Iconicity and Stylistics in Literary Translation:
An Investigation of Translation Strategies in
German and Dutch Translations of Gregory
Maguire’s Wicked (1995)
Helena van Veen
University of Amsterdam
Graduate School of Humanities
Field of Studies: MA Linguistics of European Languages: Specialization English
Number of Words: 20124
Student number: 10069585
Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Olga Fischer
Second reader: Dr. Eric Metz
Date: 17-07-2015
Abstract
In translation theory, literary texts are often perceived as the most difficult type of text to
translate due to its complexity (Westerweel and D’haen, 1990; Tabakowska, 2003). Many
translation theorists argue that a literary translation, especially a translation of poetry, is
impossible and therefore a useless venture. As a result, literary translation is often ignored in
translation theories. However, precisely the complexity of such texts makes it interesting to
investigate what options translators have, and what choices they make in literary translations;
after all, by making choices in translation distinctly different texts can be created (Wray and
Bloomer, 2012). For this reason, this thesis will investigate how the iconic features and stylistic
categories present in Gregory Maguire’s novel Wicked (1995) are translated into German and
Dutch. It aims to discover how the translators have preserved or altered the iconicity and
stylistics of the source text, and what strategies they have employed. The investigation of what
translation options translators can choose from, and the resulting strategies, can shed some light
on the translation process and its results. After all, a translation is the result of choices made by a
translator, and therefore it is a subjective process. In a sense, the translator operates as an author.
Following the methodology from Leech & Short (1981) and Van den Broeck (1985), this thesis
will carry out a comparative analysis between five passages of the English source text and the
German and Dutch target texts. The target texts will be compared to the source text and the
‘adequate translation text’ (Van den Broeck, 1985). Seven possible outcomes can result from the
translations. Of course, multiple outcomes can occur simultaneously. These seven outcomes are:
1. Iconicity is preserved.
2. Iconicity is preserved but expressed by different iconic means in the same clause.
3. Iconicity shifted to another clause.
4. One iconic feature is preserved resulting in the loss of another iconic feature.
5. Iconicity is preserved but meaning has been subtly or severely altered.
6. Iconicity lost.
7. Iconicity added by the translator where there is no iconicity in the source text.
The results from the analyses will be quantified, because quantification will ensure an objective
conclusion regarding the employed translation strategies. First of all, from the results of the
quantitative analysis it can be concluded how many iconic features have been preserved, altered,
lost or added. Secondly, the results will show how the changes have affected the meaning and
style of the source text. Finally, this method will allow fairly objective judgments of the
~2~
translations. This thesis concludes that Möhring’s translation of Wicked (1995) is more creative
and free, resulting in the preservation of more iconic features than Lenting’s Dutch translation. It
can be concluded that the latter adhered to a literal translation strategy. As a result, much of
Maguire’s style markers and creativity have been lost in the Dutch translation, while these have
been preserved in the German translation. In addition, the literal strategy sometimes resulted in
awkward translations. Therefore this thesis concludes that Möhring’s German target text is more
adequate than Lenting’s Dutch target text as the German text has preserved a higher level of
literary style markers than the Dutch text.
~3~
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................... 2
1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 5
2.
Theoretical Background: Iconicity and Translation ........................................................................ 7
2.1
Semiotics, Iconicity and Stylistics .............................................................................................. 7
2.2
Categories of Style Markers ...................................................................................................... 10
2.3
Translation Studies: The Role of Translation, Translation Issues, Translation Theories
and Translation Criticism ......................................................................................................... 13
3.
4.
5.
Data and Method ............................................................................................................................... 19
3.1
Material Selection ....................................................................................................................... 19
3.2
Procedure .................................................................................................................................... 20
3.3
Scope ........................................................................................................................................... 21
Comparative Analysis of Passages from Wicked in Source and Target Languages................... 23
4.1
Passage One: A Nursery Rhyme ............................................................................................. 23
4.2
Passage Two: Elphaba’s Birth .................................................................................................. 28
4.3
Passage Three: Another Nursery Rhyme ............................................................................... 35
4.4
Passage Four: Horrible Morrible ............................................................................................. 40
4.5
Passage Five: In the Vinkus ..................................................................................................... 47
Discussion and Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 54
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................ 58
~4~
1. Introduction
In translation theory, literary texts are often perceived as the most difficult type of text to
translate due to its complexity (Westerweel and D’haen, 1990; Tabakowska, 2003). Many
translation theorists such as Lefevere argue that a literary translation, especially a translation of
poetry, is ‘‘doomed to failure from the start’’ (qtd. in Westerweel and D’haen, 1990, p. 293). For
this reason, literary translation is often ignored in translation theories. However, precisely the
complexity of literary texts makes it interesting to investigate what options translators have, and
what choices they make in literary translations; after all, distinctly different texts can be created by
making choices in translation (Wray and Bloomer, 2012). Complexity in literary texts often arises
from intentional iconicity; while there is a universal aspect to iconicity, its linguistic realizations in
different languages are not (see section 2.1). Therefore, following Susan Bassnett (2014), this
thesis will explore what choices have been made in the translation of intentional iconicity, and
how these choices affect the meaning and form of the text. Thus the role of the translator will be
foregrounded since his or her role is after all paramount as the translator also constructs the
meaning of a text. As a result, this thesis will not focus on the limits of translation or even
untranslatability of literary texts. The analysis of the translations will be done according to Van
den Broeck’s translation criticism model (1985) as this model focuses on objective and systematic
analyses of translations.
The object of investigation will be Gregory Maguire’s hit novel Wicked (1995) and its
Dutch and German translations. This novel was chosen for its high level of iconic features;
Wicked contains many style markers such as rhyme, meter, sound symbolism and metaphor. The
blurbs in the 2007 edition of the original English work (Maguire, 2007) already indicate that the
novel contains much iconicity; these blurbs describe the novel as a ‘‘staggering feat of wordcraft’’,
‘‘elaborately descriptive’’, ‘‘a fantasy novel that reads like Graham Greene at his best’’ and
‘‘Maguire’s writing is pure poetry’’. Moreover, no articles have been written yet about iconicity in,
or translations of, Wicked, and thus the analyses presented in this thesis may contribute to the
fields of both translation studies and iconicity.
The research question of this thesis is the following:
How are foregrounded iconic features preserved, lost, added or changed in the
Dutch and German translations of Gregory Maguire’s Wicked (1995) and what
strategies have been employed by the translators?
~5~
The aim of this thesis is to show, by means of close analysis, what solutions are chosen by the
translators and how these choices result into distinctly different target texts. These systematic
comparative analyses between target texts and source text will allow for a value judgment of the
quality of the translations with regards to iconicity and style markers.
As briefly mentioned before, the focus of this thesis will be the so-called intentional or
‘‘goal-oriented’’ (Tabakowska, 2003, p. 364) iconicity; that is, iconicity that has been used
intentionally by the author to achieve a ‘‘particular communicative purpose’’ (Tabakowska, 2003,
p. 364), and which thus adds meaning to the text. The motivation for this is twofold. Firstly,
intentional iconicity is what makes a text literary; after all, unintentional or grammaticalized
iconicity is embedded in, and an inevitable part of, our language (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980;
Fischer and Nänny, 2001), and thus not considered innovative nor is it foregrounded. That is
why conventional iconicity often goes unnoticed. Secondly, Tabakowska (2003) argues that
intentional iconicity causes most problems in translation. Precisely for this reason it offers
interesting material for analysis. Furthermore, the analyses of intentional iconicity will lead to a
‘‘fuller understanding and appreciation of the writer’s [and translator’s] artistic achievement’’
(Leech and Short, 1981, p. 1).
In section 2.1 I will present a literature review of semiotics and iconicity. Section 2.2
discusses various categories of style markers, and section 2.3 will be concerned with general
translation theories and literary translation theories. This will provide the theoretical framework
from which my investigation will depart. In section 3, I will explain the chosen method and
passages. Then in subsequent sections I will analyze five passages from the novel Wicked and
compare it to its German and Dutch translations to investigate what choices have been made by
both translators regarding iconic features and style markers.
~6~
2. Theoretical Background: Iconicity and Translation
Section 2.1 briefly discusses semiotics as outlined by Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders
Peirce, who are well-known pioneers in the field of semiotics. It is important to start the literature
review with semiotics, because the study of iconicity is embedded in the study of signs. Next, a
working definition of iconicity will be outlined before providing a more in-depth review on types
of iconicity and stylistic categories in section 2.2. As mentioned in the introduction, the working
definition of iconicity will concern foregrounded iconicity because this type of iconicity is not yet
conventionalized. The stylistic categories that will be discussed are alliteration, assonance, endrhyme, sound symbolism, meter, and metaphor. Subsequently, in section 2.3 translation theories
and translation problems in general as discussed by D’haen (2012), Bassnett (2014), and Nord
(1997) will receive attention. While these theories do not specifically focus on the translation of
literary texts, they are nevertheless useful to bear in mind when analyzing the literary translation
process. The final part of section 2.3 will focus on literary translation and Van den Broeck’s
model for translation criticism specifically.
2.1
Semiotics, Iconicity and Stylistics
Since Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Peirce are often considered to be the founding
fathers of theories concerning semiotics and semiology (Silverman, 1983), I will briefly focus on
those two scholars first. The terms semiology and semiotics come from the Greek semeion, which
translates into ‘sign’. Both semiology and semiotics are sciences of signs (Cuddon, 1991).
Semiology concerns the study of signs in general and semiotics studies sign systems in language
(Cuddon, 1991). Saussure describes language as a ‘‘system of signs that express ideas’’ (Silverman,
1983, p. 4).
According to Saussure a sign consists of a so-called ‘signifier’ and ‘signified’ (Silverman,
1983; Wurth & Rigney, 2008). Wurth and Rigney explain that the signifier itself is void of
meaning (2008). That is, the sounds that we recognize as rose do not necessarily mean ‘rose’. This
relationship is arbitrary and the sounds on their own mean nothing unless in relation to the
concept ‘rose’; the relationship between signifier and signified is a cultural convention. Thus
signification is always subjective since it depends on, and cannot be isolated from, humans. As an
inevitable result, signification is also dependent on cultural systems; signification differs per
culture and per language.
~7~
Thus the ‘signified’ carries meaning whereas the signifier does not (Wurth & Rigney,
2008). Silverman (1983) explains this concept in a similar way: she writes that the signifier is the
carrier of a meaningful form and that the signified is the concept evoked by that form. Moreover,
‘‘the identity of a given signifier […] is established through the ways in which it differs from all
other signifiers or signifieds within the same system’’ (Silverman, 1983, p. 7). In other words,
meaning is carried through difference; signs are contrastive.
Peirce, however, ‘‘increases the number of signifying relationships over those charted by
Saussure’’ (Silverman, 1983, p. 4). That is, Peirce distinguishes between three types of signs: the
icon, index and symbol. The first type of sign, the icon, closely resembles the signified
(Silverman, 1983; Fischer and Nänny, 2006); this means that icons are motivated by the object in
the world that they represent. For this reason, icons are non-arbitrary (Fischer and Nänny, 2001).
Icons are further divided into three subcategories: images, diagrams and metaphors (Hiraga,
1994). Firstly, the image mimics the signified by sharing some qualities. Onomatopoeia is an
example of an image. Secondly, diagrams ‘‘exhibit a structure analogous to the structure of their
object [or] show relations of the parts of object by analogous relations in their own parts’’
(Hiraga, 1994, p. 7). An example of a diagram would be the phrase ‘‘veni, vide, vici’’ (Fischer and
Nänny, 2006, p. 462). I will focus more on the third type, the metaphor, later on so let it suffice
to mention here that metaphors are based on similarity in association rather than a direct iconic
relation (Hiraga, 1994; Fischer and Nänny, 2006). Yet, metaphors can also be diagrammatic and it
is not always clear how to categorize a metaphor.
The second type of sign is the indexical sign. Indexical signs are also motivated by the
signified, however not by resemblance but by relations of causation or contiguity (Silverman,
1983). In other words, the signifier has a connection to the signified and is therefore also nonarbitrary; the relationships of the indexical signs resemble the relationships of the signifieds.
Peirce gives a weathervane as an example of an index; it is an index because it resembles the
relationship between wind and direction (Silverman, 1983). However, it is not always easy to
separate indices from images.
Finally, the last type of sign is the symbol. Symbols are completely arbitrary, because there
is no logical connection between the signifier and signified. Peirce defines a symbol as a sign
‘‘which refers to the Object that it denotes by virtue of a law, usually an association of general
ideas, which operates to cause the Symbol to be interpreted as referring to that Object’’ (qtd. in
Silverman, 1983, p. 20). Thus, a symbolic sign relies completely on conventions as the signifier is
not motivated by the signified in some way. Thus Peirce contradicts Saussure’s assertion that all
signs are arbitrary; in Peirce’s theory, only the symbol is fully arbitrary.
~8~
Additionally, a distinction must be made between so-called endophoric and exophoric
iconicity. Exophoric iconicity concerns the iconicity as discussed so far; the term indicates the
type of signs that refers to something in the outside world (Fischer and Nänny, 2006).
Endophoric iconicity, conversely, concerns iconic relationships within a text. Endophoric signs
mimic other signs within a text, and as a result this type of iconicity is solely intralinguistic
(Fischer and Nänny, 2006). Endophoric iconicity then can be seen as a type of repetition, and it is
often used to achieve a certain effect; thus it is often intentional and as such it adds meaning to
the text. Rhyme is an example of endophoric iconicity.
As becomes comprehensible from Saussure and Peirce, iconicity is not just limited to
literary texts; rather iconicity is ‘‘basic to all human beings’’, even a ‘‘basic principle of live
speech’’ (Fischer and Nänny, 2001, p. 4). In fact, it is used by all of us every day. However, most
of this ‘everyday’ iconicity is completely conventional and unintentionally used. This becomes
apparent from the book Metaphors We Live By (1980) written by Lakoff and Johnson.
Conventional iconicity has undergone lexicalization and grammaticalization resulting in the sign
becoming opaque. Consequently, conventional iconicity often goes unnoticed.
As mentioned in the introduction, the iconicity encountered in literary texts are often
cases of ‘‘goal-oriented’’ (Tabakowska, 2003, p. 364) iconicity; iconicity intentionally used to add
meaning to the text. This type of iconicity is foregrounded because it is often unconventional,
and thus it adds something special and new. Foregrounding entails ‘‘the use of devices and
techniques which ‘push’ the act of expression into the foreground so that language draws
attention to itself. This draws attention, in turn to the way that literary language represents
reality’’ (Cuddon, 1991, p. 325). Only intentional iconicity is relevant to the analysis of literary
texts since iconicity in literary texts is semantically motivated (Fischer and Nänny, 2006).
Yet, the term ‘intentional’ iconicity is a problematic one since it suggests that all iconicity
encountered in a literary text has been inserted on purpose by the author. This, naturally, is
impossible to ascertain. It is therefore preferable to use the terms ‘foregrounded’ iconic features
or ‘style markers’ as proposed by Leech and Short (1981) in their book Style in Fiction: A Linguistic
Introduction to English Fictional Prose. They define foregrounding as the ‘‘aesthetic exploitation of
language [taking] the form of surprising a reader into fresh awareness of, and sensitivity to, the
linguistic medium which is normally taken for granted as an ‘automized’ background of
communication’’ (Leech and Short, 1981, p. 28); in other words, iconic features are foregrounded
when they catch the reader’s eye and when they make the reader aware of the fact that the
language of the text is creative and unconventional. Style markers are those salient features of a
text which call for a closer study (Leech and Short, 1981).
~9~
While these definitions are similar to one another, and to the definition of intentional
iconicity, these terms are less suggestive. Moreover, the terms foregrounded iconic features and
style markers emphasize the role of the reader instead of the role of the author, which is more
fruitful for the analysis of literary texts in this thesis as well. After all, I am a reader myself who
can only make an interpretation of those features that were most striking to me. The terms
foregrounded iconicity and style markers allow iconic features to be analyzed which may not have
been intentionally included by the author, but which are nevertheless foregrounded. Thus I
define intentional iconicity as foregrounded iconicity as noticed by the reader. I will use these
terms interchangeably from now on.
Leech and Short use the term ‘foregrounding’ in relation to ‘stylistics’. Stylistics concerns
the linguistic study of style (Leech and Short, 1981), and its operations partly overlap with the
procedures of this research as ‘‘literary stylistics has, implicitly or explicitly, the goal of explaining
the relation between language and artistic function’’ (Leech and Short, 1981, p. 13). Thus the
study of stylistics entails the study of intentional iconicity as well. Stylistics focuses on identifying
stylistic categories, which is also an aspect of this thesis.
2.2
Categories of Style Markers
In subsequent paragraphs, the stylistic categories, and thus iconic features, relevant to this study
will be discussed; this serves as a checklist for the analysis of the passages. This method will be
explained more thoroughly in section 3.2. Categories of style markers deemed relevant are
alliteration, assonance, end-rhyme, sound symbolism, meter, and metaphor. Regarding these
categories, it is also important to note, and keep in mind, that while these underlying forms of
exophoric iconicity are to some extent universal, their realizations in different languages are not
(Tabakowska, 2003); exactly this makes it interesting to look at these forms of iconicity in
multiple languages, especially translations.
The first category of style markers I will discuss is alliteration, which comes from Latin
and means ‘‘repeating and playing upon the same letter’’ (Cuddon, 1991, p. 23). Alliteration
entails that consonants, mostly in word initial position, are repeated. This repetition of
consonants is used to achieve a special effect (Cuddon, 1991). While this stylistic category is
mostly used in poetry, it is sometimes employed in prose as well. The second category assonance
entails the repetition of vowels. This is also referred to as vocalic rhyme (Cuddon, 1991).
Assonance and alliteration can have euphonic effects but they may also create dissonance.
Euphony comes from Greek and literally means ‘‘sweetness of sound’’ and it ‘‘denotes pleasing
~ 10 ~
mellifluous sounds, usually produced by long vowels rather than consonants; though liquid
consonants can be euphonious’’ (Cuddon, 1991, p. 292). Dissonance is understood to be the
‘‘arrangement of cacophonous sounds in words, or rhythmical patterns, for a particular effect’’
(Cuddon, 1991, p. 231). Alliteration and assonance are considered to be diagrams rather than
images because ‘‘sound repetition foregrounds the phonetic link between two signs thereby
foregrounding also a semantic link’’ (Fischer and Nänny, 2006, p. 465); thus, alliteration and
assonance function on a diagrammatic level, just like rhyme and meter.
The third category of style markers is end-rhyme. End-rhyme usually operates in a rhyme
scheme. A rhyme scheme can be defined as an ‘‘abstract pattern of end-rhymes’’ (Cuddon, 1991,
p. 753). The distinction between masculine and feminine rhyme is important as well with regard
to end-rhyme. Cuddon defines masculine rhyme as a ‘‘single monosyllabic rhyme, like thorn/scorn
at the end of a line’’ (1991, p.497). Feminine rhyme then is a type of rhyme which entails the use
of two or more syllables in the rhyming words. Related to feminine rhyme is the notion of
feminine ending, which can be defined as ‘‘an extra unstressed syllable at the end of a line of
verse’’ (Cuddon, 1991, p. 314).
The fourth category is sound symbolism. The use of sound repetition or single sounds
can also play a symbolic role; that is, sounds are associated with, and reinforce, certain meanings.
Within sound symbolism Andreas Fischer (1999) distinguishes between three types: auditory,
articulatory and associative iconicity. First, auditory sound symbolism can be defined as ‘‘speech
sounds representing non-speech sounds or noises’’ (A. Fischer, 1999, p. 123); in other words, the
sounds imitate the signified in some respect. The terms onomatopoeia and auditory sound
symbolism can thus be seen as synonyms since onomatopoeia is a style marker in which words
imitate sounds (Cuddon, 1991). An example of onomatopoeia is ‘‘And murmuring of
innumerable bees’’ (Vendler, 2010, p. 676). Here, the repetition of the nasals and the vowels [ɜː],
[ə] and [u] create sounds close to the actual humming of bees. Fischer also distinguishes between
non-lexical and lexical onomatopoeia. Fischer gives shshsh which represents wind noise as an
example of non-lexical onomatopoeia while murmuring would be an example of lexical
onomatopoeia.
Secondly, articulatory sound symbolism means that the articulatory features of a sound
turn the particular sound in an image for something. For example, the vowel /i/ in English
symbolizes small size due to the high tongue position during the production of the sound (A.
Fischer, 1999). The space between tongue and palate is small and therefore the sound can be
associated with smallness. Finally, associative iconicity is not based on auditory resemblance, yet
~ 11 ~
certain sounds are nevertheless ‘‘associated, however vaguely, with certain meanings’’ (A. Fischer,
1999, p. 130). Liquids, for example, are associated with fluidity, continuation and softness.
While, just like iconicity, the phenomenon sound symbolism is universal, again the
realizations differ per language since sound symbolism inevitably depends on the phonological
inventories of each individual language. For example, the onomatopoeic representation of a
barking dog1 is the same in English, Dutch and German (woof, woef and Wuff respectively) but the
onomatopoeic representation of the crowing of a rooster differs: while cock-a-doodle-doo is
commonly used in English, kukeleku and Kikeriki are the Dutch and German equivalents.
The fifth category is meter, another well-known aspect of literary texts. The term meter
refers to the arrangement of stressed and unstressed syllables called feet in a line of verse. Meter
is mostly used in poetry, but it can also be employed in prose. Common patterns in the English
language are iambic (unstressed-stressed), trochaic (stressed-unstressed), anapestic (unstressedunstressed-stressed), dactylic (stressed-unstressed-unstressed), spondaic (stressed-stressed), and
paeonic (stressed-unstressed-unstressed-unstressed). These feet establish either a rising or a
falling rhythm in a poem. Meter can be used to create meaning or emphasis in combination with
other aspects of the poem or text.
Finally, the last stylistic category is the metaphor. The simplest definition of a metaphor is
that it draws a comparison without ‘like’ or ‘as’ (Vendler, 2010). Thus a metaphor associates one
thing with another. It is a ‘‘figure of speech that implies comparison between two unlike entities,
as distinguished from simile, an explicit comparison signaled by the words ‘like’ or ‘as’ ’’(Kövecses,
2002, p.vii). In other words, metaphors partially map one conceptual domain in terms of another
conceptual domain (Kövecses, 2002). While the basis of a metaphor is obviously similarity,
difference is also important because similarity is only mapped partially. The domains of a
metaphor are called ‘source’ and ‘target’, and thus we try to understand the target domain by
drawing a comparison to the source domain.
Source domains are typically more concrete and target domains tend to be rather abstract
(Kövecses, 2002). According to Kövecses (2002) the most commonly used source domains are
the human body, health and illness, animals, plants, buildings and construction, machines, money,
food, heat and cold, light and darkness, forces, and movement and direction. Frequently used
input for target domains are emotions, desires, morality, thought, society, politics, economy,
human relationships, communication, time, life and death, religion, and events and action.
Naturally, metaphors are embedded in culture and thus culture ‘‘determines the source domains
of metaphor’’ (Hanks and Giora, 2012, p. 5). Metaphors are omnipresent in thought, reasoning,
1
It is also striking that in all three languages the verb starts with /b/: to bark, blaffen and bellen.
~ 12 ~
everyday speech and in ‘‘all kinds of writing’’ (Hanks and Giora, 2012). Yet, as mentioned before,
I will focus only on those metaphors that are deliberately and consciously used for artistic and
rhetorical purposes (Kövecses, 2002); that is, metaphors that aim to ‘‘appeal to the senses, to
interest, to clarify ‘graphically’, to please, to delight, to surprise’’ (Dickins, 2005).
2.3
Translation Studies: The Role of Translation, Translation Issues,
Translation Theories and Translation Criticism
This section starts with the discussion of the role and the use of (literary) translation, before
moving on to general difficulties regarding the process of translation. Next, various influential
theories in the field of Translation Studies will receive attention. In subsequent paragraphs
theories and difficulties regarding literary theories will be treated. In section 5 these theories will
be used to analyze the strategies employed by the translators of Wicked. Finally, this section will
end with the discussion of Van den Broeck’s model for literary translation criticism. This model
will be used for the analysis of the translations in sections 4 and 5.
Literary translation, despite its shortcomings, is an indispensable and necessary tool for
the spread of literature across the globe (D’haen, 2012). However, for a long time, working with
translations was seen as ‘‘always a poor choice’’ (D’haen, 2012, p.118), and translations were only
used as a last resort (Bermann, 2009). This view was especially dominant in the field of
Comparative Literature. These negative judgments of translations emerged due to the fact that
there is always something lost in translation. However, nowadays Comparative Literature and
Translation Studies move more and more away from the emphasis on untranslatability and the
limits of translation towards a more positive attitude. The consent is that there is much to be
gained from using translations since translations enable us to read much more from literatures all
over the world. Moreover, translated literary works ‘‘can encourage a deeper understanding of
our world and, with this, an ability to imagine (and re-imagine) our varied human situations’’
(Bermann, 2009, p. 432).
As I mentioned before, the status of translation has been low due to the impossibility of
full-equivalence. Bassnett (2014) argues that scholars can finally focus on what can be gained by
translation when it is accepted that full equivalence between two languages can never be
achieved. Translation can enrich the target culture or it can even enrich the source text (Bassnett,
2012). Moreover, since Barthes’ notion of the ‘death of the author’ the role of the reader has
been emphasized; the reader makes the text through his or her interpretation. There is no longer
such a thing as the one correct meaning of a text (Bassnett, 2012). As a result, translation has
~ 13 ~
become more accepted since readers are also considered to be translators and interpreters of the
text. For this reason, this thesis will focus first on the interpretation of the translators before
rendering a judgment of these translations based on comparative analysis and my own
interpretation.
Yet, the translation of texts, both general and of literary works, is no mean feat. This is
due to the fact that ‘‘no two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as
representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct
worlds, not merely the same world with different labels attached’’ (Edward Sapir qtd. in Bassnett,
2014, p. 24). Exactly this is the reason why translating is such a problematic venture; translation
entails more than just a linguistic transfer of ‘‘one set of language signs into another set of
language signs’’ (Bassnett, 2014, p. 24). Translation thus transcends the purely linguistic.
Knowledge of extra-linguistic elements is also paramount for understanding the source text,
which is produced in a different world so to say. Thus, translation has to been seen as an
intercultural action (Nord, 1997). As a result, a translator must be ‘‘bicultural as well as bilingual’’
(Westerweel and D’haen, 1990, p. 90). This also goes for a translator who works with languages
which are culturally closely related such as English, Dutch and German. Bassnett argues that
‘‘writing does not happen in a vacuum, it happens in a context and the process of translating texts
from one cultural system into another is not a neutral, innocent, transparent activity. Translation
is instead a highly charged, transgressive activity’’ (qtd. in D’haen, 2012, p. 126). Indeed, choices
made by the translator inevitably change the source text in some way(s) in order to adapt the text
to the receiving culture and language. As such, the translator has a powerful and influential role.
There are various translation theories in the field of Translation Studies that deal with
translation strategies. I will focus on the ones most relevant for this thesis. Firstly, Roman
Jakobson discerns three types of translations (Bassnett, 2012): intralingual translation, interlingual
translation, and intersemiotic translation. The first signifies rewording, while the second type
means ‘‘an interpretation of verbal signs by means of some other language’’ (Bassnett, 2012,
p.25). The third type consists of ‘‘an interpretation of verbal signs by means of signs of nonverbal
sign systems’’ (Bassnett, 2012, p.25). Jakobson, just like Bassnett, stresses that in none of these
categories full equivalence can be achieved. The best a translator can do is analyze the intention
of the source text, transfer it and then restructure it into the target language. Thus, the emphasis
should not be on literal translation per se, but rather the ‘‘task of the translator consists in finding
the intended effect upon the language into which he is translating which produces in it the echo
of the original’’ (D’haen, 2012, p.121).
~ 14 ~
This is called semiotic transformation, a term coined by Ludskanov, which is defined as
follows: ‘‘semiotic transformations are the replacements of the signs encoding a message by signs
of another code, preserving (so far as possible in the fact of entropy) invariant information with
respect to a given system of reference’’ (qtd. in Bassnett, 2014, p. 28). The notion of semiotic
transformation is related to the terms formal and dynamic equivalence. The first aims to focus on
‘‘the message itself, both in form and content’’ (Bassnett, 2014, p. 36) whereas the latter focuses
on equivalent effect; that is, ‘‘the relationship between receiver and message should aim, at being
the same as that between original receivers and the source language message’’ (Bassnett, 2014, p.
36).
Another useful theory is Vermeer’s Skopostheory. Vermeer argues in his theory about
translation (Skopostheory) that intention and purpose should determine the translation strategy.
Vermeer himself explains his theory as follows:
‘‘Each text is produced for a given purpose and should serve this purpose.
The Skopos rule thus reads as follows: translate/interpret/speak/write in a
way that enables your text/translation to function in the situation in which
it is used and with the people who want to use it and precisely in the way
they want it to function’’ (qtd. in Nord, 1997, p.29).
As Nord (1997, p. 29) observes, this emphasis on purpose eliminates the ‘‘eternal dilemmas of
free vs faithful translation, dynamic vs formal equivalence and so on. It means that the Skopos of
a particular translation task may require a ‘free’ or a ‘faithful’ translation, or anything between
these two extremes, depending on the purpose for which the translation is needed’’. While not
specifically focusing on literary translation, the translation theories as discussed so far are also
useful for the translation of literary translations.
Naturally, the literary translation process partially overlaps with the ‘regular’ translation
process. Thus when translating literary texts the translator first of all has to interpret the intention
of the author with the target situation in mind. This intention then should be translated in such a
way that the target text ‘‘is able to achieve the same function in the target culture as that which
the source text achieved in the source culture’’ (Nord, 1997, p. 90). This is one of the areas of
literary translation which poses a problem since the translator has to interpret the author’s
intention, and often a variety of interpretations are possible. The fact that various interpretations
are possible results into vagueness, which allows ‘‘a whole host of conceptual relationships to be
~ 15 ~
evoked in the mind of the reader’’ (Hanks and Giora, 2012, p.4). Literary texts thus pose such
difficulties due to their expressiveness.
Foregrounded metaphors specifically cause much trouble for a translator since they are
very complex due to the fact that they ‘‘convey contextual (semantic as well as pragmatic or
cultural), poetic, and metalingual information simultaneously’’ (Van den Broeck, 1981, p. 84); in
addition they are also culture-bound (Pedersen, 2015). Moreover, Dagut argues that
foregrounded iconicity, and thus unconventional metaphors, do not have an equivalent in the
target language per definition; intentional and unconventional iconicity is ‘‘a semantic novelty, it
can clearly have no existing equivalence in the target language’’ (qtd. in Bassnett, 2014, p. 34).
Thus, the question asked by translation theorists is whether a metaphor or intentional iconicity
can be translated at all or whether it can only ‘‘be reproduced in some way’’ (Bassnett, 2014, p.
34).
Lefevere is a translation theorist who is convinced that iconicity can only be ‘reproduced’.
He argues that it is impossible to translate all foregrounded iconic features of a text; a translation
can never match the original. Lefevere (Westerweel and D’haen, 1990) has developed a literary
translation theory in which he outlines seven strategies that translators of literary texts can use to
achieve some kind of equivalence; that is, how they can reproduce style markers to some extent.
Unfortunately his focus lies only on poetry. The seven strategies are phonemic translation, literal
translation, metrical translation, poetry into prose, rhymed translation, blank verse translation,
and interpretation. Substitution or paraphrasing of style markers of the source text (Van den
Broeck, 1981; Pedersen, 2015) are other strategies that are often employed when there is no
equivalent in the target language and sometimes complete omission is used as well.
Lefevere also argues that translations will fail per definition. According to him, the use of
strategies to solve translation problems will lead to ‘‘an overemphasis of one or more elements of
the poem at the expense of the whole’’ (Bassnett, 2014, p. 93). This supposedly causes an
unbalanced text. I disagree with this assertion though. When a translator uses multiple strategies
simultaneously, a balanced text can still be achieved. Thus, unlike Lefevere, I would argue that
there is an overlap between these strategies since a translator will most likely use multiple
strategies simultaneously in his or her translation rather than just one strategy.
Much of what has been discussed so far regarding literary translation has been united by
Van den Broeck into a model about literary translations criticism in ‘‘Second Thoughts on
Translation Criticism: A Model of its Analytic Function’’ (1985). Since this thesis is concerned
with an investigation of literary translations, I will mostly base my own analysis of the translations
of Wicked on his model. Van den Broeck argues that while the subjective factor can never be
~ 16 ~
completely ruled out, there is a need for a systematic model for the analysis of translation. He
writes that the value judgments of a critic should be based on ‘‘systematic description[s] and
intersubjective knowledge of translation processes’’ (Van den Broeck, 1985, p. 54). Thus he
argues in favor of a more systematic and objective approach to literary translation criticism. This
would avoid random and amateurish criticism.
A frequently encountered issue in such ‘amateurish’ reviews is that these reviewers treat
the translation as if it were the original work. More often than not the fact that the reviewer is
dealing with a translation is completely ignored (Van den Broeck, 1985). When the translation is
acknowledged, reviewers often fall back on empty clichés such as ‘‘the translation reads well’’
(Van den Broeck, 1985, p. 55) and ‘‘apart from a few mistakes the translation is excellent’’ (Van
den Broeck, 1985, p. 55). However, the reviewer often does not inform the reader as to what
criteria he or she used for such value judgments. Finally, Van den Broeck (1985) argues that most
reviewers fail to see that a translated text functions in a system of other target texts.
To solve these problems, Van den Broeck’s model consists of three steps. First, the
reviewer must provide a description of a comparative analysis between source and target text
(Van den Broeck, 1985). This comparative analysis aims to discover equivalence and shifts of
expressions between the source and target texts (Van den Broeck, 1985; Leech and Short, 1981).
Shifts of expression in the translation only affect the adequacy of the translation if these are
optional. Obligatory shifts are inevitable since they are governed by the linguistic rules of the
target language, but optional shifts are based on the norms of the translator. It must be noted
though that this description of the translation is by no means an ‘error analysis’.
Secondly, the reviewer should reconstruct what Van den Broeck calls the ‘adequate
translation text’. This text is ‘‘not an actual text, but a hypothetical reconstruction of the textual
relations and functions of the [source text]’’ (Van den Broeck, 1985, p. 57). This adequate
translation text can be seen as the maximum reconstruction of all the elements in the source text
that possess textual functions. The translation is then compared to this ‘adequate translation text’.
The third step entails the interpretation and evaluation of the translation by the reviewer.
That is, the reviewer should interpret and analyze the criteria of the translator, the target
audience, translation method, purpose and intention. The options a translator has should be
taken into account in the interpretation (Van den Broeck, 1985). It is only at this stage that the
judgment of the reviewer can come into play in the evaluation. The reviewer may disagree with
the choices made by the translator when the translator has used different criteria than the
reviewer. In his or her criticism, the reviewer should make his or her own criteria and standards
~ 17 ~
known to the reader, and the translation must be evaluated in terms of the adequate translation
text.
~ 18 ~
3. Data and Method
3.1
Material Selection
In order to carry out a comparative analysis of strategies employed by translators and how these
create distinct texts, material had to be selected and languages to work with had to be determined.
The latter choice was based on the skills of the author. As I am raised bilingual in Dutch and
German, and study English Linguistics and Literature the choice for these three languages was
naturally made. The to-be-selected object of analysis had to meet two criteria. First, it needed to
be a work of fiction consisting of a significant level of figurative language and intended iconicity.
The stylistic categories which the text should contain have been discussed in detail in section 2.2.
The second criterion was that the work of fiction needed to be available in both Dutch and
German. Maguire’s novel Wicked (1995) met both criteria, and for this reason it was selected as
the object of investigation. The novel is a rewriting of L. Frank Baum’s The Wonderful Wizard of
Oz (1899). Maguire’s novel tells the tale of Elphaba, better known as the Wicked Witch of the
West from Baum’s novel, before and after she became this infamous witch. In addition, Wicked
changes all preconceived notions about good and evil in The Wonderful Wizard of Oz since the
wizard is exposed as an evil dictator whereas the Wicked Witch is in fact the only good character
left unaffected by corruption and power.
Keeping the scope of this thesis in mind, ultimately five passages were chosen as fit for
analysis. Two of the passages were poetry and three passages were prose; thus there was a balance
between poetry and prose. The choice for these five passages was based on the high level of
foregrounded stylistic categories and iconicity encountered; after all, I chose this novel because of
its overall stylistic qualities. While the choice for pieces of poetry in relation to the investigation
of foregrounded iconicity is a straightforward one, it is perhaps necessary to briefly explain why
the selection of prose is useful with regard to this thesis. Leech and Short (1981) note that
‘‘interesting things with language’’ more easily catches the eye in poetry than in prose. Yet, they
emphasize that ‘‘great novelists [are] also great artists in the use of words’’ (Leech and Short,
1981, p. 2), and that stylistic categories are also frequently encountered in prose. The analysis of
iconicity in prose simply costs more effort due to the fact that stylistic categories tend to be
‘‘more unobtrusive’’ (Leech and Short, 1981, p. 2) in prose than in poetry. Thus the analysis of
prose may prove a greater challenge than poetry, but it is nonetheless interesting to subject prose
to investigation.
~ 19 ~
3.2
Procedure
According to Van den Broeck (1985) and Short and Leech (1981), a comparative analysis
between source and target text(s) must be made in order to gain insight into how translators can
create distinctly different meanings, literary forms and hence different texts. In accordance with
the method of Leech and Short (1981), a checklist of stylistic categories was made and presented
in section 2.2. This checklist served as a guide during the analysis and linguistic investigation of
the passages. While reading the novel in English, notes were taken about passages containing a
high level of iconicity resulting in the choice for the five passages. By means of close-reading, I
analyzed for each passage first the English text, then the German translation, followed by the
Dutch translation. The analyses of the first two passages were immediately made with a
comparative mind-set. However, during meetings with Prof. Dr. Olga Fischer it became apparent
that by immediately focusing on a comparison to the English version, iconicity added or
compensated by the translators due to either obligatory or optional shifts went undetected and
did not receive my attention. For this reason, the approach was altered; subsequent analyses were
made without focusing yet on the comparative aspect. This proved to be a more fruitful
approach as it allowed more iconicity to be detected in the translations. The first two passages
were re-analyzed according to this procedure.
After the individual analyses of the passages, a comparative analysis between the findings
of iconicity in the three languages per passage was made.2 This procedure allowed for all
foregrounded iconic features to be identified. After this, by means of a comparison between
source and target texts it was possible to identify what strategies had been employed by the
translators. By identifying the translation strategies it was possible to investigate how the
translators have affected the style and iconic features of the source text. There are seven possible
outcomes to how the translators can influence the iconic features of the source text. These are
presented in Table 1.
Please note that while I analyzed the passages in the three language separately and carried out the comparison later,
the analyses are presented together in section 4 because this was most efficient. Thus in this thesis it seems as if the
analyses and comparisons were carried out simultaneously, but in fact this was not the case.
2
~ 20 ~
1
Iconicity is preserved.
2
Iconicity is preserved but expressed by different iconic means in the same clause.
3
Iconicity shifted to another clause.
4
One iconic feature is preserved resulting in the loss of another iconic feature.
5
Iconicity is preserved but meaning has been subtly or severely altered.
6
Iconicity lost.
7
Iconicity added by the translator where there is no iconicity in the source text.
Table 1. Possible options in which translators affect the iconic features of the source text.
After the comparative analysis between the target texts and source text, it is counted for each
passage how often any of these seven outcomes are encountered in the translations. This adds a
quantitative aspect to an otherwise qualitative analysis. In addition, the quantification helps to
‘‘find out [and underpin] what is distinctive about the style of a [text]’’ (Leech and Short, 1981, p.
43); it makes remarks regarding the translations less impressionistic and intuitive. As a result, the
quantitative aspect allows for a more objective judgment of the translations, and thus it is in
accordance with Van den Broeck’s model for literary translation criticism.
To summarize, the procedure in this thesis consists of two parts. The first part concerns
the identification of stylistic categories in five passages of Wicked (1995) in English, German and
Dutch. The second part constitutes a comparative analysis between the original English text and
its two translations. This comparative analysis leads to three outcomes. First, a fairly objective
judgment as outlined by Van den Broeck (1985) can be made of the translations. Secondly,
translation strategies can be derived from this analysis. Finally, the comparative analysis exposes
how these translation strategies have preserved, altered, added, or deleted foregrounded iconic
features. The identification of stylistic categories and the comparative analysis will be discussed in
section 4 whereas the three outcomes, which will lead to the answer to the research question, will
be discussed in section 5.
3.3
Scope
As has been mentioned in section 2.1, this thesis only focuses on intentional iconicity which I
defined as foregrounded iconic features. The reason for this focal point is twofold; firstly,
intentional iconicity proves to be most challenging in translation and therefore it is most
interesting to analyze. Secondly by only focusing on intentional iconicity the scope for this thesis
is set. After all, as Leech and Short (1981) note as well, it is impossible to provide an exhaustive
~ 21 ~
inventory of all linguistic, and thus iconic, features of a text. Therefore, I made the selection of
foregrounded stylistic categories as outlined in section 2.2 to set the range for this research; for a
practicable method of translation analysis there simply had to be a selection of some features for
analysis in favor of other features. This method is in accordance with the method of stylistics as
outlined by Leech and Short (1981). As discussed in section 2.2, this thesis will focus both on
exophoric and endophoric iconicity in the form of metaphors, alliteration, assonance, end-rhyme,
sound symbolism, meter and syntax. In addition, although the stylistic categories word register
and frequency3 are not iconic categories, these will also be taken into account since these, in
translation, can change the meaning of a text significantly.
With register I refer to style and attitude labels in language use. That is, the difference between polite and impolite
language, formal and informal language, spoken and written language, scientific language, religious language, jargon
etcetera. Frequency refers to how commonly used a lexical item or phrase is by native speakers. This information will
be retrieved from dictionaries such as Macmillan and Oxford Dictionary for English, Duden Wörterbuch for
German and Van Dale for Dutch.
3
~ 22 ~
4. Comparative Analysis of Passages from Wicked in Source
and Target Languages
In accordance with Van den Broeck (1985), and Leech and Short (1981), I will make a
comparative analysis between five passages from the novel Wicked in this chapter. Then I will
interpret the choices made by the translators before evaluating these choices in section 5. With
each passage, I will start with an analysis of an iconic feature in the original English passage
before analyzing the German and then Dutch texts. At the end of each passage, the results found
regarding iconic features are presented in a table.
4.1
Passage One: A Nursery Rhyme
The first object of analysis is a nursery rhyme from Oz about the birth of babies:
1 Born in the morning,
Geboren am Morgen,
Kind van de morgen
2 Woe without warning;
Nur Leiden und Sorgen.
Brengt rampspoed en zorgen
3 Afternoon child
Nachmittagskind,
Kind van de middag
4 Woeful and wild;
Im Leiden geschwind.
Is woest zonder glimlach
5 Born in the evening,
Abends entbunden,
Kind van de avond
6 Woe ends in grieving.
Das Leiden schlägt Wunden.
Is nimmer lavend
7 Night baby borning
Geboren zur Nacht,
Kind van de nacht
8 Same as the morning.
Wird’s wie morgens gemacht.
Is als het kind van de morgen.
(Maguire, 2008, p. 21).
(Maguire, 2010, p. 21).
(Maguire, 2007, p. 11-12).
A striking element in this passage is Maguire’s use of end-rhyme, which is a defining feature of a
nursery rhyme (Cuddon, 1991). The end-rhyme constitutes of a pair of rhyming lines, also called
a couplet (Vendler, 2010). The rhyme scheme can be indicated as aabbccdd. A salient feature of the
end-rhyme as employed by Maguire is that all lines except for lines 3 and 4 (the only lines which
do not refer to birth) have feminine endings. Thus it can be argued that the feminine rhyme is
used to emphasize that giving birth is a female affair, but it also emphasizes the wildness of the
afternoon child. Hans-Ulrich Möhring, the German translator, has opted for a strategy in which
the couplet form of end-rhyme is maintained whereas meaning is subtly altered. He has managed
to preserve four out of six cases of feminine rhyme. Thus, form has received more emphasis than
~ 23 ~
meaning. This, I would argue, is appropriate as it is a nursery rhyme, and the form should be
recognizable as such. The first line of the German translation is a literal translation of the original
English line. However, in English warning rhymes with morning but in German Morgen does not
rhyme with Warnung. Since Möhring clearly wanted to maintain the end-rhyme, he had to change
Warnung into something that would rhyme with Morgen. He chose to solve this problem with
Leiden und Sorgen which maintains the end-rhyme as well as it is still semantically related to the
English woe. Woes, after all, can be rephrased into problems and worries, and thus it can be
translated into Sorgen. Leiden is also related to woe since both words concern sorrow and sadness.
Another example in which Möhring has altered meaning to maintain the end-rhyme can
be found in line 4. The English original rhymes child with wild, but in German Kind does not
rhyme with wild. The English couplet conveys that a baby born in the afternoon is wild and
causes worries and sadness. The German version suggests that a child born in the afternoon
causes a state of sorrow before long. Thus, the part of sadness is conveyed in the German
translation, but wildness is left out and replaced with a sense of swiftness. The meter of this line
has been altered as well, but I will discuss this later on.
Finally, in lines 5 and 6 meaning has also been changed. First of all, in line 5 there is a
shift in subjectivity. Throughout the English poem the baby is the agent. However, the verb
entbunden shifts the subject position from the baby to the mother. Entbinden means to deliver or to
give birth. Naturally, this can only be done by a woman. Thus the German line roughly means
‘when a woman gives birth in the evening’ whereas in the English line the emphasis is on ‘to be
born’, which has the baby as subject. This choice is probably motivated by the wish to maintain
end-rhyme. The translator also could have chosen to translate line 5 with Geboren am Abend but
then it would have been difficult to maintain the end-rhyme since nothing related to sorrow or
grief rhymes in German with Abend. Kummer would have been an obvious choice to translate grief
with. Yet, this does not rhyme with entbunden nor with Abend. Wunden, however, does rhyme with
entbunden and it evokes a similar sense of emotional wounds as grieving.
The Dutch translator Ineke Lenting appears to have chosen the same strategy as HansUlrich Möhring; that is, the end-rhyme is maintained for the sake of the genre, and in order to
achieve this meaning has been altered. However, Lenting completely lost the emphasis on
feminine endings; in fact, the rhyme, but not the endings, in the Dutch translation is feminine
except for line 7. Regarding the end-rhyme scheme, in the second line we find a similar alteration
as in the German translation. In Dutch, waarschuwing does not rhyme with morgen but it does
rhyme with zorgen. The end-rhyme is maintained and rampspoed en zorgen evoke the associations of
woe. Thus, the strategy here of Lenting is the same as Möhring’s strategy.
~ 24 ~
The second instance in which Lenting changes meaning occurs in line 4. Whereas the
German translation focuses on the ‘woeful’ part of this line, Lenting chooses to emphasize the
‘wild’ aspect. In Is woest zonder glimlach there is no reference to woe at all, but woest is linked to wild.
While zonder glimlach thus indicates that the child is not happy, it is not as strong as woeful. Here
zonder glimlach is arguably mostly used to maintain the end-rhyme with middag. As a result, it is
semantically rather empty. In line 6 Lenting has also chosen an empty expression in order to
maintain the rhyme scheme. She has chosen to translate woe ends in grieving with is nimmer lavend,
which has absolutely nothing to do with sorrow or sadness at all since it means that the child
born in the evening has a thirst which cannot be quenched; the expression is just a vehicle to
keep the rhyme.
The style markers alliteration and assonance are foregrounded in the English passage as
well. Three instances of alliteration can be found in this passage. Woe, without and warning
alliterate in line 2, woeful and wild in line 4, and finally baby and borning in line 7. Born and morning
in line 1 is the only occurrence of assonance. The alliteration and assonance is related in this case
to sound symbolism. The sounds [w], [ɔː], [əʊ], and [aɪ] are repeated throughout the nursery
rhyme, and it can be argued that these sounds relate to the theme of sadness. The vowels are all
long and open back vowels, and therefore they can be seen as symbolizing sad moaning. The
words woe and woeful occur three times in the short passage. This reinforces a strong feeling of
sadness and worries. Since the nursery rhyme is about the birth of babies, these moaning sounds
can also symbolize the sounds made by a mother during labor. Thus these sounds can be
associated with pain, both physical and emotional, and with misery and sadness.
In the German translation there are three cases of alliteration and one instance of
assonance as well. In line 5 [b] alliterates in Abends and entbunden. Next, in line 8 [w] in wird’s wie
alliterates and [m] alliterates in morgens gemacht. The case of assonance, geboren and Morgen, can be
found in line 1. I would argue that the sound symbolism is not maintained despite repetition of
the sounds [aɪ], [ ], and [ɑ], because they do not stand out as much as the sounds in the English
version; the sounds are not foregrounded enough. In the Dutch translation of the nursery rhyme
there are no instances of alliteration nor of assonance. I would also argue that sound symbolism
is not really present as it is in the original English version. The sounds [ɔ], [I], [u], [ɑ], and [a] are
repeated but none of them are long. As a result they do not evoke the same sense of painful
moaning and sadness.
Meter is a distinguishing feature of a nursery rhyme as well since the nursery rhyme finds
its origins in the oral tradition (Cuddon, 1991). Apart from the fact that a regular and insistent
meter helps with the recital or singing of the nursery rhyme, it also gives pleasure to the listener
~ 25 ~
(Vendler, 2010). Therefore, meter must be investigated too. The English passage has a falling
rhythm throughout; in most lines a dactyl occurs followed by a trochee. In lines three and four,
however, we find a rising foot due to the masculine rhyme of those lines. The meter is not
preserved in the German translation since the rhythm in lines 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7 is rising rather than
falling. Lines 3 and 4 also end with a rising foot, just like the English version. Overall Lenting did
not maintain the falling meter since almost all her translated lines are a mix of iambs and
anapests. Due to the fact that she did not preserve the masculine rhyme in lines 3 and 4 there is
no rising rhythm at the end of these lines.
Additionally, Lenting has made an unnecessary optional shift with regards to the syntax.
In lines 4, 6 and 8 she has added is to start the line with and this inflected copulative verb does
not receive stress; due to this the falling rhythm is lost and the verbs in initial position disturb the
entire structure of the poem.4 Especially line 8 suffers from the shift as it is metrically now a very
weak line and the emphasis of the meter is lost. The placement of verbs in initial position in lines
2, 4, 6 and 8 is redundant since the syntactic structure of the English nursery rhyme works in
Dutch as well. Without those initial verbs, the lines would have been stronger. For example, if
line 4 would have been translated into woest zonder glimlach the line would have run much
smoother than it does now. It is also striking that Lenting starts four lines with Kind. The
syntactical repetition of this lexical item does strengthen the translation as it creates a unified
whole, just as the repetition of born and borning unites the English version. In addition, Lenting
maintained the symmetrical structure in the first and final line; both in English and Dutch these
lines end with morning. The lack of such a repetition regarding birth is a weak point in the German
translation. However, Möhring does repeat Leiden as it occurs three times.
The quantitative outcome of the analysis is summarized and presented in Table 2 on the
following page.
Due to the initial position of the inflected copulative verbs in the Dutch translation, the verbs are foregrounded as
it is strange to start a sentence with is in Dutch if it is not a question. Conversely, in the German version more verbs
occur than in the English version as well, but these are not foregrounded as their position in the sentences is regular.
4
~ 26 ~
Outcomes of translation:
1. Iconicity is preserved.
Frequency in German
Frequency in Dutch
Translation
Translation
16 (end-rhyme 4, feminine rhyme 4, 6 (end-rhyme 5, symmetrical
meter 4, syntax 1, assonance 1,
structure 1).
masculine rhyme 1, lexical
repetition of Leiden 1).
2. Iconicity is preserved but
expressed by different iconic
means in the same clause.
3. Iconicity shifted to another
3 (alliteration 3).
clause.
4. One iconic feature is
preserved resulting in the loss
of another iconic feature.
5. Iconicity is preserved but
4 (end-rhyme 4).
meaning has been subtly or
4 (end-rhyme 3, lexical repetition of
kind 1).
severely altered.
6. Iconicity lost.
10 (meter 4, feminine rhyme 2,
23 (feminine and masculine rhyme
masculine rhyme 1, sound
8, meter 8, assonance and
symbolism 15, lack of lexical
alliteration 4, sound symbolism 1,
repetition regarding
syntax 1, lack of repetition of woe
born/borning 1, lack of
1).
symmetrical structure 1).
7. Iconicity added.
Table 2. Outcomes of the translations of passage one.
Since passage one is small and the sound symbolism in the English original is linked together to one theme, I
counted the lack of sound symbolism as one.
5
~ 27 ~
4.2
Passage Two: Elphaba’s Birth
The second object of analysis is a passage in which Elphaba’s unusual birth is described. Unlike
passage one, this is a piece of prose:
The night of torches and fog gave way, at dawn, to broad bluffs of
thundercloud, dancing skeletons of lightning. Glimpses of blue sky appeared
briefly, though sometimes it rained so hard that it seemed more like mud
drops falling than water. The midwives, crawling on hands and knees out of
the back of the clock-wagon, had their little discharge at last. They protected
the infant from the dripping gutter. ‘‘Look, a rainbow,’’ said the senior,
bobbing her head. A sickly scarf of colored light hung in the sky.
What they saw, rubbing the caul and blood off the skin – was it just a trick
of the light? After all, following the storm the grass did seem to throb with its
own color, the roses zinged and hovered with crazy glory on their stems. But
even with these effects of light and atmosphere, the midwives couldn’t deny
what they saw. Beneath the spit of the mother’s fluids the infant glistened a
scandalous shade of pale emerald.
There was no wail, no bark of newborn outrage. The child opened its
mouth, breathed and then kept its own counsel. ‘‘Whine, you fiend,’’ said the
crone, ‘‘it’s your first job.’’ The baby shirked its obligations. (Maguire, 2007,
p. 26-27)
Die nächtliche Fackeln und Nebelschwaden wichen bei Tagesanbruch breiten
Gewitterwolkenwänden und zuckenden Blitzen. Zwischendurch rissen kurz
blaue Flecken am Himmel auf, obwohl es zeitweise so schwere Tropfen
regnete, dass sie eher aus Schlamm als aus Wasser zu sein schienen.
Schließlich was das Neugeborene da, und die Hebammen krabbelten damit
auf allen vieren hinten zum Uhrwagen hinaus. Sie schirmten das Kind vor der
überlaufenden Dachrinne ab. »Seht mal, ein Regenbogen!«, sagte die Älteste
mit einer kurzen Kopfbewegung. Ein fahler bunter Lichtstreif hing am
Firmament.
Was sie erblickten, als sie die Glückshaube und das Blut van der Haut
abtrieben, war es nur das täuschende Licht? Nach dem Gewitter nämlich
~ 28 ~
schien das Gras eine viel intensievere Farbe zu haben, und die Rosen
leuchteten mit wahnsinniger Pracht auf ihren Stengeln. Und doch waren das
Licht und die atmosphäre nicht verantwortlich für das, was die Hebammen
vor sich sahen. Unter der Käseschmiere glänzte das Kleine in einem blassen,
doch schokierend smaragdgrünen Ton.
Kein Schrei ertönte, kein empörtes Neugeborenenplärren. Das Kind
machte den Mund auf, atmete und bewahrte ansonsten Stillschweigen. »Na
heul schon, du Teufel!«, sagte die Alte. »Das ist deine erste Schuldigkeit.« Das
Kleine kam seiner Verpflichtung nicht nach. (Maguire, 2008, p. 34-35)
Tegen de ochtend week de nacht van toortsen en mist voor de brede klippen
van onweerswolken en dansende bliksemskeletten. Af en to was er een glimp
blauwe lucht, hoewel het soms zo hard regende dat het leek alsof er modder
in plaats van water naar beneden kwam. De vroedvrouwen, die op handen en
voeten uit de achterkant van de klokkenwagen kropen, hadden hun bundeltje
eindelijk te pakken. Ze beschermden de zuigeling tegen de lekkende goot.
‘Kijk, een regenboog,’ zei de oudste met een knik. Aan de hemel hing een
bleke sjerp van gekleurd licht.
Wat ze zagen toen ze het vlies en het bloed van de huid veegden… Was
het een speling van het licht? Per slot van rekening leek het gras na de
onweersbui te zinderen van zijn eigen kleur, en de rosen bruisten en dansten
in waanzinnige praal op hun stelen. Maar ondanks de werking van licht en
atmosfeer viel het niet te ontkennen: onder het schuim van het moedervocht
lag een schandelijke zweem van bleek glanzend groen over het kind.
Er klonk geen gejammer, geen brul van pasgeboren woede. Het kind
opende de mond, ademde en deed er het zwijgen toe. ‘Jank dan, duivel,’ zei
het oude wijf. ‘Dat is je allereerste taak.’ Maar de baby ontrok zich aan zijn
verplichtingen. (Maguire, 2010, p. 34)
Two types of figures of speech are foregrounded in this passage; the metaphor and simile. For
example, in the first two lines Maguire refers to lightning as ‘lightning is like dancing skeletons’.
Lightning, the target domain, is mapped in terms of skeletons. The similarity is based on
appearance. Both skeletons and lighting are white and constitute of thin lines; lightning has thin
lines of electricity and skeletons have bones. The image is based on sharp lines as well; dancing
~ 29 ~
skeletons probably would not have any suppleness, and thus they would create sharp lines in their
moves. Lightning bolts also consist of sharp lines. In addition, the metaphor draws attention to
another aspect. Lightning is known to scare people and dancing skeletons also have a scary and
macabre touch to them.
Alongside this metaphor, the sentence contains sound symbolism, alliteration and rhythm
as well, which strengthens the metaphor. Hard plosive consonants such [g], [d], [b], and [k]
reinforce the sound of thunder while front and central vowels such as [aɪ], [aʊ], [æ], and [e] draw
attention to the unpleasantness of lightning: the night of torches and fog gave way, at dawn, to broad
bluffs of thundercloud, dancing skeletons of lightning. The alliteration of broad bluffs not only
emphasizes the size and impressiveness of the thunderclouds semantically, but it also symbolizes
thunder itself. The sound [b] is a voiced plosive which imitates the sound of thunder. Thus the
alliteration is arguably a case of articulatory sound symbolism. Finally, rhythm also supports the
imagery. The rhythm of the sentence is slowed down by the clause at dawn which is then followed
by the heavy rhythm of broad bluffs of thundercloud (stressed-stressed-unstressed-stressedunstressed-stressed). The heavy rhythm underscores the oppressive sultriness of the air when a
thunderstorm is coming. The rhythm changes though to a lighter falling meter in dancing skeletons
of lightning. This lighter rhythm emphasizes the fast and sharp movements of the skeletons and
lightning.
Hans-Ulrich Möhring did not choose to preserve this metaphor as it is absent from his
translation. Instead of translating the metaphor, he opted for the common form zuckenden Blitzen.
As a result, the foregrounded metaphor is lost. Yet, Möhring did add alliteration to his translation
of this sentence. The [w] and [z] alliterate in Gewitterwolkenwänden und zuckenden Blitzen. The
alliteration makes the sentence more poetic despite the fact that it is lexically common. The
sound symbolism has not really been preserved by Möhring, but there is a change in rhythm.
Gewitterwolkenwänden has a rising rhythm whereas zuckenden Blitzen has a falling rhythm; thus this
foregrounded iconicity has been preserved.
Lenting seems to have chosen for a literal translation approach. She translated broad bluffs
of thundercloud, dancing skeletons of lightning literally into brede klippen van onweerswolken en dansende
bliksemskeletten. The metaphor concerning the lightning is preserved, but the sound symbolism,
alliteration and rhythm have been lost. The blunted and heavy [b] and long vowels have been
lost, for example, by translating bluffs into klippen which is rather sharp and short in comparison
to the sounds of the English word. The rhythm is falling throughout brede klippen van onweerswolken
en dansende bliksemskeletten so no change is announced by a different rhythm.
~ 30 ~
Next, Maguire uses a simile in the third line to describe the rain. It is no typical rain since
it rains very hard and the drops are much thicker. Therefore Maguire draws a comparison to mud
which has a thicker consistency than water. Möhring maintained the simile more like mud drops. He
changed the syntax though in his translation dass sie eher aus Schlamm als aus Wasser zu sein schienen.
This is an obligatory shift because the sentence would become awkward in German if the verbs
would move to the front of the sentence. The simile is maintained in the Dutch passage as well,
although the syntax has been changed unnecessarily. The Dutch translation is more lengthy than
the original English but this shift is optional as something shorter such as het regende zo hard dat het
meer op modder dan water leek is perfectly normal to use in Dutch. The Dutch translation is less
effective than the original, because it is too lengthy and explanatory; it is not really poetic
anymore.
Another metaphor concerns the target ‘baby’ that has been mapped in terms of the
source discharge. The baby is described in terms of cargo. Since the three women are midwives,
they see the baby as a delivery of cargo for which they are responsible. The midwives are thieving
and selfish women, and they do not care at all for the baby; it is just a duty. The choice for
discharge thus emphasizes the fact that the midwives do not feel anything for the baby as they see
it as an object. Accordingly, the word is negative.
In the German translation, there is a shift in syntax resulting in a change in foregrounding
in the sentence schließlich war das Neugeborene da, und die Hebammen krabbelten damit auf allen vieren
hinten zum Uhrwagen hinaus. This shift is optional, not obligatory. In the English original, the focus
is on the midwives crawling out of the wagon with their discharge; the midwives come first and
thus the syntax arguably represent their selfishness. That it, they think of themselves first before
anything else. The German translation focuses on the baby and consequently the egocentric
nature of the midwives is no longer foregrounded. Due to this alteration, the meaning has been
severely altered. The metaphor ‘baby is like discharge’ is arguably not translated due to the fact
that the metaphor does not work with the changed syntax. As a result, Möhring translated
discharge with the normal term Neugeborene.
In the Dutch passage the metaphor concerning the midwives and their discharge is
preserved to some extent. Unlike the German translator, Lenting kept the original syntax which
focuses on the midwives rather than the baby. As a result, the self-centeredness of the midwives
is also foregrounded in the Dutch passage. While bundeltje does not have anything to do with
delivery or cargo like discharge, it is unconventional to refer to a baby like that. Hence an effort
was made by the translator to maintain some form of foregrounded iconicity. However, bundeltje
sounds much sweeter than discharge. Arguably this is both due to sounds and the fact that the
~ 31 ~
Dutch word has a diminutive suffix. The English word sounds harsher due to the fricatives [tʃ]
and [dʒ].
Subsequently, the rainbow is metaphorically described by means of two source domains.
First, the rainbow is compared to a scarf which hangs in the air because the form is similar. Then
the rainbow is mapped in terms of sickness; the pale colors resemble the pallor of a sick person.
This evokes a feeling of unpleasantness and uneasiness. Alliteration strengthens the image of
sickness even more. The repetition of [s] and [k] in sickly, scarf, colored and sky foregrounds the
metaphor and the sharp sounds emphasizes the thin and pallid colors of the rainbow. Möhring
did not maintain the metaphors regarding the rainbow. There is no comparison to a scarf and it
has been translated with the everyday term Streif. Neither has a connection been made between
the pale colors of the rainbow and sickness; fahler bunter just means pale colored. If the translator
had opted for blass or übel instead, the association with illness would have been maintained.
Lenting did preserve the metaphor regarding the rainbow. She translated a sickly scarf of colored light
with een bleke sjerp van gekleurd licht. Scarf has been translated literally with sjerp and sickly is implied
with bleke. Sjerp also preserves the ‘sickly’ and uneasy sound of [ʃ]. Additionally, she has
substituted the alliteration of [s] with the alliteration of [h] in hemel hing.
A final metaphor can be found in the second to last line. Baby Elphaba is compared to a
figure of horror by the midwives because she has a green color. Therefore the target baby is
mapped in terms of fiend because her green color is fiendish. This metaphor is preserved in both
German and Dutch as both translated it into devil.
The grass and roses, too, are described by means of style markers. For example, the
choice of lexical items is unconventional as throb, zinged, hovered and crazy glory are uncommon
words in relation to grass and roses. To throb is usually associated with the human body or
machines, and to zing and to hover are typically linked to machinery as well (guns for the first,
airplanes for the latter). As a result, these words obtain a poetic function. In addition, assonance
occurs on paper as well due to the repetition of o in storm, throb, and color. Möhring changed the
figurative language regarding the grass and roses. The grass did seem to throb with its own color has been
translated into schien das Gras eine viel intensievere Farbe zu haben. The German translation is regular
everyday language whereas Maguires’ original clearly has a poetic ring to it. To maintain the
figurative language, the translator could have opted to translate to throb with with pulsierende Farbe
zu haben. Maguire’s English version is not conventional, and translating it with pulsieren would be
unconventional in German as well but it would work. Lenting did preserve the lexical
foregrounded iconicity in this sentence as she translated it literally, but the assonance has been
lost.
~ 32 ~
Maguire employs alliteration, assonance and sound symbolism in other places of the
passage as well. Near the end of the passage, Elphaba’s skin color is revealed. The presence of
many sharp [s] sounds in combination with plosives in beneath the spit of the mother’s fluids the infant
glistened a scandalous shade underscores the abnormality and nastiness of this green color.
Scandalous shade alliterates, and thus the shade receives emphasis. The choice for shade over color
is arguably due to the fact that shade is reminiscent of shady, which is of course a negative word.
Möhring maintained the repetition of s on paper, but they are not all realized as [s] in speech.
Therefore the sound symbolism has been lost. Lenting translated beneath the spit of the mother’s fluids
the infant glistened a scandalous shade of pale emerald into onder het schuim van het moedervocht lag een
schandelijke zweem van bleek glanzend groen over het kind. The sounds of the Dutch translation are
also harsh due to the repetition of [x] and [s]. In addition, there is assonance in zweem and bleek
which foregrounds the color of the baby.
Another example of sound symbolism is the word bobbing, which can be seen as
articulatory sound symbolism. The first vowel [ɒ] is a low and back vowel whereas [I] is a high
and front vowel. Thus the tongue makes an up and down movement just like the head does when
nodding. The repetition of [b] serves as a kind of reduplication which matches the repetitive
movement the head actually makes when bobbing. Additionally, the bobbing movement of the
midwives is later repeated by the zinging of the roses. While in German this sound symbolism is
lost, the bobbing movement is still expressed through the rhythm and alliteration of einer kurzen
Kopfbewegung which is stressed-unstressed-stressed-unstressed-stressed-unstressed-stressedunstressed. Thus the rhythm represents the bobbing movement. The representation of bobbing
either through sound symbolism or rhythm has been lost in the Dutch passage; nothing
reinforces the knik. Next, Fluids is arguably a case of articulatory sound symbolism as well since
the fricatives [f] and [s] and the liquid [l] are thin sounds associated with liquefied substances.
This is lost both in German and Dutch.
In the final paragraph bark newborn, and kept counsel alliterate. The [b] sound reinforces
the hard sound barking makes and it is in juxtaposition to the silence of the baby. The repetition
of [k] foregrounds the fact that the baby did whatever it wanted to do. Wail, outrage, and whine are
also instances of sound symbolism as the diphthongs [eɪ], [aɪ], and [aʊ] and the consonant [w]
are long rounded open sounds resembling the noise of wailing and whining. Möhring kept the
alliteration of the first sentence by alliterating [p] in empörtes Neugeborenenplärren. Lenting too
preserved the alliteration by repeating the [b] sound in brul pasgeboren. The sound symbolism
regarding wail, outrage, and whine are lost in both German and Dutch.
~ 33 ~
Moreover, syntactic repetition is found in this final paragraph. No wail, no bark is
foregrounded due to the repetition of the word no, and the word order. The syntactic repetition
employed by Maguire is kept by Möhring as he also repeats kein. Lenting kept the syntactic
iconicity by repeating geen. Lenting unnecessarily changed the syntax of the sentence about the
color of the child. She could have decided to choose an option like onder het schuim van het
moedervocht glinsterde het kind een schandelijke bleekgroene tint. Such a translation or something similar
would have maintained the syntax and it is a normal construction to use in Dutch. However,
Lenting’s choice for zweem is well-made as the word can be used negatively just like shade can be
connected to shady.
Table 3 summarizes the findings of this section.
Outcomes of translation:
1. Iconicity is preserved.
Frequency in German
Frequency in Dutch
Translation
Translation
6 (alliteration 2, rhythm 1, simile
8 (metaphor 3, sound symbolism 2,
1, metaphor 1, syntax 1).
poetic language 1, alliteration 1,
syntax 1).
2. Iconicity is preserved but
2 (sound symbolism).
expressed by different iconic
means in the same clause.
3. Iconicity shifted to another
clause.
4. One iconic feature is
1 (simile).
preserved resulting in the loss
of another iconic feature.
5. Iconicity is preserved but
1 (metaphor).
meaning has been subtly or
severely altered.
6. Iconicity lost.
9 (metaphor 3, sound symbolism 3,
7 (sound symbolism 3, alliteration
poetic language 1, assonance 1,
2, rhythm 1, assonance 1).
alliteration 1).
7. Iconicity added.
Table 3. Outcomes of the translations of passage two.
~ 34 ~
4.3
Passage Three: Another Nursery Rhyme
The third passage is another nursery rhyme, yet this one is much more ideologically charged. The
passage shows the morals and values of Oz. These values are negative towards women, and the
nursery rhyme shows the prevailing stereotypes regarding the various ethnicities of Oz. It is
therefore a rather shocking passage as this is intended for children.
1 Boys study, girls know,
Jungen lernen, Mädchen wissen,
2 That’s the way that lessons go.
Weshalb sie nichts lernen müssen.
3 Boys learn, girls forget,
Jungen büffeln, Mädchen vergessen,
4 That’s the way of lessons yet.
Anders locht sie unterdessen.
5 Gillikinese are sharp as knives,
Gillikinesen sind nicht blöd,
6 Munchkinlanders lead corny lives,
Munchkinleben sind meist öd.
7 Glikkuns beat their ugly wives,
Glikker hauen ihre Frauen,
8 Winkies swarm in sticky hives.
Winkies hausen wie die Sauen.
9 But the Quadlings, Oh the Quadlings,
Doch der Quadlinger, strohdumm,
10 Slimy stupid curse-at-godlings,
Eklig, widrig, gar nicht fromm,
11 Eat their young and bury their old
Frisst die Jungen, begräbt die Alten,
12 A day before their bodies get cold.
Noch bevor Ihre Leichen erkalten.
13 Give me an apple and I’ll say it again.
Gib mir ’nen Apfel, dann sag ich’s noch mal.
(Maguire, 2007, p. 68).
(Maguire, 2008, p. 78).
1 Jongens leren, meisjes weten,
2 Een les die je nooit meer mag vergeten.
3 Jongens leren en meisjes niet,
4 Zo gaat het nog steeds, tot groot verdriet.
5 Een Gillikijn is scherp als een mes,
6 Een Knaaglander saai als een ouwe bes.
7 De Glikkusman slaat zijn lelijke wijf,
8 En een Winkie heeft een kleverig lijf,
9 Maar de Quadlanders, o, die Quadlanders,
10 Slijmerige, stomme godvergeeflanders.
11 Ze eten hun jongen en begraven hun oudjes
12 Al een dag voordat het lichaam koud is.
13 Geef me een appel, dan vertel ik het nog eens.
(Maguire, 2010, p. 71).
~ 35 ~
As already mentioned in section 4.1, defining characteristics of the nursery rhyme are end-rhyme
and meter. The latter is foregrounded, and important regarding the ideological message of this
nursery rhyme; the meter changes to emphasize that the Quadlings are different from the other
people of Oz. The first 8 lines of the nursery rhyme have a falling trochaic meter. Line 9,
however, has a rising rhythm as the meter is anapestic. Lines 10, 11 and 12 have a falling trochaic
meter again, resuming the rhythm of the first eight lines. As a result, line 9 is foregrounded, and
this emphasizes that the Quadlings are ‘different’. Then in the final line, the meter changes into
an irregular prose-like rhythm because the line does not relate to anything of the nursery rhyme;
it seems like a random and strange addition.
Hans-Ulrich Möhring maintained the trochaic meter in the first eight lines. As in the
English original, in line 9 the meter changes to show that the Quadlings are different. Möhring
starts line 9 with an anapest, just like Maguire, but the second half of the line is a spondee
because Möhring chose to leave out the repetition of Quadlinger. It is striking that he does not
employ the repetition, as it so clearly signals a change in the poem and the construction would
have worked in German as well. Nevertheless, the spondee also creates emphasis. Lines 10, 11
and 12 are again trochaic, just as in the English version, and the final line is irregular as well. So
overall, the meter of the German translation resembles the original English meter.
Ineke Lenting managed to keep the meter of the first 4 lines mostly trochaic. Lines 5 up
until 8, however, are iambic. The meter in line 9 changes just as in the original English passage by
means of two anapests. Lines 10 and 12 are also trochaic, but line 11 has a rising rhythm. In the
Dutch passage the rhythm of the final line is prose-like as well. Due to the alterations of the
meter in the Dutch version, the rhythm is disturbed resulting in the loss of the snappiness that is
present in the English text. Since almost all lines have trochees only line 9 is foregrounded.
Next, the end-rhyme of the first 10 lines is also in accordance with the typical rhyme
scheme of a nursery rhyme as the rhyme scheme is aabbccdd. The end-rhyme of lines 9 and 10 are
feminine rhymes; the change from masculine to feminine rhyme also signals a change in the
poem, just like the meter. Lines 11 and 12 have again a masculine end-rhyme. Then the final line
does not rhyme at all. The end-rhyme in this nursery rhyme is mostly masculine; only lines 9 and
10 have a feminine ending, and thus only lines 9 and 10 have feminine rhyme. Perhaps the overall
strong masculine endings are employed to strengthen the ideological message of the nursery
rhyme, which is rather female-unfriendly.
Möhring did not perfectly maintain the end-rhyme scheme. Some pairs of lines do rhyme
and others do not. Lines 1 and 2, for example, do not have end-rhyme whereas lines 5 and 6 do.
~ 36 ~
As a result, lines 9 and 10 stand out less in the German translation. Additionally, unlike the
English version the end-rhyme is mostly feminine.
Lenting has preserved the rhyme scheme of the first 8 lines; thus the rhyme scheme in the
Dutch translation is also aabbccdd. Then lines 9 and 10 do not really rhyme, and this should
foreground these 2 lines. However, lines 11 and 12 do not really rhyme either in the Dutch
translation on paper. Yet, when speaking koud is aloud, it almost does rhyme with oudjes. As a
result, the lines about the Quadlings do stand out. There is no significant difference in use of
masculine or feminine end-rhyme as there are 6 instances of feminine endings and 7 cases of
masculine endings.
Alliteration or assonance is not foregrounded in this nursery rhyme. There is one case of
alliteration; in line 10 slimy stupid alliterates. This is also the only line in which sound symbolism
occurs: slimy stupid curse-at-godlings. The repetition of [s] in combination with the [k] and [g]
sounds make this line very aggressive. The [s] makes it as if the words are spitted out. The [k] and
[g] are harsh sounds because they are plosives. Consequently, these sounds create an image of
aggression. The meter, of course, also aids this sense of aggressiveness. These aggressive sounds
and the meter make sense as the Quadlings are hated in Oz6 and treated with hostility. In the
German translation there is neither alliteration nor sound symbolism, but Möhring does
foreground the negative attitude towards Quadlings by repeating –ig in Eklig widrig. Lenting does
preserve the alliteration of [s]. However, while slijmerige, stomme alliterates just as the English slimy
stupid I do not think that it has the same effect of sound symbolism since there are too many
syllables in slijmerige to have the same aggressive effect.
The style markers metaphor and simile are foregrounded in this nursery rhyme as well. In
line 5 the nature of the Gilikinese is compared to knives by means of the simile Gillikinese are
sharp as knives. The comparison between the people and knives is made because the Gilikinese are
canny, hard and snobbish people; they do anything for money and power. In the German passage
the metaphor regarding the Gillikinese is left out and replaced with the normal expression nicht
blöd. Lenting literally translated the metaphor Gilikinese are sharp as knives into Een Gillikijn is scherp
als een mes. She had to change the subject from plural to singular though as Gillikijnen zijn scherp als
messen does not run as smoothly in Dutch as the singular version. As mentioned before, this
results in the alteration of the meter which causes the snappiness of the English version to be
lost.
The Munchkinlanders provide Oz with food and thus Munchkinland mostly consists of
farms. Therefore they are mapped in terms of corny in line 6. Corny can mean ‘related to corn’ or
6
Without any true cause. They are just loathed.
~ 37 ~
‘cliché’, but it also refers to a ‘‘sense of rustic, appealing to country folk’’ (Oxford Dictionary
Online). So literally the line refers to the fact that Munchkinlanders grow corn. Yet, they are also
seen by the Gillikinese, who form the upper class of society, as boring and clichés because they
live in the country. Thus the comparison is negative. In the German passage the
Munchkinlanders are no longer mapped in terms of corn, but the sense of boredom is maintained
by the word öd. Lenting translated Munchkinlanders lead corny lives with the simile een Knaaglander saai
al seen ouwe bes. This simile preserves, and indeed focuses, on the sense of boring evoked by the
English corny as the Munckinlanders lead just as dull lives as old ladies. After all, an ouwe bes is an
old lady (Dikke Van Dale). However, the aspect of cliché and the link to corn are lost in both
German and Dutch.
The Winkies, who are nomads living in the west of Oz, are compared to bees. They are
mapped in terms of swarms, because they live in tribes. Their camps are compared to sticky hives.
Möhring describes the Winkies by means of a metaphor as well, but this is completely different
from the original English one. In the German translation, they are compared in terms of how
they live; Winkies live like pigs. I would argue that he changed it from bees to pigs not for
semantic reasons, but to maintain the end-rhyme. By changing the metaphor from bees to pigs,
Sauen rhymes with Frauen in line 7. Additionally, this metaphor Winker hausen wie die Sauen allows
for assonance as line 7 in the German text (which is quite literally translated) also has two
instances of [aʊ]. Therefore I would argue that Möhring mostly focused on rhyme, both endrhyme and assonance, in his translation of line 8. Otherwise the line does not make much sense,
because the Winkies do not resemble pigs in this sense at all. They are actually very organized
people. Lenting did not use a metaphor or simile to describe the Winkies. Rather een Winkie heeft
een kleverig lijf is a vehicle to maintain the end-rhyme with wijf.
In the German passage the Quadlings are also described by means of a metaphor; they
are strohdumm. This metaphor maps intelligence in terms of hay, which naturally does not possess
any intelligence at all. Therefore, the comparison emphasizes the supposed stupidity of the
Quadlings. Möhring’s solution to curse-at-godlings is not to invent a new word himself, but to
choose for gar nicht fromm which roughly conveys the same message. The Dutch translator
translated curse-at-godlings into godvergeeflanders, which is an ambiguous word. Depending on where
the stress is put, it either is a curse godver-geeflanders or about forgiving god-vergeeflanders. In my
opinion, both words are odd. The first option has the aspect of cursing, but then geef is strange as
it seems random. The second choice would also be peculiar since then the aspect of cursing
would be lost. For clarity, it would have been better perhaps if she had translated it into
godvervloeklanders as this word is less ambiguous.
~ 38 ~
Repetition on the level of syntax occurs in this passage too. In lines 1 up until 4, which
are divided in pairs, the sentence structure is repeated. The first line of a pair is a comparison
between boys and girls in four words total. Both lines start first with the boys and then the girls.
The second lines of the pairs start both with That’s the way and they consist of six words. The
second and fourth lines are almost exact repetitions; only the last words differ. The sentence
structures in lines 5 up until 8 is exactly the same and thus present a form of repetition. Line 9
has a completely different structure, which alongside with the meter and rhyme foregrounds this
line and signals the change in the nursery rhyme. The repetition of Quadlings emphasizes their
difference in comparison to the other people of Oz as well. Möhring has altered the repetition on
the level of syntax. I already mentioned that there is no repetition in line 9. The reduplication of
the structure of the first four lines has been changed as well. While lines 1 and 3 have the same
structure, lines 2 and 4 do not. The repetition of the sentence construction is maintained in lines
5 up until 8 though. Thus the German text is not as effective as the English regarding syntax
repetition. Lenting mostly kept the syntactic repetition in lines 1 up until 4. Yet, she unnecessarily
added en in line 3 and thus the repetition is not perfect. In addition, lines 2 and 4 do are not as
perfectly repeated as in the English version. The translator maintained the repetition of sentence
construction in lines 5 up until 8, and the sentence internal repetition of line 9 as well. As a result,
line 9 receives the same emphasis as in the English original.
Lastly, the final line of the nursery rhyme is printed in italics. This indicates a change; the
fact that there is no meter also indicates that this line is different. The line is odd and does not
seem to relate to the rest of the nursery rhyme at all. From other poems in the novel it becomes
apparent that all poems with an ideological message end with an italic line; often the line in italics
shows the main message of the poem. Finally, both translators preserved the iconicity on
graphemic level as the final line in the German and Dutch translation is in italics. However,
syntax is slightly altered in both German and Dutch as the and construction would not work in
this context. Therefore both translators opted for the then construction.
Table 4 presents the findings of this section.
~ 39 ~
Outcomes of translation:
1. Iconicity is preserved.
Frequency in German
Frequency in Dutch
Translation
Translation
30 (meter 12, rhyme 9, syntax 8,
30 (rhyme 11, meter 8, syntax 7,
graphemic iconicity 1).
alliteration 1, metaphor 1, lexical
repetition 1, graphemic iconicity 1).
2. Iconicity is preserved but
4 (meter 1, sound symbolism 1,
expressed by different iconic
meter instead of lexical repetition 1,
means in the same clause.
substitution of curse-at-godlings
3 (rhyme 2, metaphor 1).
with gar nicht fromm 1).
3. Iconicity shifted to another
clause.
4. One iconic feature is
1 (metaphor).
preserved resulting in the loss
of another iconic feature.
5. Iconicity is preserved but
1 (metaphor).
2 (metaphor 1, invention of
meaning has been subtly or
godvergeeflanders 1).
severely altered.
6. Iconicity lost.
7. Iconicity added.
11 (rhyme 4, metaphor 3, syntax
10 (meter 5, syntax 4, sound
3, alliteration 1).
symbolism 1).
1 (metaphor).
Table 4. Outcomes of the translations of passage three.
4.4
Passage Four: Horrible Morrible
The fourth passage contains a description of Madame Morrible, the Headmisstress of Crage Hall,
who is known amongst her students as Horrible Morrible. She is an evil force, who works for the
Wizard of Oz and for this reason she obtained her nickname. As this nickname is iconic on the
endophoric level due to reduplication – the words are the same except for the first consonant – I
will first briefly discuss it. In English, Horrible Morrible is almost a perfect reduplication, and it is
of course not an accident that horrible so nicely rhymes with Morrible. This gives the feeling that
‘horrible’ really suits this person, foregrounding her awfulness. In addition, Madame Morrible is a
huge and grotesque woman, and the capital letter in Horrible emphasizes, to me, her
grotesqueness and how horrifying she is. Reduplication, Norrman (2001) argues, also enlarges an
object. Thus the reduplication serves to emphasize the fact that the headmistress is a huge
~ 40 ~
woman. In addition, Norrman also argues that bilabial sounds such as [m] an [b] ‘‘denote massive
roundness’’ (2001, p. 91). So both the reduplication and the bilabials in Madame Morrible enlarge
her even more. Madame Morrible is also a snobbish woman, who feels very important. This is
indicated with the title Madame which she gave to herself. It has a French ring to it, and it
foregrounds her association with the upper-class. Furthermore, Madame alliterates with Morrible
as well.
The German translator translated the nickname into Makabre Akaber, which maintains the
rhythm of the English nickname. What is striking is the spelling of Makabre. In German the word
is actually spelled makaber but Möhring changed the spelling into Makabre in order to preserve the
sense of Frenchness. The translator changed the name of Morrible into Akaber to be able to
maintain the reduplication of sounds; makaber and Akaber also exactly repeat each other except
for the first sound. Semantically the sense of ‘horrible’ is maintained, although I would argue that
makaber is stronger than horrible as the first is especially associated with death and decay. Yet, the
description still fits Madame Morrible as she is an evil woman involved in murders.
The solution of Ineke Lenting is less adequate. She translated the nickname into Morribel
de Monsterlijke. Due to the extra (unstressed) syllables, this nickname sounds less hard. The
reduplication is lost as this is a construction of three words, and the sounds only partially repeat; I
think Lenting could have left out de since Monsterlijke Morribel would also work in Dutch. Yet, this
solution still has a syllable too much in monsterlijke (four instead of three). Perhaps Monster Morrible
would have been an option. The reduplication would still not be maintained, but the rhythm
would be. Due to the repetition of [m] and [ɔ] there is still a sense of unity, but not as complete
as in the original or the German translation. Semantically, the nickname does fit as Morribel de
Monsterlijke is a monstrous woman. Yet, there is no foregrounded association with French as the
spelling does not suggest foreignness. However, this is not problematic at all since the English
original does not carry this extra level of meaning either; it is an invention of Hans-Ulrich
Möhring. The title Madame is preserved in both German and Dutch, although Lenting decided to
spell it with a lower-case letter.
The passages describing Horrible Morrible run as follows:
The Headmisstress of Crage Hall, a fish-faced upper-class Gillikinese woman
wearing a lot of cloisonné bangles, was greeting new arrivals in the atrium.
The head eschewed the drabness of professional women’s dress that Galinda
had expected. Instead the imposing woman was bedecked in a currantcolored gown with patterns of black jet swirling over the bodice like dynamic
~ 41 ~
markings on sheet music. ‘‘I am Madame Morrible,’’ she said to Galinda. Her
voice was basso profundo, her grip crippling, her posture military, her
earrings like holiday tree ornaments. (Maguire, 2007, p. 88).
Die Rektorin des Grattler-Kollegs, eine fischgesichtige Gillikinesin der
Oberschicht mit vielen Cloisonnéreifen an den Armen, begrüßte die
Neuzugänge im Atrium. Die Kleidung der Rektorin zeichnete sich nicht
durch das Blaustrumpfhafte aus, das Galinda bei einer Akademikerin erwartet
hatte. Die imposante Frau war vielmehr in ein johannisbeerrotes Kleid mit
wild versprengten schwarzen Jettaufnähern gewandet, die das Oberteil wie
eine dynamische Notenschrift überzogen. »Ich bin Madame Akaber«, sagte
sie zu Galinda. Ihr Stimmlage war Bass, ihr Händedruck wie ein
Schraubstock, ihre Haltung militärisch, ihre Ohrringe wie Festbaumschmuck.
(Maguire, 2008, p. 97).
De directrice van Kraagh Hal, een Gillikijnse uit de hogere kringen, met een
hoofd als een vis en een hele verzameling cloisonné armbanden, stond in het
atrium om de nieuwaangekomenen te begroeten. De rectrix had kennelijk
niets op met de kleurloosheid waarmee carrièrevrouwen zich vaak kleedden –
en waar Galinda op had gerekend. De imposante dame was gehuld in een
paarsrood gewaad met een dessin van gitjes die over het lijfje wervelden als
dynamische markeringen op bladmuziek. ‘Ik ben madame Morribel,’ zei ze
tegen Galinda. Ze had een diepe basstem, haar greep was verlammend, haar
houding krijgshaftig en haar oorbellen leken wel feestversierselen. (Maguire,
2010, p. 89).
The headmistress is described as a fish-faced woman. The link to fish is nasty on multiple levels.
First, a fish is not commonly associated with beauty. We can thus infer that Madame Morrible is
an ugly woman. Secondly, the sounds [f], [s], and [ʃ] are sounds associated with slithery and slimy
which are nasty connotations; this effect is deepened by the alliteration. These slithery sounds
match Madame Morrible as she never gets caught for the crimes she committed. Elphaba and
other people try to assassinate her, but she always manages to slip through the net and slither
away like a slippery eel. In the German translation, the image of Madame Akaber’s appearance is
drawn in terms of fish as well. Although fischgesichtige does not alliterate like fish-faced, it contains
~ 42 ~
assonance. In addition, the word summons the image of an ugly and slithery woman as
fischgesichtige also has the sounds [f] and [ʃ]. The s is actually realized as [z] in German, but this
sound also fits Madame Morrible.
Ineke Lenting, too, preserved the comparison of Madame Morrible to a fish by translating
fish-faced into met een hoofd als een vis. This simile, however, does not have the same strong effect as
the English and German equivalents; this is most likely due to the fact that in English and
German the description is compact whereas in Dutch it is an entire clause. Due to the simile
there is no case of sound symbolism anymore. The simile, and the resulting loss of sound
symbolism, does not evoke an image of a very ugly and slithery woman the way fish-faced and
fischgesichtige do; it is also too mild for Horrible Morrible due to the word hoofd. Instead of met een
hoofd als een vis, the translator could have chosen an expression such as vissenkop. This is much
more a negative expression associated with ugliness and sliminess in Dutch than the simile. This
option also maintains the snappiness of the English text.
Cloisonné reinforces the feeling of upper-classness with which Horrible Morrible associates
herself; like Madame, cloisonné is also French and the words underpin the supercilious character of
the headmistress. Bangles is also iconic as the hard sound [b] and front sound [æ] resemble the
sounds when the bracelets dangle and collide with each other. Maguire could have opted for
bracelet, but that would have been less poetic. In the German passage, Cloisonnéreifen preserves the
association with French and the supercilious choice of words of the upper-class, as reifen is a
metal bracelet but the term is less frequently used than Armband. Lenting’s translation of a lot of
cloisonné bangles is, in my opinion, very good as een hele verzameling cloisonné armbanden is an
exaggeration and it emphasizes the sense of grotesque that Horrible Morrible evokes. The sound
symbolism of bangles has been lost in both translations.
The choice for eschew also helps to paint a picture of Madame Morrible as it is a very
formal word for to avoid. Thus the choice of eschew fits with the upper-class style of the
headmistress. Drabness means dull and boring, especially referring to the lack of color, but drab is
less frequently used than the other two options. It therefore highlights the headmistress’ absurd
taste. Drabness is also a negative term. Möhring does not preserve the use of a word such as eschew.
More importantly, he changed this sentence from active to passive. In the English version
Madame Morrible is an active agent which underlines her position of power, but in the German
passage she is not an active agent. However, the sense of drabness is preserved by Möhring by
means of the striking lexical item Blaustrumpfhafte, which is a strong term and very rare in usage.
Just like drabness it means dull, and it has very negative connotations as well; it is often used to
mock an intelligent woman. A Blaustrumpf is an intelligent woman who looks very unfeminine
~ 43 ~
(Duden Wörterbuch Online). The term is derived from an unorganized women’s emancipation
movement in the 19th Century.
Lenting’s translation of eschew and drabness is less adequate since the use of fancy
vocabulary is not preserved. Had kennelijk niets op and kleurloos are frequently used, and these
words slacken the entire description. The inserted hyphen as well as kennelijk and vaak add
emphasis to Galinda’s opinion; as a result, Galinda is foregrounded in the Dutch translation
whereas she does not receive special attention in the original English text. Lenting on the other
hand keeps the active sentence. Accordingly Madame Morrible does have agency, but she is not
as central as in the English sentence.
Next, Maguire underscores Horrible Morrible’s ugly grotesqueness by describing her in
terms of a decorated holiday tree. First, he uses the adjective bedecked, which means covered with
lots of decorations. This evokes a ridiculous image and it emphasizes the headmistress largeness
once more; the word bedecked is often used with large objects and for ludicrous descriptions
(British National Corpus and Corpus of Contemporary American English). Maguire continues
this image by finishing it with the simile her earrings like holiday tree ornaments. Thus Madame
Morrible’s clothing and accessories are far from drab as they are grotesque and silly. The dress in
which she is bedecked is currant-colored, which alliterates and foregrounds the color. The black jet
pattern on her gown is described by means of a simile. The pattern is swirling like dynamic markings
on sheet music. This is a rather ironic description since swirling again foregrounds the grotesque and
large appearance of Horrible Morrible.
In the German translation, the choice for gewandet keeps the sense of the grotesqueness of
Makabre Akaber since it is a verb not frequently used, but when used it is facetious or to make
fun of someone. As it is a infrequently used verb, it also maintains the sense of poetic word
choice of the original English version. While johannisbeerrotes Kleid does not alliterate like currantcolored, it is nonetheless iconic as it is metaphorical; after all, the dress is mapped in terms of one
of the characteristics of currants: its color. In addition, both in English and German the color
description is so precise that it also adds to the ridiculous and bizarre image of Madame Morrible.
The ludicrous image regarding the gown is preserved in the German translation as Möhring
translated the simile like dynamic markings on sheet music literally into wie eine dynamische Notenschrift
überzogen. Swirl has been rendered into wild versprengten instead of wirbeln, which would have been a
literal translation. This is too bad, as it would have provided an opportunity for alliteration: wild
wirbelnden would have been a more poetic option. The simile regarding her earrings has been
preserved as well.
~ 44 ~
Lenting decided to translate imposing woman with imposante dame and this choice is wellmade as a dame is usually associated with the upper-class. However, the image of Madame
Morrible as a huge decorated tree is not present in the Dutch translation since Lenting decided to
translate bedecked with gehuld. Gehuld is common in the Dutch literary register (Dikke Van Dale),
and it does not have the connotation to large objects. However, due to the fact that hullen is
literary, the poetic language is preserved as it is a better choice than the common gekleed. In
addition, the choice for paarsrood stands for a loss of iconicity as the color of the gown is no
longer mapped so specifically in terms of currants. The simile regarding the pattern of the jets is
maintained as Lenting translated the sentence literally. However, the use of diminutive suffixes in
gitjes and lijfje unnecessarily weakens the description of the headmistress’ largeness.
The final sentence is iconic due to syntax and metaphors. The sentence structure is
repeated as each clause starts with her followed by a description. Due to the fact that the
descriptions are rather short (except for the last one), the repetition sounds forceful, strict and
commanding; it has a staccato rhythm. This reinforces the words with which she is described; she
is powerful and military. The description of her voice, basso profundo, is a fancy substitute for bass
and an unconventional choice. This choice extends the imagery of music of the gown and it
reinforces again Madame Morrible’s association with the upper-class. The fact that her grip is
crippling is scary, and it underlines why her nickname is Horrible Morrible; she is strong and she
can cripple you. This is foregrounded by the assonance of [I] in grip crippling as well. She is
mapped in terms of the military, and thus she is a force to be reckoned with. Overall, the word
choice emphasizes Madame Morrible’s connections with the upper-class, her snobbishness and
superciliousness, her largeness, and her power.
The syntactic iconicity of the last sentence has been translated by Möhring too as each
clause starts with ihr followed by a description. Therefore the sense of command and forcefulness
is maintained. In addition, the sentence is also metaphorical. I appreciate Möhring’s choice for
Schraubstock, which means vise. It is stronger than crippling as a vise can be seen as a particular tool
for torture, but this absolutely fits Makabre Akaber. She is not averse to using violence and
torture, and the choice of this simile emphasizes the danger she poses. Her posture military and her
earrings like holiday tree ornaments have been translated literally.
Lenting changed the syntax of the final sentence by making Madame Morrible the subject
instead of her voice, and by adding verbs; the Dutch sentence contains three verbs whereas the
English text only has one verb. The extra words diminish the effect of repetition and dictation.
However, the shift in subject position is an obligatory shift since haar stem was bas is awkward in
Dutch. On the other hand, readers most likely would understand haar stem was basso profundo; after
~ 45 ~
all, in English it is also unconventional. The Dutch translator did maintain the simile and
metaphors to some extent; crippling is translated literally and krijgshaftig is associated with the
military. While the simile regarding the earrings does not concern a holiday tree, feestversierselen
does maintain the sense of grotesque and bizarre appearance; feestversierselen makes Madame
Morrible perhaps even more ridiculous as it reminds me of Carnaval and clowns. However,
Lenting again has unnecessarily added the words leken wel which weakens the description.
Table 5 shows the results of this section.
Outcomes of translation:
1. Iconicity is preserved.
Frequency in German
Frequency in Dutch
Translation
Translation
11 (rhythm 2, word choice 2, sound
5 (word choice 2, sound symbolism
symbolism 2, simile 2, rhyme 1,
1, syntax 1, metaphor 1).
syntax 1, metaphor 1).
2. Iconicity is preserved but
2 (assonance instead of alliteration
expressed by different iconic
in fischgesichtige 1, simile
means in the same clause.
Händedruck wie ein
Schraubstock 1).
3. Iconicity shifted to another
clause.
4. One iconic feature is
1 (word choice johannisbeerrotes
preserved resulting in the loss
results in loss of alliteration).
of another iconic feature.
5. Iconicity is preserved but
2 (reduplication 1, word choice 1).
2 (word choice 1, simile 1).
4 (word choice 2, sound symbolism
13 (word choice 5, rhythm 2, sound
1, syntax 1).
symbolism 2, syntax 1,
meaning has been subtly or
severely altered.
6. Iconicity lost.
reduplication 1, rhyme 1,
alliteration 1).
7. Iconicity added.
1 (spelling of Makabre).
1 (exaggeration by means of een
hele verzameling).
Table 5. Outcomes of the translations of passage four.
~ 46 ~
4.5
Passage Five: In the Vinkus
The final object of investigation is a piece of prose, which paints a picture of the landscape of the
Vinkus. This is a land in the West of Oz mostly inhabited by nomadic tribes. The passage runs as
follows:
By the light of sallowwood torches, the camels, in glittering caparisons, lurched
und lumbered on a worn track. It was like going up and down a staircase at the
same time. Elphie sat above the grass, a vantage point over the great flickering
surface. Although the ocean was only an idea sprung out of mythology, she
could almost see where it came from – there were small grasshawks launching
themselves like fish leaping out of the spume, nipping at the fireflies, pocketing
them, then falling back in a dry splash. Bats passed, making a guttering,
sputtering sound that ended in an extinguishing swoop. The plain itself seemed
to bring forth night color: now a heliotrope, now a bronzy green, now a dun
color skeined through with red and silver. The moon rose, an opalescent
goddess tipping light from her harsh maternal scimitar. Nothing more need
have happened; it seemed enough to Elphaba to find herself capable of such
weird ecstatic response to soft color and safe space. But no, on – on. (Maguire,
2007, p. 304-305).
Im Licht von Weidenfackeln schaukelten die mit glitzernden Schabracken
bedenkten Kamele einen ausgetretenen Pfad entlang. Auf ihnen zu reiten war,
als ginge man eine Treppe gleichzeitig hinauf und hinunter. Elphaba blickte
über die flirrende Weite des Graslands hinaus. Obwohl das Meer nur eine den
Mythen entsprungene Idee war, sah sie beinahe, wie die Idee entstanden war:
Kleine Grasfalken schossen empor wie aus der Gischt springende Fische,
schnappten nach Leuchtkäfern, schluckten sie und ließen sich mit einem
trockenen Platschen wieder fallen. Fledermäuse strichen mit einem lauten
Flattern vorbei, das jäh mit einem Wusch endete. Die Ebene selbst schien
nächtliche Farben hervorzubringen: mal ein Blauviolett, mal ein broziertes
Grün, mal ein rot und silbern geädertes Graubraun. Der Mond ging auf, eine
opaliserende Göttin, die mit ihrem harten mütterlichen Krummsäbel Licht
spendete. Mehr hätte für Elhpabas Geschmack nicht zu geschehen brauchen:
~ 47 ~
Die eigentümliche Ekstase, in die sie die sanften Farben und das Gefühlt der
Geborgenheit versetzten, reichte ihr vollkommen aus. Doch nein, es ging
weiter. (Maguire, 2008, p. 315-316).
Bij het licht van wilgentoortsen hotsten en sjokten de kamelen met hun
glitterende sjabrakken over een uitgesleten spoor. Het was alsof je tegelijkertijd
een trap op en af ging. Elphie troonde hoog boven het gras en kon de hele
flikkerende vlakte overzien. Hoewel de oceaan slechts een mythologisch begrip
was, zag ze bijna waar die zijn oorsprong had: kleine libellen schoten als vissen
omhoog uit het schuim, hapten naar vuurvliegjes, die ze verorberden, waarna
ze met een droge plons terugvielen. Vleermuizen vlogen over met een
spatterend, sputterend geluid dat eindigde in een allesuitwissende duik. De
vlakte zelf leek nachtkleuren voort te brengen: van paarsrood tot bronsgroen
tot vaalbruin, dooraderd met rood en zilver. De maan kwam op, een melkwitte
godin die licht schonk uit haar wrede moederlijke kromzwaard. Nu hoefde
niets meer te gebeuren; het leek Elphaba voldoende dat ze in staat was tot een
dergelijke geheimzinnige, extatische reactie op zachte tinten en veilige ruimte.
Maar nee, ze moesten verder, steeds verder. (Maguire, 2010, p. 285).
The first sentence of this passage describes the experience of traveling on camelback and it
contains two levels of iconicity. First, I would argue that the syntax is iconic because it contains
multiple clauses separated by commas. These commas, three in total, and the pauses they create,
almost evoke the heavy rhythm of the steps of the camels; it is as if the sentence is also lurching
and lumbering. Secondly, sounds are repeated in the section the camels, in glittering caparisons,
lurched and lumbered. Camels and caparisons alliterates, and in addition to that the vowel [æ] is
repeated. In the non-restrictive modifying clause in glittering caparisons, the repetition of the liquids
[l] and [r] evokes a sense of continuation which matches the fact that they go on [and] on. In
addition, the rhythm of the word glittering resembles the up and down movement of the camels.
The assonance of [i] foregrounds the glittering as well. Lurched and lumbered alliterates, thus creating
a sense of unity between the two descriptive words and making the movement laborious. In
addition, lurched and lumbered can also be seen as symbolic as the sounds [tʃ], [m], [b], and [t]
combined are perhaps more difficult to pronounce. Thus the sounds highlight this image of
heavy walking and trekking; it sounds heavy and tiresome. In addition to this, eye rhyme occurs
~ 48 ~
as well; it looks as if lurched and lumbered contains assonance on paper but the first is actually
pronounced with [ɜ] whereas the latter is pronounced with [ʌ].
Hans-Ulrich Möhring’s first sentence is less iconic since the syntactic iconicity is not
preserved. However, this loss is an obligatory shift because the English syntactic structure is not
possible in German. Yet, there is still some iconicity present in Möhring’s translation. Schaukelten,
for example, is iconic as it roughly means the same as lurched and lumbered; it is just one word
instead of two. Aguably, schaukelten costs effort to pronounce due to the consonant clusters. The
word is therefore iconic in the sense that it resembles the laborious walking. Möhring repeats –el
in Weidenfackeln and schaukelten and thus assonance is maintained. Möhring preseves a sense of
poetic language by choosing schaukelten as it is a word with a low frequency (Duden Wörterbuch
Online).
Lenting did not keep the syntactic structure of the first sentence either for the same
reasons as Möhring, yet she maintained iconicity with the translation of lurched and lumbered into
hotsten en sjokten. While the Dutch translation does not alliterate, the vowels and some consonants
are repeated creating a sense of unity as well. In addition, the consonant clusters [tst] and [kt] are
difficult to pronounce, and therefore articulatory sound symbolism is also present in the Dutch
translation.
To strengthen the image of heavy walking and the unusual experience of traveling by
camel, the sound symbolism and alliteration is followed by the simile it was like going up and down a
staircase at the same time. Going up and down at the same time mirrors the motion one experiences
on a camel’s back. In addition, it would also prove to be difficult and tiresome to move up and
down at the same time.7 The simile of the staircase is literally translated in the German
translation, resulting in the preservation of iconicity. Moreover, in the German translation hinauf
und hinunter alliterates and hin is repeated; this creates emphasis. Lenting translated the simile
literally as well. Both the German and Dutch translator changed the syntax of the simile though,
but both changes are cases of obligatory shifts.
Arguably, flickering is a case of articulatory sound symbolism as the tongue moves up,
down, and to the front and back of the oral cavity while pronouncing the word. Therefore, it
resembles the fluctuating and bobbing movement of something that flickers. Additionally, the
repetition of [f] in flickering surface creates again a oneness between the adjective and noun.
Arguably, flirrende is just like flickering an instance of articulatory sound symbolism as the tongue
moves around the oral cavity. Hence it may resemble the movement of flickering. Additionally,
I imagine this as when you try to move up on an escalator that goes down. You go against the motion and it is very
difficult to walk up.
7
~ 49 ~
this word is associated with exalted and literary language (Duden Wörterbuch Online). Therefore
the choice for flirren is more poetic than other options such as flimmern or glitzern, which are very
common words.
Lenting translated flickering literally into flikkerende, and iconicity is thus preserved;
flikkerende is arguably a case of articulatory sound symbolism too. Lenting managed to keep the
repetition of [f] by translating flickering surface literally into flikkerende vlakte, something which was
not possible in German. In addition to this, Lenting added iconicity to this sentence with the
word troonde. This is a word mostly used in a literary context and thus a case of poetic language.
While the English original just contains sat, Lenting has made Elpha’s position stronger by
mapping her sitting position in terms of a throne; this gives an importance and a sense of being
in control to Elphaba.
There is an emphasis on lexical iconicity in the fourth sentence as it is metaphorical in
two ways. First, while the ocean does not exist in Oz as it is a mythological entity, it is
nevertheless mapped in terms of the flickering surface of the plain in the Vinkus; if an ocean would
exist then it would look like the plain. Secondly, an idea sprung out of mythology is a metaphor as well
since it maps the forming of an idea in terms of the beginning of a river. Moreover, this
metaphor is clever as it highlights the water imagery. The ocean and river metaphor also
reinforces the undulating movement of the camels.
The water imagery regarding the mythical ocean is preserved by the German translator.
Lenting, however, does not maintain this imagery as strongly; she translated an idea sprung out of
mythology rather flatly with slechts een mythologisch begrip while een idee ontsprongen uit de mythologie or
something similar would have worked in Dutch. She does keep the reference to the source of a
river by translating where it came from with oorsprong but without ontsprongen this is rather weak; it
does not evoke the image of the origins of a river. Yet, the plain is still described in terms of an
ocean; thus the water imagery is maintained to some extent.
The water imagery is extended throughout the paragraph as the wildlife is described in
terms of river animals. For example, grasshawks are compared to fish as these dragonflies leap,
nip at fireflies and fall back in a dry splash. The choice for grasshawks is also unconventional. The
term is so rare that it does not even have an entry in the Oxford and Macmillan dictionaries. The
choice thus adds something special, and I would argue that grasshawks also ensures the link to the
plain by means of grass. The water imagery is further extended by the use of spume. Yet the
juxtaposition between dry and splash foregrounds that it is only imagery, and that there is no ocean
at all; Maguire takes us on a journey to an ocean and then brings us back to the plain again.
Furthermore, associative sound symbolism is also employed here as the sentence contains many
~ 50 ~
liquids such as [l] and [r], and fricatives such as [s], [ʃ] and [f]: there were small grasshawks launching
themselves like fish leaping out of the spume, nipping at the fireflies, pocketing them, then falling back in a dry
splash. The liquids and the fricatives sound like rushing waters. Consequently, these sounds
foreground and reinforce the water imagery. The leaping is also emphasized by the many voiceless
plosives.
Just as in the English original, in the German translation the water imagery is extended by
the description of the wildlife. The imagery of the Grasfalken is translated literally. In the German
translation the sound symbolism is present as well since the liquids [l] and [r], and the fricatives
[s], [ʃ] and [f] are omnipresent in this sentence: Kleine Grasfalken schossen empor wie aus der Gischt
springende Fische, schnappten nach Leuchtkäfern, schluckten sie und ließen sich mit einem trockenen
Platschen wieder fallen. So in German, the sounds of this sentence evoke an image of rushing
waters too.
Lenting, too, literally translated the imagery of the grasshawks, resulting in the
preservation of the water imagery. Except the curious choice for grasshawks is not maintained
since she translated it with the common libelle. There is no sound symbolism in Dutch as there
are not as many liquids and fricatives present in the translation. In my opinion, this was an
inevitable shift as the Dutch words simply do not have these sounds. Therefore Lenting’s strategy
was to maintain meaning rather than sound symbolism.
The bats make a guttering, sputtering noise which also maintains the water imagery; they
sound like water or rain splattering and splashing onto a surface. In addition, there is also
reduplication as the words are the same except for the first consonants. This splashing sound
ends in a swoop, which is onomatopoeic as the sounds of the word echo what one hears when
someone dives. Despite the fact that the sound repetition of guttering, sputtering and its connection
to the water image is lost in the German translation, the movement of the bats is preserved
nonetheless by means of the words strichen and lauten Flattern; the German translation more
literally describes the movements of the bats. Strichen is the past tense of streichen and it means
‘‘mit einer gleitenden Bewegung [leicht, ebnend, glättend] über etwas hinfahren, hinstreichen’’
(Duden Wörterbuch Online)8. Thus strichen is a stronger word than passed in the English version,
and it already contains the description of the movement of the bats. Flattern is arguably iconic as
well due to auditory symbolism; the consonants and vowels are reminiscent of the fluttering
sound of wings. Therefore, Flattern in combination with lauten is an equivalent of guttering,
sputtering regarding the bats movements. Just as in the English original, the sentence about the
bats ends with an onomatopoeic Wusch.
8
Brushing over something with a soft, gliding movement.
~ 51 ~
The Dutch translator did keep the water imagery with regard to the bats by translating
guttering, sputtering into spatterend, sputterend. In addition, the sound reduplication of the words is
reminiscent of the English original as well since spatterend and sputterend only differ due to the first
vowel. However, Lenting chose not to end the sentence with an onomatopoeia; she translated
swoop with duik, which weakens the description significantly.
Furthermore, the colors of the plains extend the water image too; the colors constantly
change the way colors of flowing water also changes. The syntax is iconic due to the repetition of
now; each clause starts with now followed by a new color description. The lack of verbs evokes an
image of sudden changes as well. The moon is described by means of imagery too; she is
compared to an opalescent goddess tipping light from her harsh maternal scimitar. Thus the moon is
associated with femininity (goddess and mother), and her shape is described as an ‘‘Arab or
Turkish sword with a curved blade that becomes wider near the point’’ (Macmillan Online
Dictionary). Thus she has both soft power due to her femininity and harsh power. The lexical
items chosen by Maguire make this sentence exotic and ecstatic. Words such as opalescent, tipping
light and scimitar are words and phrases not typically used in colloquial language. Finally, in the last
sentence of this passage soft color and safe space alliterate and contain assonance, foregrounding
the color and the space of the plain once more.
In the German translation the water imagery is extended as well through the changing
colors of the plain. Similar to the English original, this is expressed by means of syntactic
repetition. Möhring chose the word mal instead of jetzt, which would have been a literal
translation of the English now. Yet jetzt is a rather forceful and urgent term, and therefore the
choice for mal is more suitable as this better evokes the relaxed vibe which the plain seems to
radiate. The metaphors describing the moon have been literally translated by Möhring resulting in
the preservation of the iconicity. Finally, in the second to last sentence Möhring managed to
preserve iconicity in his translation despite the fact that the alliteration of soft safe space has been
lost; he has translated safe space with Gefühl der Geborgenheit, which does alliterate. The assonance of
soft color is also maintained due to sanften Farben.
Lenting expanded the water imagery through the description of the changing colors of
the plain as well. Yet, she did not keep the syntactic repetition of the original. Rather she created
her own weaker repetition with the van tot- construction. This shift is unnecessary since the
syntactic structure of the original works in Dutch as well. Lenting could have translated this
sentence with something like dan paarsrood, dan bronsgroen, dan een vaalbruin dooraderd met rood en zilver.
The metaphors with which the moon is described are literally translated by Lenting. However,
while she overall maintains the exotic poetic language in this sentence, Lenting did not translate
~ 52 ~
opalescent with opalen, which is a less frequent and more fancier word in Dutch than melkwitte.
Finally, the assonance and alliteration of soft color and safe space has been lost.
Table 6 shows the results of the analysis of passage five.
Outcomes of translation:
1. Iconicity is preserved.
Frequency in German
Frequency in Dutch
Translation
Translation
14 (sound symbolism 5, metaphor
9 (Metaphor 4, sound symbolism 2,
5, simile 1, syntax 1, word choice
alliteration 2, simile 1).
1, onomatopoeia 1).
2. Iconicity is preserved but
2 (word choice schaukelten 1,
expressed by different iconic
frequentative –el 1).
means in the same clause.
3. Iconicity shifted to another
clause.
4. One iconic feature is
1 (word choice).
preserved resulting in the loss
of another iconic feature.
5. Iconicity is preserved but
meaning has been subtly or
severely altered.
6. Iconicity lost.
2 (syntax 1, alliteration 1).
8 (sound symbolism 3, syntax 2,
metaphor 1, word choice 1,
onomatopoeia 1).
7. Iconicity added.
1 (alliteration).
Table 6. Outcomes of the translations of passage five.
~ 53 ~
1 (word choice).
5. Discussion and Conclusion
The aim of this thesis was twofold. First, it aimed to discover the translation strategies employed
by the German and Dutch translators of Gregory Maguire’s novel Wicked (1995). Secondly, this
study aimed to determine how these strategies affected the meaning and iconicity of the source
text; that is, how the translators have created distinctly different target texts by preserving,
deleting, adding or changing iconic features. A comparative analysis was made between five
passages of the English source text and the German and Dutch target texts. The results of the
investigation underscored Tabakowska’s (2003) assertions regarding the complexity of translating
iconic and stylistic features. The results of section 4 show that the translators often made very
different choices resulting in different target texts. The analysis of iconicity in five passages (two
pieces of poetry and three pieces of prose) in the three languages according to the models of
Short & Leech (2007) and Van den Broeck (1985), as presented in sections 4.1 up until 4.5,
allows the research question of this thesis to be answered in this section.
Table 7 (on the following page) shows the results of the analyses carried out in section 4.
~ 54 ~
Outcomes of translation
1. Iconicity is preserved.
Total Frequency in German
Total Frequency in Dutch
Translation
Translation
77 (meter 19, (end-)rhyme 14,
58 ( (end-)rhyme 16, metaphor 9,
syntax 12, sound symbolism 8,
syntax 9, meter 8, sound symbolism
metaphor 7, feminine rhyme 4,
5, alliteration 4, word choice 3,
simile 4, word choice 3, alliteration
symmetrical structure 1, lexical
2, assonance 1, masculine rhyme 1,
repetition 1, graphemic iconicity 1,
lexical repetition 1, graphemic
simile 1).
iconicity 1).
2. Iconicity is preserved but
10 (sound symbolism 3, meter 2,
3 (rhyme 2, metaphor 1).
expressed by different iconic
lexical items 2, assonance 1, simile
means in the same clause.
1, frequentative 1).
3. Iconicity shifted to another
3 (alliteration 3).
0
1 (word choice 1).
3 (simile 1, metaphor 1, word
clause.
4. One iconic feature is
preserved resulting in the loss
choice 1).
of another iconic feature.
5. Iconicity is preserved but
7 (end-rhyme 4, metaphor 1,
9 (end-rhyme 3, lexical repetition 1,
meaning has been subtly or
reduplication 1, word choice 1).
metaphor 2, lexical item 1, word
severely altered.
6. Iconicity lost.
7. Iconicity added.
choice 1, simile 1).
36 (metaphor 6, sound symbolism
61 (meter 16, sound symbolism 11,
5, syntax 5, meter 4, end-rhyme 4,
syntax 8, feminine and masculine
word choice 3, alliteration 3,
rhyme 8, alliteration 6, word choice
feminine rhyme 2, masculine rhyme
6, assonance 2, lexical repetition 1,
1, lexical repetition 1, symmetrical
reduplication 1, rhyme 1, metaphor
structure 1, assonance 1).
1).
3 (metaphor 1, spelling of
2 (exaggeration 1, word choice 1).
Makabre 1, alliteration 1).
Table 7. Results.
It becomes apparent that overall the German translation is more adequate. Möhring managed to
preserve 77 cases of iconic features whereas Lenting preserved 58. In addition, the Dutch
translator lost almost twice as many iconic features in her translation as the German translator.
When looking at the other categories, it becomes apparent why Lenting has scored more in
~ 55 ~
category 6: Möhring has translated the text more creatively, substituting the loss of the original
iconic features more often with other iconic features or placing the iconic feature somewhere else
(see categories 2 and 3). According to the results, Möhring has managed to do so 13 times.
Section 4 shows that Lenting sometimes made unnecessary poor choices in her translation,
resulting in the loss of many iconic features in the target text. As a result, the Dutch text created
by Lenting is less iconic, and aesthetically less pleasing than the original English. In addition,
section 4 shows that Möhring hardly made any optional shifts changing the text whereas
Lenting’s translation is defined by many such unnecessary optional shifts, especially regarding
syntax (see category 6).
From Table 7 it can also be concluded that Möhring’s strategies while translating were
focused on free and creative translation, which resulted in the preservation of many iconic
features. For example, the results show that it appears that Möhring’s strategy was in line with
Jakobson’s (Bassnett, 2012) strategy; that is, overall Möhring interpreted the intended effect of
Maguire’s text and translated this effect into the target text. As a result, the German translation is
a case of semiotic transformation. Additionally, it can also be said that the German translator
focused on dynamic equivalence; that is, ‘‘the relationship between receiver and message should
aim, at being the same as that between original receivers and the source language message’’
(Bassnett, 2014, p. 36). Thus Möhring’s translation better serves the purpose, or Skopos, of the
source text. Finally, when analyzing the results from Lefevere’s theory it can be concluded that
Möhring uses four out of the seven9 proposed literary translation strategies. This results in a
balanced target text.
Lenting’s approach appears to have been more of a literal word-for-word translation. As a
consequence of this strategy, the Dutch translation does not contain as many iconic features as
the source text or the German target text. Lenting did not focus enough on the intended ‘‘effect
upon the language’’ (D’haen, 2012, p. 121). For this reason, it cannot be argued that Lenting’s
translation is a case of semiotic transformation. As a result, the Dutch translation inclines to
formal equivalence rather than dynamic equivalence. Consequently, the Dutch target text does
not serve the same purpose as the source text because the latter is ‘‘a staggering feat of
wordscraft’’ (Maguire, 2007) whereas the Dutch text does not contain as many style markers.
Finally, Lenting only uses two out of seven translation strategies10 as outlined by Lefevere, which
underpins the impression that the Dutch translation is indeed unbalanced.
In conclusion, the research question of this thesis can be answered as follows: Möhring
preserved iconic features either by translating the English text literally, by replacing the iconic
9
Phonemic, literal, metrical, and rhymed translation.
Literal and rhymed translation.
10
~ 56 ~
feature by a different feature, or by altering the meaning subtly or severely in order to maintain a
certain feature. Thus, iconic form is marked as more important than meaning. From the analyses
it becomes apparent that preservation of the iconic features rhythm, sound, alliteration and
rhyme was more important to Möhring than a literal translation of the semantics and metaphors.
Due to this, some iconic features were lost. Of course, sometimes the loss of iconic features was
inevitable. The translator rarely added iconicity. Thus, the German translator’s strategy indeed
focuses on effect rather than literal translation. This resulted mostly in the preservation and slight
alteration of iconicity, while it contained the loss of iconicity.
Lenting preserved some of the iconicity by translating literally, and occasionally she
maintained iconicity by changing meaning to maintain a particular feature. Despite the fact that
Lenting thus scores 9 in category 5, section 4 also shows that literal transmission of meaning
appears to have been the norm of the Dutch translator. This literal translation strategy often
resulted in the loss of the style markers rhythm, syntax, sound, and alliteration and assonance.
Naturally, some losses were inevitable but many losses could have been prevented if Lenting
would have found more creative solutions like Möhring. The Dutch translator seldom added
iconicity either. At the same time, she did choose to add words and syntactic constructions which
are not present in the source text, and which did not need adding. This, too, resulted in the loss
of iconicity, weakened the text and sometimes even led to unnecessary awkward translations.
This thesis therefore concludes that Möhring’s German target text is more adequate than
Lenting’s. The first has preserved a higher level of literary style markers than the latter, and
overall the German text runs more smoothly than the Dutch text. The difference between the
two target text may partially be due to the fact that Hans-Ulrich Möhring is a literary author
himself.
For further research it may prove fruitful to include translations of non-Germanic
languages and of non-western cultures. The three languages investigated in this thesis are
linguistically related and the cultures are somewhat similar. Translations of the English source
text may prove to cause more difficulties in non-related languages and cultures since there will
probably be more gaps between cultures. As a result, it is likely that translators will have to be
more creative in their translation to preserve the iconic features.
~ 57 ~
Bibliography
Bassnett, Susan. (2014). Translation Studies. London: Routledge.
Bermann, Sandra. (2009). Working in the And Zone: Comparative Literature and Translation.
Comparative Literature, 61(4), 432-446.
Brillenburg Wurth, Kiene and Ann Rigney. (2008). Het Leven van Teksten: Een Inleiding tot de
Literatuurwetenschap. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Cohen, Imogen and Olga Fischer. (2015). Iconicity in Translation: Two Passages From a Novel
by Tobias Hill. In Masako K. Hiraga, William J. Herlofsky, Kazuko Shinohara, and Kimi
Akita (Eds.), East Meets West. Iconicity in Language and Literature 14 (163-184). Amsterdam:
Benjamins.
Cuddon, J.A. (1991). Dictionary of Literary Terms & Literary Theory. London: Penguin Books.
D’haen, Theo. (2012). The Routledge Concise History of World Literature. London: Routledge.
Dickins, James. (2005). Two Models for Metaphor Translation. Target, 17(2), 227-273.
Fischer, A. (1999). What, If Anything, is Phonological Iconicity? In Max Nänny and Olga Fischer
(Eds.), Form Miming Meaning: Iconicity in Language and Literature (123-134). Amsterdam:
Benjamins.
Fischer, Olga, and Max Nänny. (2006). Iconicity: Literary Texts. Encyclopedia of Language &
Linguistics, 5, 462-472.
Hanks, Patrick and Rachel Giora. (2012). Metaphor and Figurative Language: Critical Comcepts in
Linguistics. Abingdon: Routledge.
Hiraga, Masako K. (1994). Diagrams and Metaphors: Iconic Aspects in Language. Journal of
Pragmatics, 22(1), 5-21.
Kövecses, Zoltán. (2002). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of
Chicago Press.
Leech, Geoffrey N. and Michael H. Short. (1981). Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English
Fictional Prose (1st ed.). New York: Longman Inc.
Maguire, Gregory. (2007). Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West. New York:
Harper Collins Publishers.
Maguire, Gregory. (2010). Wicked (Slecht). (Ineke Lenting, Trans.) Amsterdam: Uitgeverij De
Vliegende Hollander.
~ 58 ~
Maguire, Gregory. (2008). Wicked – Die Hexen von Oz: Die Wahre Geschichte der Bösen Hexe des
Westens. (Hans-Ulrich Möhring, Trans.) Stuttgart: J. G. Cotta'sche Buchhandlung Nachfolger
GmbH.
Nänny, Max and Olga Fischer. (2001). Introduction: Iconicity and Nature. European Journal of
English Studies, 5(1), 3-16.
Nord, Christiane. (1997). Translating as a Purposeful Activity. London: Routledge.
Norrman, R. (2001). On Natural Motivation in Metaphors: The Case of the Cucurbits. In Olga
Fischer and Max Nänny (Eds.), The Motivated Sign: Iconicity in Language and Literature 2 (89108). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Pedersen, Jan. (2015). On the Subtitling of Visualized Metaphors. The Journal of Specialised
Translation, 23, 162-180.
Silverman, Kaja. (1983). The Subject of Semiotics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Tabakowska, Elżbieta. (2003). Iconicity and Literary Translation. In Wolfgang G. Müller and
Olga Fischer (Eds.), From Sign to Signing: Iconicity in Language and Literature 3 (361-376).
Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Van den Broeck, Raymond. (1981). The Limits of Translatability Exemplified by Metaphor
Translation. Poetics Today, 2(4), 73-87.
Van den Broeck, Raymond. (1985). Second Thoughts on Translation Criticism: A Model of its
Analytic Function. In Theo Hermans (Ed.), The Manipulation of Literature: Studies in Literary
Translation. London/Sydney: Croom Helm, 54-62.
Vendler, Helen. (2010) Poems, Poets, Poetry: An Introduction and Anthology. Boston: Bedford/St.
Martin’s.
Westerweel, Bart, and Theo D’Haen. (1990). Something Understood: Studies in Anglo-Dutch Literary
Translation. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Wray, Alison and Aileen Bloomer. (2012). Projects in Linguistics and Language Studies. London:
Routledge.
Oxford Dictionary Online. Retrieved from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/
Macmillan Dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.macmillandictionary.com/
Van Dale Woordenboeken. Retrieved from http://pakket7.vandale.nl/
Duden Online Wörterbuck. Retrieved from http://www.duden.de/
British National Corpus available from http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/
Corpus of Contemporary American English available from http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/
~ 59 ~