esejieng

In the vision of establishing a common and unique international cultural community, in the idea of European thinkers and creators who accepted Herder and Goethe's idea of international literature, translation is an indispensable prerequisite and an essential element of the whole process. Over the last 100 or 200 years the act of translation has become one of the means of cross-cultural communication. That hidden means of mass communication between authors and their readership has helped and continues to help the dissemination of not only literary styles but also of literary genres, as is the case with haiku, from the East to the West and from the West to the East, functioning, from the viewpoint of international literature, as a unifying and “communicable” factor.

Thus, then, after almost two centuries of undiminished expansion, growing development and improvement of the act of translation, it has become apparent that those literatures of those cultures which are translated in a greater measure stand a better chance of their own further development. By translating achievements of foreign cultures, particularly those distant ones (the West – the Far East), literature and culture receive special and valuable impulses for their inner development. As early as in the 19th century the German scholar of aesthetics, F. Schleiermacher, did not consider the phenomenon of translation as a mere transmission from one language to another, but considered it in a much broader sense as a phenomenon of understanding something that is not only different in terms of linguistics but something that is also essentially new and different, worthy of attention.

The Czech theoretician Jiri Levy (1926-1967) puts it like this: “It's like with two communicative vessels filled with different liquids; in each of them taken separately the flow of liquid results in transformation of the initial homogenous content into a mixture, and the entropy increases; if we consider the communicative vessel system as a whole, the initial differentiation decreases with dissemination of the homogenous mixture into both vessels, and the entropy decreases. Viewed from national standpoint, translation is a factor which increases the entropy, whereas from international point of view, translation is a factor which decreases the entropy. Considered this way, translation could be said to be a factor which directs literary development toward international literature...” (Levy, 229)

It may be said that the act of translation leads international literature toward unification as a lot of individual features of a translated author fade away in translation, but, on the other hand, various translations appear in a vast variety of new versions produced by different nations and here, in the case of haiku, also a new literary genre for the West. From the beginning of the 19th century the West has been showing the growing interest for the East, and vice versa. Literary translation is a contemporary factor which contributes to both differentiation and monolithic tendency. In case of the two cultures far from each other in time and space, there are lesser possibilities for them to exert influence on each other and thus a lesser translation inventory of elements common to both of them. However, this is not an insurmountable problem as in such cases similar situations are sought to help in a search for functional and meaningful equivalents. This can be exemplified by the fact that at the beginning of the 19th century the German scientist Adelung translated “The Lord's Prayer ” into 500 languages, among which into those spoken by people who do not grow grain (“give us this day our daily bread”) or by those who have no notion of the term “tsar” (“Thy Kingdom come”) so that it comes as no surprise that those translations were unintelligible to those nations. It should have been done otherwise. The translator did not have in mind that every nation has its own daily concerns and needs. It doesn't have to be bread, but that which is the basic food for a particular nation. The same refers to “Thy Kingdom.” All people, as sentient human beings, at any level of their development, hope for an ideal order of everything that exists – “The Kingdom in Heavens.”

The haiku form which spread from Japanese poetry to the West (European and American continents) is an area where the spirituality of the East and the West has been confronted since the beginning of the 19th century, so that it appears logical that all written in the West has been estimated by the Eastern measures as if it were the matter of the simple relation between an original and a copy. Language is a storehouse of national history and civilization, of its past and present. Therefore it makes sense that the two national cultures, notably the one in the East and another in the West never completely coincide with each other as there are no two nations, no matter how distant and different they may be, that have nothing whatever in common. The degree of their similarity will depend on several factors: first of all, on the similarity of the two languages and cultures and, in a direct relation with this, on the contact between them. When considering the matter of equivalency in translation, both structural and dynamic, one must not overlook three types of correlations dependant on linguistic and cultural differences of various languages. In some cases there is relatively close correlation between two languages and two relatively similar cultures (e.g. Serbian and Bulgarian); in other instances there is no genetic correlation between languages spoken by people belonging to nations whose cultures have been developing simultaneously (e.g. Serbian and Turkish); and finally, instances where there is no genetic correlation between languages of those nations whose cultures are essentially different (e.g. Serbian and Japanese).

Actual differences between two cultures determine the translator's choice of the preferred approach. Extreme approaches to translation will be avoided in a greater measure or, if applied, receivers of translations will respond more strongly if an original culture differs in a larger degree from receivers' culture. In contrast, the more closely akin cultures of the originals to the translations, the less sharp, the less conspicuous and all the more acceptable in translation the approaching processes to the original culture. Therefore, the more similar cultures, the higher useful strength of transcription, i.e. transliteration and literal translation. Neutralization by means of paraphrase and description, omission and making up of neologisms are justifiable only when cultural similarity is very small, as is the case with the Far East , European or American cultures.

A wide range of specific features which brought about and made possible the origin and determined the development of haiku in Japan, were no more applicable as such as soon as haiku found the fertile ground in other languages, literatures and cultures. Haiku was easily and rapidly accepted by many countries not because it originated from Zen or was an expression of the Zen-based teachings, but because it was a literature form which, as any other, has its own rules acceptable or not by the writers.

Haiku was first mentioned in Serbia as early as in 1895 in an article titled “Japanese poetry” published in the literary journal “Brankovo kolo.” It included renditions from French translations published in a literary supplement to “Figaro.” After a lapse of several decades the first translations of haiku poems appeared: in 1927: the great Serbian writer Miloš Crnjanski (1893-1976) published “Ancient Japanese Poems,” first in the journal “Letopis Matice srpske” and afterwards in a separate book (1928), in his own selection and translations. He himself did not write haiku poems. A few decades later, in the 1950s, a wave of writing this shortest of poetic forms started out on its journey to gain in velocity ever after, so that today Serbian poets show an extraordinary great interest in haiku (magazines, collections, books of haiku poetry, festivals and haiku, senryu, haibun contests, renga, awards won in international competitions, haiku clubs and societies…), and in the spirituality and culture of the Far East. No doubt, the translator was a missionary in this case also: the first spiritual link between East and West on this soil, too.

That same (1928) year the great Serbian woman writer, Isidora Sekulić, gave her voice regarding this first anthology of Japanese haiku, expressing her amazement in Japanese poetry which “even though forcibly transplanted into Europe, rustles with a melancholic beauty refining not only the soul but also the brain and nerves.” Her knowledge of the origin of this new literary genre and of its future dissemination beyond the spiritual and linguistic areas out of which it sprang up seems to confirm the present haiku situation in the spaces of the Serbian language and literature. “By translating Japanese poetry, Miloš Crnjanski has in fact brought haiku to our literature as a guest from the East; moreover, Isidora Sekulić, in her survey published in the most renowned Serbian literary journal, did not merely welcome the guest from the distant spaces out of courtesy – she did more than that: she opened the door of our literature wide as if to someone whom we know so well, who is dear to us as a close, long expected relative. The hospitality initiated by Crnjanski and Isidora Sekulić has been kind ever since: the guest decided to stay at his new home…” ( Živković , 1996, 184)

Translation is a mutual enrichment, when every new act of translation signifies a step forward the varied and different cultures after which none of them is what it used to be. The translator often refines the reader's taste, educates and teaches his receiver, first of all by supplying him with new information. It is, however, essential that “the translator who clears a path with the aim of introducing the reader with a particular foreign culture and literature must, at the very beginning, take measures to overcome the reader's repulsion.” (Levy 1982,73) Can't we say that translation is always an act of introduction?” Antoine Berman asks himself, since whenever the translator sets such an “introduction” as his goal, he can't avoid making “concessions” to the audience, just because he has set it as his horizon. This, for example, may mean to “polish” Dostoyevsky in order to make him readable to the majority of French readership.

If a translation is to meet four basic requirements: to convey the essence, spirit and style of the original, to be natural, to make the same impression as the original does, then it is clear that in the majority of cases conflicts must arise between the form and the content when one of the two has to be sacrificed. Here an unwritten rule comes into effect: when it is impossible to reach the consensus, the content should be preserved, which rarely happens, and only if unavoidable. However, if one seeks an equal proportion of sacrifices on both sides, what results is a fair quality of translation. Partial sacrifices on both sides are inevitable and that is way translation is always a kind of compromise, whereas a translator is like a tightrope walker; despite the fact that he is well versed in the equilibristic rules, he is never quite sure he will reach the other end of the stretched rope.” (Čović, 1986, 20). One thing is indisputable: to translate haiku literally - means to kill it, and even when the general impression and style of a haiku is conveyed, a part of its being is killed anyway; it is in fact the translation of one culture into another and in this process the latter cannot avoid destroying a good many spaces of the former – the culture of the original.

In any case, the translator should possess all the knowledge necessary to enable him to fully interpret the original work. Therefore, apart from the competence in various codes (verbal, phonetic, graphological, cultural, of a specific work of art, as is haiku) and the capability of getting a full insight into the style and artistic interpretation, the translator should also possess the knowledge beyond the linguistic and code spheres. The translator, especially the one dealing with works produced by distant cultures, should be well versed in a series of extra linguistic issues, such as: possibilities for communication, historical events, customs, geography… Conciseness and simplicity in rendering Japanese haiku are compensated by the complex and rich system of Japanese culture which must be familiar to both translator and receiver from the West so as to understand the message.

Haiku, a perfect short poem cast in three lines limited to seventeen syllables containing a whole vision of life, originates, as we are all well aware, from Japan. Western haiku is also most often cast in three lines, but it doesn't have to contain 17 syllables since Western languages cannot conform to much more flexible Japanese syllables. Translators from European languages are faced with difficulties when translating from one European language into another because a single thought, taken separately, each time requires a different number of syllables to be expressed in a different language. That semantic saturation of the original language and the language in which the translation is made compels the translator to shorten or to extend the essence of a thought. As an example, J. Levy explains that semantic saturation of the German language is somewhat smaller than that of the French, smaller than that of the English and Czech, but somewhat greater than that of the Russian.

Haiku can be translated into Serbian from every foreign language, in 17 syllables, but translators, as is the case with Serbian haiku poets themselves, do not always stick to the rules. By accepting the rules of original Japanese haiku, they are faced with difficulties, not only when inadaptability of haiku metrics is concerned, but also regarding particularities of the Western civilization to which they belong. Does this account for the emergence of “adaptations” and transformations in Serbian poetry of our time? Some Serbian literary theoreticians have noticed certain subgroups of haiku produced by well-known Serbian poets: historical, court, urban, cosmic, visual (concrete), slang, and even scientological-stochastic haiku!(?) What distinguishes Serbian haiku perhaps is the measure of value of such haiku regarding the degree to which they resemble “original Japanese haiku.” Unable to establish direct communication with the spirituality which brought haiku to life (ignorance of the Japanese language and, in a good measure, of Zen-Buddhist philosophical and religious teachings), they cherish this form conforming it to their own sensibility, creative capabilities and in compliance with the “rules” of their mother tongue. They write haiku which resemble old Japanese poetry in the “mood” and “form,” but stray from it in linguistic and lexical sense. In their opinion, poetry is a true poetry only if it grows out of the root of the language and ultimately realizes at its offsprings. Justifying this posture, Saiki-Vukelić (1991, 270) says: “It is quite natural for a poetic form to be transformed in the process of its reception by another cultural environment so that today we cannot negate the artistic value of Japanese symbolism which essentially differs from the original, French.” There are, however, even such opinions in Serbian-speaking world that haiku should be written and interpreted only by the chosen and consecrated and that everything else in poetry, art and spirituality we were endowed with by European civilization is nothing but deceit.

However, another positive influence and the direction of haiku development as a Far East form transferred to the Western soil (Europe, Serbia) is a haiku written in a Serbian dialect. This fact is proof of the high value of haiku as a literary genre which arrived to the most remote village of a small country far from Japan, but also proof of the power of expression of Serbian dialects, their value, dignity and great vitality.

Western literary languages have still been showing their ability at rendering haiku as if it were something exotic and fickle despite the fact that the work of translation and creative production is quite massive; there are tens of thousands of haiku poets in Europe and America alone. But let us consider the opposite case: translation and reception of Serbian “decasyllable” (of the Middle Ages origin, employed in Serbian folk epic and lyric poetry). “Decasyllable is a traditional rhythm in Serbo-Croatian poetry, but nothing more than exoticism to the Japanese culture. That is way the translator of Serbian heroics into Japanese was unable to render the mood of the poems through the rhythm, but sought to do so by applying a similar classical style of the Japanese literary language.” (Saiki-Vukelić, 1982,106-107)

Changes in melody within one syllable (tones) of classical Chinese poetry belong to the sphere of versification. (The first great translator of haiku poetry into Serbian, Miloš Crnjanski, had already observed the indisputably significant influence of Chinese lyrics exerted on Japanese lyrics, which was especially noticeable during the Middle Ages, and he was of the opinion that that influence was analogous to the one exerted by the ancient Greece on the renaissance Italy).

The greater average number of Serbian words' syllables than those of English ones requires that they be reduced in the process of translation from Serbian into English and vice versa. In that way not only the original style is preserved but also the possibilities to preserve the essence of haiku poems (This is important for Serbian, Montenegrin and Bosnian-Herzegovina authors who send their haiku in English translations to competitions throughout the world, especially to those organized in Japan!)

Transposition of meaning from one language into another is often very hard to achieve, but if a translator takes as his starting point those elements which are unique to the respective languages, then he may be able to perform his task successfully, even when countries in the furthest East or West, with their different language systems, are concerned. In such cases, he chooses to start his task by applying the conceptual relations common to a man as a social being. “Were it not like that, the translator would find himself in the position of a modern astrophysicists who try to catch signals from the universe using the most advanced apparata, but their every attempt to decode them and get a meaningful message fails as they eventually find out that they have to do with a system of symbols non-existent on our planet, and thus meaningless.”(Čović},1986, 26)

REFERENCES

• BERMAN, Antoan: “Prevodjenje i slovo ili konačište za dalekog”, Rad/AAOM, Beograd, 2004.

• CRNJANSKI, Miloš: “Haikai, pesme starog Japana”, Letopis Matice srpske, Novi Sad, 1927.

• ČOVIĆ, Branimir: “Umetnost prevodjenja ili zanat”, Književna zajednica Novog Sada, 1986.

• ČOVIĆ, Branimir: “Poetika književnog prevodjenja”, Naučna knjiga, Beograd, 1994.

• DEVIDÉ, Vladimir: “Japanska haiku poezija i njen kulturno-povjesni okvir”, Zagreb, 1985.

• HLEBEC, Boris: “Opšta načela prevodjenja”, Naučna knjiga, Beograd, 1989.

• LEVY, Jirži: “Umjetnost prevodjenja”, Svjetlost, Sarajevo, 1982.

• SAIKI-Vukelić, Kayoko: “Shvatanje Japanaca o prevodjenju”, Mostovi 50, Pljevlja, 1982.

• SAIKI-Vukelić, Kayoko: Pogovor antologiji “Grana koja maše”, Požega, 1991.

• SCHLEIERMACHER, Friedrich: “Ueber die verschiedenen Methoden des Uebesetzens”, Rad/AAOM, Beograd, 2003.

• SIBINOVIĆ, Miodrag: “Original i prevod”, Privredna štampa, Beograd, 1979.

• SIBINOVIĆ, Miodrag: “ Novi original, Uvod u prevodjenje”, Naučna knjiga, Beograd, 1990.

• ŽIVKOVIĆ, Živan: Gost sa Istoka” - ogledi o haiku poeziji, Prosveta, Niš, 1996.

Translation: Saša Važić