Papers by Oleksandr Kalnychenko
Russian Literary Translation in the Global Context, edited by Muireann Maguire and Catherine McAteer, Apr 3, 2024
This paper portrays Russian literature in Ukrainian translation from the early
1920s to the earl... more This paper portrays Russian literature in Ukrainian translation from the early
1920s to the early 2020s. Dialogue between Russian and Ukrainian cultures in the field of translation from and through Russian, as a mediating language, from the mid-1930s to the mid-1950s, was more like the slow but increasingly deadly compression of a rabbit
by a boa constrictor. When in the post-Stalin era, this suffocating grasp partly
relaxed, an entire school of translation emerged inflected against Russification.
Its chief theorists included well-known translators of Russian prose such as
Oleksa Kundzich, Stepan Kovhaniuk, and Maksym Rylsky, among others.
Routledge eBooks, Feb 23, 2024
Open Book Publishers, Apr 3, 2024
This work is licensed under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International license (CC B... more This work is licensed under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license allows re-users to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, for non-commercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator. Attribution should include the following information.
Násilie a neľudskosť ruskej vojny na Ukrajine definitívne ukončili falošný pocit bezpečia, ktorý ... more Násilie a neľudskosť ruskej vojny na Ukrajine definitívne ukončili falošný pocit bezpečia, ktorý Európa zažívala od juhoslovanských vojen. Udržiavanie priateľského dialógu s ľuďmi na celom svete je teraz dôležitejšie ako kedykoľvek predtým, aby sa zabránilo ďalším tragédiám. Preklad vo všetkých jeho podobách je kľúčový pre sprostredkovanie vzájomného porozumenia, ktoré je nevyhnutné, ak chceme ďalším generáciám odovzdať planétu v obývateľnom stave. Okrem iných disciplín sa práve translatológia čoraz aktívnejšie zaoberá najzložitejšími problémami našej planéty. Odkedy sú informačné toky priamo závislé od polohy na geopolitickej mape a podliehajú trhovým pravidlám, mnohé dôležité štúdiá uskutočňované mimo hlavných centier zostávajú napriek významným výsledkom a motivácii vedeckej obce v medzinárodnej akademickej sfére neznáme. Vďaka vedeckým osobnostiam, ktoré prispeli do tejto kolektívnej publikácie, sa translatológia na Ukrajine a excelentný výskum, ktorý sa na jej univerzitách real...
The Journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University Series: Foreign Philology. Methods of Foreign Language Teaching, 2020
The article describes the programs of the first academic institutions, which started running tran... more The article describes the programs of the first academic institutions, which started running translation courses as early as the 1930s: the Ukrainian Institute of Linguistic Education set up in Kyiv (with a branch in Kharkiv) in May of 1930 and the Moscow Institute for Modern Languages founded in July of the same year. The article shares new archival findings and analyzes the content of two syllabi in translation studies. The first course entitled “Translation Methodology” and compiled by Mikhailo Kalynovych was designed for the second-year students for the 1932/33 academic year in Kyiv/ Kharkiv; the second course “Theory and Practice of Translation” was compiled by Dmitrii Usov in Moscow in 1934. Usov’s course is made public for the first time here. The comparative analysis of these two documents demonstrates that both programs addressed a wide range of issues that extended far beyond purely practical concerns. The article also provides brief information on the scholars who stood a...
TEACHING TRANSLATION: UNIVERSITY COURSES IN «TRANSLATION THEORY AND PRACTICE» OF THE EARLY 1930s. НАВЧАННЯ ПЕРЕКЛАДУ: ІНСТИТУТСЬКІ ПРОГРАМИ З ПЕРЕКЛАДОЗНАВСТВА ПОЧАТКУ 1930-ИХ РОКІВ, 2020
The article describes the programs of the first academic institutions, which started running tran... more The article describes the programs of the first academic institutions, which started running translation courses as early as the 1930s: the Ukrainian Institute of Linguistic Education set up in Kyiv (with a branch in Kharkiv) in May of 1930 and the Moscow Institute for Modern Languages founded in July of the same year. The article shares new archival findings and analyzes the content of two syllabi in translation studies. The first course entitled “Translation Methodology” and compiled by Mikhailo Kalynovych was designed for the second-year students for the 1932/33 academic year in Kyiv/Kharkiv; the second course “Theory and Practice of Translation” was compiled by Dmitrii Usov in Moscow in 1934.
Usov’s course is made public for the first time here. The comparative analysis of these two documents demonstrates that both programs addressed a wide range of issues that extended far beyond purely practical concerns. The article also provides brief information on the scholars who stood at the origins of the new discipline of Translation Studies several decades before its official recognition (Mykola Zerov, Mykhailo Kalynovych, and Dmitrii Usov). The article also discusses
the lists of recommended literature to the syllabi, which proves that Russian and Ukrainian scholars worked with a close eye on each other’s achievements, programs, and developing ideas.
“Nationalistic Wrecking” in Translation into Ukrainian. Oleksandr Kalnychenko and Nataliia Kalnychenko in Translation and Power / Lucyna Harmon and Dorota Osuchowska(eds.). – Berlin Peter Lang, 2020. – P. 53-60., 2020
The study deals with the Soviet translation policy into Ukrainian in 1933-1935, when a gradual sh... more The study deals with the Soviet translation policy into Ukrainian in 1933-1935, when a gradual shift in official attitude towards translation took place and a new function of translations, the one connected with nationalities policy, emerged, as translations became considered an instrument of consolidation of the Soviet Union republics around Russia. Stalinist regime has been shown to have attempted to openly regulate literary expression in translated books, including not only the textual choices and source language, but even the translation methods. The study describes a campaign in media against "the nationalistic wrecking" in translation incriminating to translators a nationalistic distortion and counterrevolutionary actions toward separating the Ukrainian language from Russian (and not at all inaccuracy of translation!). The campaign has been displayed to have triggered plentiful relay translations as well as retranslations and revisions in order to near the texts to Russian.
"Oleksandr Finkel’ on the Problem of Self-Translation", inTRAlinea Vol. 21., 2019
The aim of this study is to draw attention to the almost forgotten pioneer works on self-translat... more The aim of this study is to draw attention to the almost forgotten pioneer works on self-translation by Ukrainian scholar Oleksandr
Finkel’. The case-study proves the importance of the spread of knowledge and construction of a unified translation history in order
to ensure objectivity of research and fair judgement. The development of a unified translation reflection history can become an
important contribution to the field of translation studies and create a common ground for the joint effort of researchers in the
development of the discipline.
National Identity in Literary Translation, 2019, ISBN 978-3-631-80068-3, págs. 71-80, 2019
The essay deals with the national self-image in Ukrainian translations of a
romanticized histori... more The essay deals with the national self-image in Ukrainian translations of a
romanticized historical novella Taras Bulba of the Ukrainian-born writer Nikolai Gogol,
in which the author is stylistically oriented to the language coloring of Ukrainian folk
epics and which exists in two versions, Ukrainophile 1835 version and Russified version
of 1842. The analysis of eleven translations of the second version made at different times at
different parts of Ukraine by the translators of different ideological stance has shown that
the national self-image is always taken into account by a translator. It is argued that pragmatic
adaptation seems to be unavoidable since the reader of translation perceives himself
differently than the reader of original in the case of rendition of the national self-image and
knows more about culture-bound elements belonging to his culture. The essay concludes
that the self-image incites a translator to “correct” facts and specify culture-bound items.
A Sketch of the Ukrainian History of Translation of the 1920s, 2011
Contents/Contenu : Theo Hermans: Introduction. How is Translation Possible? - Peeter Torop: Histo... more Contents/Contenu : Theo Hermans: Introduction. How is Translation Possible? - Peeter Torop: History of Translation and Cultural Autotranslation - Christopher Rundle: History through a Translation Perspective - Luc Van Doorslaer: The Relative Neglect of Newspapers in Translation Studies Research - Martina Ozbot: Translation as an Agent of Culture Planning in Low-Impact Cultures - Nikolay Aretov: Translation as an Object of Literary Scholarship: From the Perspective of a 'Small' Literature - Antoine Chalvin : Comment ecrire une histoire areale de la traduction ? - Nayelli Castro : Questions de methodologie en vue d'une histoire de la traduction philosophique au Mexique au XXe siecle - Jean-Leon Muller : L'histoire de la traduction litteraire en Hongrie : un etat des lieux - Marie Vrinat-Nikolov : Pourquoi et comment une histoire comparee de la traduction en Bulgarie et en France ? - Janika Pall: Translating from Ancient Languages into Estonian: Outlines for Translation...
Translation and Interpreting Studies
Translation Under Communism
Translation Under Communism
Вісник Харківського національного університету імені В. Н. Каразіна. The journal of V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, 2019
The study deals with the Soviet translation policy into Ukrainian in 1933-35, when a gradual shif... more The study deals with the Soviet translation policy into Ukrainian in 1933-35, when a gradual shift in official judgments on translation took place and a new function of translations, the one connected with nationalities policy, emerged, as translations became considered an instrument of consolidation of the Soviet Union republics around Russia. Stalinist regime has been shown to have attempted to openly regulate literary expression in translated books, including not only the textual choices and source language, but even the translation methods. The study describes a unique for the XX century Europe campaign in press against “the nationalistic wrecking” in translation incriminating the translators a nationalistic distortion and counterrevolutionary actions toward separating the Ukrainian language from Russian (and not at all inaccuracy of translation!).which triggered plentiful relay translations as well as retranslations and revisions to near the texts to Russian. Five condemning pu...
Books by Oleksandr Kalnychenko
Russian Literary Translation in the Global Context, 2024
This chapter portrays Russian literature in Ukrainian translation from the early 1920s to the ear... more This chapter portrays Russian literature in Ukrainian translation from the early 1920s to the early 2020s. Our critical framework is Iurii Lotman’s theory of cultural dialogue. Dialogue between Russian and Ukrainian cultures in the field of translation from and through Russian, as a mediating language, from the mid-1930s to the mid-1950s, was more like the slow but increasingly deadly compression of a rabbit by a boa constrictor. When in the post-Stalin era, this suffocating grasp partly
relaxed, an entire school of translation emerged inflected against Russification. Its chief theorists included well-known translators of Russian prose such as Oleksa Kundzich, Stepan Kovhaniuk, and Maksym Rylsky, among others.
Rundle, Christopher, Anna Lange, and Daniele Monticelli (eds.).Translation Under Communism, 2022
Viewed from the perspective of the history of communism, the study
of the translation practices a... more Viewed from the perspective of the history of communism, the study
of the translation practices and (mostly tragic) personal histories of the
writers-translators in Soviet Ukraine broadens the horizons of our understanding of both the strategies of translation and the political strategies of the Communist Party, which de facto continued Tsarist Russia’s policy of imperialistic colonization of Ukraine. Following in the steps of Christopher Rundle’s view of translation as an organic part of the history of political regimes in Europe outlined in his article ‘History through a Translation Perspective’, in which he discusses the history of Italian
Fascism through the prism of literary translation in Italy in the 1930s
(Rundle 2011), we assume that the history of translation in the USSR
will give us an insight into the nature of communist power. In particular,
the study of translations into Ukrainian will make a significant contribution
to our understanding of Soviet cultural policy. Reworking Rundle’s
idea, the historians of translation in post-Soviet countries should ask
themselves not what the Soviet political regime tells them about the
history of translation but what translation can say about the history of
Communism in the twentieth century.
Uploads
Papers by Oleksandr Kalnychenko
1920s to the early 2020s. Dialogue between Russian and Ukrainian cultures in the field of translation from and through Russian, as a mediating language, from the mid-1930s to the mid-1950s, was more like the slow but increasingly deadly compression of a rabbit
by a boa constrictor. When in the post-Stalin era, this suffocating grasp partly
relaxed, an entire school of translation emerged inflected against Russification.
Its chief theorists included well-known translators of Russian prose such as
Oleksa Kundzich, Stepan Kovhaniuk, and Maksym Rylsky, among others.
Usov’s course is made public for the first time here. The comparative analysis of these two documents demonstrates that both programs addressed a wide range of issues that extended far beyond purely practical concerns. The article also provides brief information on the scholars who stood at the origins of the new discipline of Translation Studies several decades before its official recognition (Mykola Zerov, Mykhailo Kalynovych, and Dmitrii Usov). The article also discusses
the lists of recommended literature to the syllabi, which proves that Russian and Ukrainian scholars worked with a close eye on each other’s achievements, programs, and developing ideas.
Finkel’. The case-study proves the importance of the spread of knowledge and construction of a unified translation history in order
to ensure objectivity of research and fair judgement. The development of a unified translation reflection history can become an
important contribution to the field of translation studies and create a common ground for the joint effort of researchers in the
development of the discipline.
romanticized historical novella Taras Bulba of the Ukrainian-born writer Nikolai Gogol,
in which the author is stylistically oriented to the language coloring of Ukrainian folk
epics and which exists in two versions, Ukrainophile 1835 version and Russified version
of 1842. The analysis of eleven translations of the second version made at different times at
different parts of Ukraine by the translators of different ideological stance has shown that
the national self-image is always taken into account by a translator. It is argued that pragmatic
adaptation seems to be unavoidable since the reader of translation perceives himself
differently than the reader of original in the case of rendition of the national self-image and
knows more about culture-bound elements belonging to his culture. The essay concludes
that the self-image incites a translator to “correct” facts and specify culture-bound items.
Books by Oleksandr Kalnychenko
relaxed, an entire school of translation emerged inflected against Russification. Its chief theorists included well-known translators of Russian prose such as Oleksa Kundzich, Stepan Kovhaniuk, and Maksym Rylsky, among others.
of the translation practices and (mostly tragic) personal histories of the
writers-translators in Soviet Ukraine broadens the horizons of our understanding of both the strategies of translation and the political strategies of the Communist Party, which de facto continued Tsarist Russia’s policy of imperialistic colonization of Ukraine. Following in the steps of Christopher Rundle’s view of translation as an organic part of the history of political regimes in Europe outlined in his article ‘History through a Translation Perspective’, in which he discusses the history of Italian
Fascism through the prism of literary translation in Italy in the 1930s
(Rundle 2011), we assume that the history of translation in the USSR
will give us an insight into the nature of communist power. In particular,
the study of translations into Ukrainian will make a significant contribution
to our understanding of Soviet cultural policy. Reworking Rundle’s
idea, the historians of translation in post-Soviet countries should ask
themselves not what the Soviet political regime tells them about the
history of translation but what translation can say about the history of
Communism in the twentieth century.
1920s to the early 2020s. Dialogue between Russian and Ukrainian cultures in the field of translation from and through Russian, as a mediating language, from the mid-1930s to the mid-1950s, was more like the slow but increasingly deadly compression of a rabbit
by a boa constrictor. When in the post-Stalin era, this suffocating grasp partly
relaxed, an entire school of translation emerged inflected against Russification.
Its chief theorists included well-known translators of Russian prose such as
Oleksa Kundzich, Stepan Kovhaniuk, and Maksym Rylsky, among others.
Usov’s course is made public for the first time here. The comparative analysis of these two documents demonstrates that both programs addressed a wide range of issues that extended far beyond purely practical concerns. The article also provides brief information on the scholars who stood at the origins of the new discipline of Translation Studies several decades before its official recognition (Mykola Zerov, Mykhailo Kalynovych, and Dmitrii Usov). The article also discusses
the lists of recommended literature to the syllabi, which proves that Russian and Ukrainian scholars worked with a close eye on each other’s achievements, programs, and developing ideas.
Finkel’. The case-study proves the importance of the spread of knowledge and construction of a unified translation history in order
to ensure objectivity of research and fair judgement. The development of a unified translation reflection history can become an
important contribution to the field of translation studies and create a common ground for the joint effort of researchers in the
development of the discipline.
romanticized historical novella Taras Bulba of the Ukrainian-born writer Nikolai Gogol,
in which the author is stylistically oriented to the language coloring of Ukrainian folk
epics and which exists in two versions, Ukrainophile 1835 version and Russified version
of 1842. The analysis of eleven translations of the second version made at different times at
different parts of Ukraine by the translators of different ideological stance has shown that
the national self-image is always taken into account by a translator. It is argued that pragmatic
adaptation seems to be unavoidable since the reader of translation perceives himself
differently than the reader of original in the case of rendition of the national self-image and
knows more about culture-bound elements belonging to his culture. The essay concludes
that the self-image incites a translator to “correct” facts and specify culture-bound items.
relaxed, an entire school of translation emerged inflected against Russification. Its chief theorists included well-known translators of Russian prose such as Oleksa Kundzich, Stepan Kovhaniuk, and Maksym Rylsky, among others.
of the translation practices and (mostly tragic) personal histories of the
writers-translators in Soviet Ukraine broadens the horizons of our understanding of both the strategies of translation and the political strategies of the Communist Party, which de facto continued Tsarist Russia’s policy of imperialistic colonization of Ukraine. Following in the steps of Christopher Rundle’s view of translation as an organic part of the history of political regimes in Europe outlined in his article ‘History through a Translation Perspective’, in which he discusses the history of Italian
Fascism through the prism of literary translation in Italy in the 1930s
(Rundle 2011), we assume that the history of translation in the USSR
will give us an insight into the nature of communist power. In particular,
the study of translations into Ukrainian will make a significant contribution
to our understanding of Soviet cultural policy. Reworking Rundle’s
idea, the historians of translation in post-Soviet countries should ask
themselves not what the Soviet political regime tells them about the
history of translation but what translation can say about the history of
Communism in the twentieth century.