Department of english language and literature

CONCLUSIONS
Having covered some bullet-points of the theory and historical outlook of Literary Translation we would like to approach closer to the style rendering problem within it.
The stylistic equivalence pursuit is the corner stone of Literary Translation. Style retaining is a highly problematic goal and it cannot be achieved completely. Concerning this issue, I. Leviy believes that Literary Translation is a hybrid.
It is not a monolith work of literature, but interpenetration and conglomeration of two structures: on the one hand – contents and stylistic peculiarities of the original text, on the other hand – the whole complex of specific stylistic features characteristic of translator’s language.
In the work of literature translation these two stratums are in the state of permanent tension, that can results in a contradiction.
The translator is to iron out the contradiction thus, achieving stylistic correspondence. Sometimes a minute detail will be enough for the reader to feel translator’s failure in doing that.
A literary text may, in fact, include some parts of purely informative character. Literary works are known to fall into a number of genres. Literary translation may be subdivided in the same way, as each genre calls for a specific arrangement and makes use of specific artistic means to impress the reader. Translators of prose, poetry or plays have their own problems. Each of these forms of literary activities comprises a number of subgenres and translator may specialize in one or some of them in accordance with his talents and experience. The particular tasks inherent in the translation of literary works each genre is more literary than linguistic. The greet challenge to the translator is to combine the maximum equivalence and the high literary merit.
The translator of a belles-lettres text is expected to make a careful study of the literary trend the text belongs to, the other works of the same author, the peculiarities of this individual style and manner and so on. This involves both linguistic considerations and skill in literary criticism. A good literary translator must be a versatile scholar and talented writer or poet.
So many problems of translating poetry have been discussed for centuries that one should just follow some of the good useful or bad and tricky recommendations of predecessors. One of the best is that provided by Dante Gabriel Rossetti, which asserts, “…the life blood of translation is this – that a good poem shall not be turned into a bad one.” Presumably, we know what a good poem is and how it differs from a bad one.
Whatever the versification system, each poem is unique. It has an individual flavour and, even within a most conservative traditional metric pattern, is market by a rhythm, pitch and infection of its own. It is a pointless exercise to pursue absolute fidelity to the original, but it is necessary at least at attempt to preserve at much as possible of the source’s principle of poetic arrangement and imagery.
It appeals to different points of perception: while a traditional poem speaks more to the emotions, vers libre tends to appeal to the reason rather than to the heart. Verse libre has properties of its own, which makes the reader seek other thinks in such a text than he would in a sonnet. Besides verse libre itself requires sophisticated decisions and techniques in translation.