokusa v iazyke. Semantika, sintaksis i pragmatika defokusirovaniia, Moscow, 2014.

Jakobson R. O., “Shifters, Verbal Categories, and the Russian Verb,” in: B. A. Uspenskij, ed., Printsipy tipologicheskogo analiza iazykov razlichnogo stroia, Moscow, 1972, 95–113.

Koyama N., “Grounding and Deixis: A Comprehensive Approach to the Grounding Phenomenon in Japanese Narrative,” Taiwan Journal of Linguistics, 2/1, 2004, 1–44.

Labov W., Waletzky J., “Narrative Analysis: Oral Versions of Personal Experience,” in: J. Helm, ed., Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts, Seattle, 1967, 12–44.

Maslov Yu. S., Ocherki po aspektologii, Leningrad, 1984.

Paducheva E. V., Semanticheskie issledovaniia, Moscow, 1996.

Pentkovskaya T. V., “The Present Historical in the Chud Redaction of the New Testament,” Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 9. Philology, 4, 2008, 9–29.

Peshkovsky A. M., Russkii sintaksis v nauchnom osveshchenii, 3rd ed., Moscow, 1927.

Petrukhina E. V., Russkii glagol: kategorii vida i vremeni v kontekste sovremennykh lingvisticheskikh issledovanii, Moscow, 2009.

Powers L., “The Sweet Success of Twain’s Tom,” The Dalhousie Review, 53/2, 1973, 310–324.

Royster J. F., Thompson S., Guide to Composition, Chicago, 1919.

Rosenthal D. E., Telenkova M. A., Slovarʹ-spravochnik lingvisticheskikh terminov, Moscow, 1976.

Segal E., “Narrative Comprehension and the Role of Deictic Shift Theory,” in: J. Duchan, G. Bruder, L. Hewitt, eds., Deixis in Narrative: A Cognitive Science Perspective, Hillsdale, NJ, 1995, 3–18.

Shmeleva T. V., “Smyslovaia organizatsiia predlozheniia i problema modalʹnosti,” in: K. V. Gorshkova, E. V. Klobukov, eds., Aktualʹnye problemy russkogo sintaksisa, Moscow, 1984, 78–100.

Urzha A. V., Russkii perevodnoi khudozhestvennyi tekst s pozitsii kommunikativnoi grammatiki, Moscow, 2009.

Urzha A. V., “Application of the Theory of Grounding in the Study of Syntax and Style of Russian Translations of Prose Texts,” Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 9. Philology, 6, 2012, 197–212.

Urzha A. V., “K voprosu o funktsiiakh form nastoiashchego vremeni v sovremennom russkom narrative,” in: Russkii iazyk i kulʹtura v sovremennom obrazovatelʹnom prostranstve, Moscow, 2014, 71–73.

Urzha A. V., “Perceptivisation as an Element of the Interpreter’s Tactics,” Humanitarian Vector. Series History, Political Sciences, 4 (40), 2014, 57–62.

Uspenskij B. A., Poetika kompozitsii (struktura khudozhestvennogo teksta i tipologiia kompozitsionnoi formy), Moscow, 1970.

Venuti L., The Translator’s Invisibility: A History of Translation, London, New York, 1995.

Vinogradov V. V. “Stilʹ ‘Pikovoi damy’,” in: Yu. G. Oksman, ed., Pushkin: Vremennik Pushkinskoi komissii, 2, Moscow, Leningrad, 1936, 74–147.

Vinogradov V. V., Russkii iazyk. Grammaticheskoe uchenie o slove, Moscow, Leningrad, 1947.

Vinogradov V. V., Istrina E. S., eds., Grammatika russkogo iazyka, 2, Moscow, 1954.

Zalizniak Anna A., Shmelev A. D., Vvedenie v russkuiu aspektologiiu, Moscow, 2000.

Zolotova G. A., Onipenko N. K., Sidorova M. Yu., Kommunikativnaia grammatika russkogo iazyka, Moscow, 1998.

Refbacks

There are currently no refbacks.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Username
Password
Remember me