Переклад як основа обміну художнім досвідом: історичний штрих
Вантажиться...
Дата
2019
Назва журналу
Номер ISSN
Назва тому
Видавець
КОД
Анотація
(uk) Літературно-критичну діяльність Людвіґа Якобовського і Ґеорґа Адама –дослідників і популяризаторів української літератури в німецькомовному ареалі – слід розглядати як активних учасників творення німецько-українських культурних взаємодій. Вони зміцніли у 90-х рр. ХІХ століття, бо їхня результативність була позначена спільною метою українських і німецьких діячів. У цьому плані І.Франку та О.Кобилянській належала рол ь посередників. Їм надавали дієву допомогу Леся Українка, Михайло Коцюбинський, Осип Маковей, Денис Лукіяновіч, Володимир Гнатюк, Іван Труш, Роман Сембратович, Остап Грицай. Творчість Івана Франка та Ольги Кобилянської – переконливий приклад, коли діячі національної літератури в одній іпостасі успішно здійснюють дві істотно різні функції –оригінальну й перекладну.
(en) The literary-critical activity of Ludwig Jacobowski and Adam Georg –the researchers and promoters of the Ukrainian literature in the German-speaking region – should be regarded as active participants in the creation of the German-Ukrainian cultural interactions. In the 90’s of the XIX century they were strengthened because their effectiveness was marked by the common goal of the Ukrainian and German activists. The role of moderators in this sphere belonged to Ivan Franko and Olha Kobylianska. They were provided with effective assistance by Lesya Ukrainka, Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi, Osyp Makovei, Denys Lukiianovych, Volodymyr Hnatiuk, Ivan Trush, Roman Sembratovych and Ostap Grytsai. The creative work of Ivan Franko and Olha Kobylianska is a convincing example, when the figures of the national literature successfully perform two essentially different functions –original and translation –in one incarnation. This is evidenced by the letters of Adam Georg, addressed at different times to the Ukrainian writers. Interesting details that are worthy of attention are in the letters of Adam Georgto Ivan Franko. Another fact of literary interchange, which has notbeen yet known in the literature about Olha Kobylianska and her interrelations with the German culture, was found out. This is the autograph of May 26, 1905, which Adam Georgreceived as a commentary on his article devoted to the Ukrainian literature and published in the journal Das literarische Echo of May 15, 1905. It should be emphasized that fruitful activity of Olha Kobylianska was dictated primarily by the interests of the Ukrainian culture. This applies even to those moments when the writer promotedthe works of the German (Ludwig Jacobowski) and Bulgarian authors (Petko Todorov). At the same time, Adam Georg’s similar connections have broader nature. However, it is impossible to identify the degree of direct acquaintance of the German reader, for example, with the Russian, Bulgarian or Ukrainian literature. Why? The answer to this question should be sought in the unequal socio-historical conditions under which the named kinds of literature were developed. That is also the reason for their natural or unnatural “integration” in the public consciousness of the German-speaking countries –Austria and Germany.
(en) The literary-critical activity of Ludwig Jacobowski and Adam Georg –the researchers and promoters of the Ukrainian literature in the German-speaking region – should be regarded as active participants in the creation of the German-Ukrainian cultural interactions. In the 90’s of the XIX century they were strengthened because their effectiveness was marked by the common goal of the Ukrainian and German activists. The role of moderators in this sphere belonged to Ivan Franko and Olha Kobylianska. They were provided with effective assistance by Lesya Ukrainka, Mykhailo Kotsiubynskyi, Osyp Makovei, Denys Lukiianovych, Volodymyr Hnatiuk, Ivan Trush, Roman Sembratovych and Ostap Grytsai. The creative work of Ivan Franko and Olha Kobylianska is a convincing example, when the figures of the national literature successfully perform two essentially different functions –original and translation –in one incarnation. This is evidenced by the letters of Adam Georg, addressed at different times to the Ukrainian writers. Interesting details that are worthy of attention are in the letters of Adam Georgto Ivan Franko. Another fact of literary interchange, which has notbeen yet known in the literature about Olha Kobylianska and her interrelations with the German culture, was found out. This is the autograph of May 26, 1905, which Adam Georgreceived as a commentary on his article devoted to the Ukrainian literature and published in the journal Das literarische Echo of May 15, 1905. It should be emphasized that fruitful activity of Olha Kobylianska was dictated primarily by the interests of the Ukrainian culture. This applies even to those moments when the writer promotedthe works of the German (Ludwig Jacobowski) and Bulgarian authors (Petko Todorov). At the same time, Adam Georg’s similar connections have broader nature. However, it is impossible to identify the degree of direct acquaintance of the German reader, for example, with the Russian, Bulgarian or Ukrainian literature. Why? The answer to this question should be sought in the unequal socio-historical conditions under which the named kinds of literature were developed. That is also the reason for their natural or unnatural “integration” in the public consciousness of the German-speaking countries –Austria and Germany.
Опис
Ключові слова
художній переклад, історія перекладу, літературно-критична діяльність, рецепція, національна література, взаємозв’язок, культура, спадок, громадськість, literary translation, translation history, literary-critical activity, reception, national literature, interconnection, culture, heritage, public
Бібліографічний опис
Білоус О. І. Переклад як основа обміну художнім досвідом: історичний штрих Ольга Іванівна Білоус // Наукові записки ЦДПУ. Серія: Філологічні науки = Research Bulletin. Series: Philological Sciences / ред. кол.: О. А. Семенюк [та ін.]. – Кропивницький : КОД, 2019. – Вип. 175. – С. 698-705.