ПОЗНАВАТЕЛЬНОЕ

Оси и плоскости тела человека - Тело человека состоит из определенных топографических частей и участков, в которых расположены органы, мышцы, сосуды, нервы и т.д.

Отёска стен и прирубка косяков - Когда на доме не достаёт окон и дверей, красивое высокое крыльцо ещё только в воображении, приходится подниматься с улицы в дом по трапу.

Дифференциальные уравнения второго порядка (модель рынка с прогнозируемыми ценами) - В простых моделях рынка спрос и предложение обычно полагают зависящими только от текущей цены на товар.

EUROPEAN AND UKRAINIAN TRANSLATION

LEXICOLOGICAL ASPECTS

OF TRANSLATION

аШ&ак.

As it has beenjpointed process of written or

oral translating presents in reality different forms of decoding or transformation which the source language units undergo at the phonetic, morphological or syntactic levels: Cf.: ambition [aembijn] амбіція, geologist геолог, metaphor метафора, participate брати участь, negotiable те (той), що піддається погодженню; рученьки beautiful little hands, лісовик (mythology) wood goblin, etc. No lingual, i.e., structural or semantic identity have in the target language many English and Ukrainian specifically national notions of lexicon (culturally biased words), which are also to be decoded, i.e., transformed Cf.: Number 10 Downing Street Даунінг¹ Стріт N210 (резиденція прем'єр-міністра Великої Британії), haggis зварений у жирі овечий кендюх, начинений вівсяною кашею впереміш із посіченими потрохами; кутя cooked peeled wheat, barley or rice mixed with ground poppy seeds, raisins and parceled kernels of nuts, honey and a little boiled water, etc.

Neither are there in the target language direct semantic or structural equivalents for many idioms and stable expressions of the source language. Hence, they must be decoded, i.e., transformed, Cf.: Tom, Dick and Harry перший-ліпший (з), будь-хто (з), to до to the altar одружуватися, виходити заміж; клепки не вистачає nobody home, he has got a screw loose, etc.

A considerable number of other source language units, however, may maintain their lingual form little changed or unchanged in the target language, as in many proper names and genuine internationalisms: Alfred Альфред/Ельфред, Robert Frost Роберт Фрост, Boston Бостон, president президент, affix афікс, phoneme фонема, motor мотор, cybernetics кібернетика, export експортувати, social соціальний, nationally національно, etc. Such and the like words are, in fact, not translated in the true sense of the word but turned into the target language in their phonemic (sometimes also in their orthographic) form/structure. These and some other problems, which are of academic interest not only for the beginning translator but also for the teacher constitute the subject-matter of the succeeding chapters of this work.

II. A SHORT HISTORICAL OUTLINE OF

EUROPEAN AND UKRAINIAN TRANSLATION

World translation in general and European translation in particular has a long and praiseworthy tradition. Even the scarcity of documents available at the disposal of historians points to its incessant millenniums-long employment in international relations both in ancient China, India, in the Middle East (Assyria, Babylon) and Egypt. The earliest mention of translation used in viva voce goes back to approximately the year 3000 BC in ancient Egypt where the interpreters and later also requiar translators were employed to help in carrying on trade with the neighbouring country of Nubia. The dragomans had been employed to accompany the trade caravans and help in negotiating, selling and buying the necessary goods for Egypt. Also in those ancient times (2400 BC), the Assyrian emperor Sargon of the city of Akkada (Mesopotamia), is known to have circulated his order of the day translated into some languages of the subject countries. The emperor boasted of his victories in an effort to intimidate his neighbours. In 2100 BC, Babylon translations are known to have been performed into some naighboring languages including, first of all, Egyptian. The city of Babylon in those times was a regular centre of polyglots where translations were accomplished in several languages. As far back as 1900 BC, in Babylon, there existed the first known bilingual (Sumerian-Akkadian) and multilingual (Sumerian-Akkadian- Hurritian-Ugaritian) dictionaries. In 1800 BC, in Assyria there was already something of a board of translators headed by the chief translator/interpreter, a certain Giki. The first trade agreement is known to have been signed in two languages between Egypt and its southern neighbour Nubia in 1200 BC.

Interpreters and translators of the Persian and Indian languages are known to have been employed in Europe in the fourth century BC by Alexander the Great (356-323), the emperor of Macedonia, during his military campaign against Persia and India. Romans in their numerous wars also employed interpreters/translators (especially during the Punic Wars with Carthage in the second and third centuries BC). Unfortunately, little or nothing is practically known about the employment of translation in state affairs in other European countries of those times, though translators/interpreters must certainly have been employed on the same occasions and with the same purposes as in the Middle East. The inevitable employment of translation/interpretation was predetermined by the need to maintain intercommunal and international relations which always exist between different ethnic groups as well as between separate nations and their individual representatives.

The history of European translation, however, is known to have started as far back as 280 BC with the translation of some excerpts of The Holy Scriptures^{^[1]}. The real history of translation into European languages, however, is supposed to have begun in 250 BC in the Egyptian city of Alexandria which belonged to the great Greek empire. The local leaders of the Jewish community there decided to translate the Old Testament from Hebrew, which had once been their native tongue, but which was no longer understood, into ancient Greek, which became their spoken language. Tradition states that 72 learned Jews, each working separately, prepared during their translation in 70 days the Greek variant of the Hebrew original. When the translators met, according to that same tradition, their translations were found to be identical to each other in every word. In reality, however, the Septuagint (Latin for «seventy»), as this translation has been called since then, took in fact several hundreds of years to complete. According to reliable historical sources^{^[2]}, various translators worked on the Septuagint after that, each having made his individual contribution to this fundamental document of Christianity in his national language. The bulk of the Septuagint is known today to have been a slavishly literal (word-for-word) translation of the original Jewish Scripture. Much later around 130 AD another Jewish translator, Aguila of Sinope, made one more slavishly literal translation of the Old Testament to replace the Septuagint.

There were also other Greek translations of the Old Testament, which are unfortunately lost to us today. Consequently, only the Septuagint can be subjected to a thorough analysis from the point of view of the principles, the method and the level of its literary translation.

One of several available graphic examples of slavish literalism, i.e., of strict word-for-word translation both at the lexical/semantic and structural level, may be seen in the Old Slavonic translations of the Bible from the Kyivan Rus' period as well as during the succeeding centuries. This may easily be noticed even from the latest (1992 and 1997) Ukrainian publications of the Holy Scriptures. For example, in Genesis 10:8 «Куш же породив Німрода 13... А Міцраїм породив лудів, і анамів, і легавів, і невтухів, і патрусів, і каслухів ... 15 А Ханаан породив Сидона, свого перворідного, та Хета ... Similarly in the Ukrainian Version of the Matthew's Gospel^{^[3]}: Авраам породив Ісака, а Ісак породив Якова, а Яків породив Юду й братів його. Юда ж породив Фареса та Зару від Тамари. Фарес же породив Есфома, а Есфом породив Арама. Арам породив Амінадава, Амінадав породив Наасона ... (Chronicles, 1-46)^{^[4]}.

English translators of the Bible have already for some centuries resorted to faithful sense-to-sense conveying of this and many other expressions. So they have managed to avoid these and several other literalisms of many Ukrainian (and Russian) Bible translators. Cf. Cush was the father (був батьком) of Nimrod... Mizraim was the father of the Ludities, Anamites Lehabites, Naphtuhites, Pathrusites, Casluhites ... Canaan was the father of Sidon his firstborn and of the Hittites... Similarly in Matthew's Gospel: Abraham was the father of Isaac, Isaak the father of Jacob, Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers. (Matthew, 1 )^{^[5]}.

Much was translated in ancient times also from Greek into Egyptian and vice versa, and partly from Hebrew into Greek. The next best known translation of the Old Testament into Greek, but performed this time meaning-to-meaning/sense-to-sense, was accomplished by Simmachus in the second century ВС.Later on, with the political, economic and military strengthening of the Roman Empire, more and more translations were performed from Greek into Latin. Moreover, much of the rich literature of all genres from ancient Rome has developed exclusively on the basis of translations from old Greek. This was started by the Roman-Greek scholar Livius Andronicus who made a very successful translation of Homer's poems, the Iliad and the Odyssey in 240 ВС, and thus laid the beginning and the foundation for a rich Latin belles-lettres tradition. That first successful translation was followed by no less successful translations of Greek dramas made by two Roman men of letters who were also translators, namely, Naevius (270 - 201 ВС) and Annius (239 -169 ВС).

A significant contribution to Roman literature in general and to the theory of translation in particular was made by the outstanding statesman, orator and philosopher Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 BC), who brought into Latin the speeches of the most eloquent Greek orators Demosthenes (385? - 322 BC) and Aeschines (389-314 BC). Cicero became famous in the history of translation not only for his literary translations but also for his principles of the so-called «sense-to- sense» translation, which he theoretically grounded for translations of secular works. These principles appeared to have been in opposition to the principle of strict word-for-word translation employed by the translators of the Septuagint. Cicero held the view, and not without grounds, that the main aim of translators was to convey first of all the sense and the style of the source language work and not the meaning of separate words and their placement in the source language work/ passage. Cicero's principles of «sense-for-sense translation» were first accepted and employed by the outstanding Roman poet Horace (65-8 BC), who translated works from Greek into Latin. Horace, however, had understood and used Cicero's principles in his own, often unpredictable way: he would change the composition and content of the source language works that he translated. Moreover, he would introduce some ideas of his own, thus making the translated works unlike the originals. This way of free interpretation from the source language works in translation was accepted and further «developed» in the second century AD by Horace's adherent Apuleius (124 - ?), who would still more deliberately rearrange the ancient Greek originals altering them sometimes beyond recognition. This, perhaps, was the result of an attitude of benign neglect by the Romans towards the culture of the Greeks, which began to be absorbed by the stronger empire. The Roman translators following the practice of Horace, and still more of Apuleius, began systematically to omit all «insignificant» (in their judgement) passages, and incorporate some ideas and even whole stories of their own. The translators began introducing references to some noted figures. Such a kind of translation made the reader doubt whether the translated works belonged to a foreign author or were in fact an original work. This practice of Roman translators, that found its expression in a free treatment of secular source language works on the part of the most prominent Roman men of letters, little by little fostered an unrestricted freedom in translation, which began to dominate in all European literatures throughout the forthcoming centuries and during the Middle Ages. There were only a few examples of really faithful sense-to-sense translations after the afore-mentioned Greek translation of the Old Testament by Simmachus (second century BC) and its Latin translation by Hieronymus (340 - 420) in the fourth century AD.The latter demanded that translation should be performed not «word-for-word» but «sense-for-sense» (non verbum e verbo, sedsensum expremere de sensu). Unlike Cicero, who wanted to see in a translation the expressive means of the source language work well, Hieronymus saw the main objective of the translator first of all the faithful conveying of the content, the component parts, and the composition of the work under translation.

Often practised alongside written translation before Christian era and during the first centuries, was also the viva voce translation. Some theoretical principles of interpretation were already worked out by the then most famous men of letters. Among them was the mentioned above poet Horace who in his Ars Poetica (Poetic Art) pointed out the difference between the written translation and typical oral interpretation. He emphasized that the interpreter rendered the content of the source matter «as a speaker», i.e., without holding too closely to the style and artistic means of expression of the orator. Interpreters were, for a considerable time, employed before the Christian era and afterwards in Palestinian synagogues where they spontaneously (on sight) interpreted the Torah from Hebrew into Aramaic, which the Palestinians now freely understood.

TRANSLATION AND INTERPRETATION DURING THE MIDDLE AGES

The Middle Ages (ca. 500 AD -1450 AD) are characterized by a general lack of progress and a constant stagnation in many spheres of mental activity including translation and interpretation, which continued to be practised, however, in the domains of ecclesiastic science and the church. Thus, interpreting from Greek into Latin is known to have been regularly employed in the 6^th century AD by the Roman church. One of the best interpreters then was the Scythian monk Dionisius Exiguus. The last historically confirmed official interpretation under the auspices of the church, this time from Latin into Greek, took place during the pontificate of Pope Martin I during the Lateran Council in 649. Interpreting outside the church premises was and is widely carried on up to the present day by Christian and other religious missionaries who continue to work in various languages and in different countries of the world. Written translation as well as oral interpretation naturally continued to be extensively employed during the Middle Ages in interstate relations, in foreign trade and in military affairs (especially in war times). The primary motivation (рушійною силою) for linguistic endeavours in those times remained, quite naturally, the translation of ecclesiastic literature from the «holy languages» (Hebrew, Greek and Latin). Due to the continual work of an army of qualified researching translators, practically all essential Christian literature was translated during the Middle Ages in most European countries. Moreover, in some countries translations greatly helped to initiate their national literary languages and literatures. A graphic example of this, apart from the already mentioned name of Livius Andronicus, may be found in English history when King Alfred the Great (849-901) took an active part in translating manuals, chronicles and other works from ancient languages and thus helped in the spiritual and cultural elevation of his people. His noble work was continued by the abbot and author Aelfric (955? -1020?) who would paraphrase some parts of the work while translating and often adding bona fide stories of his own. Yet, Aelfric would consider this technique of rendering as a sense-to-sense translation. Abbot Aelfric himself admitted, that in his translation of the Latin work Cura Pastoralis under the English title The Shepherd's (i.e. Pastor's) Book, he performed it «sometimes word-by-word» and «sometimes according to the sense», i.e. in free translation.

These same two approaches to translation were also characteristic of other European countries of the Middle Ages. Thus, word- for-word translation was widely practised in the famous Toledo school in Central Spain (the twelfth and thirteenth centuries) where the outstanding translator of that country Gerhard of Cremonas worked. The adherence to word-for-word translation was predetermined by the subject-matter which was turned there from Arabic into Spanish. Among the works translated there were scientific or considered to be scientific (as alchemy), mathematical works (on arithmetic, algebra, geometry, physics, astronomy), philosophy, dialectics, medicine, etc. However, in Northern Spain, another school of translation functioned where the «sense-to-sense» approach was predominant and translations there were mostly performed from Greek into Hebrew (usually through Arabic). These same two principles, according to Solomon

Ibn Ajjub, one of the greatest authorities on translation in the middle of the thirteenth century, were practised in the southern Italian school (Rome), which had fallen under a strong Arabic cultural influence as well. Secular works were translated in this school with many deliberate omissions/eliminations, additions, and paraphrases of their texts, which consequently changed the original works beyond recognition. This was the logical consequence of the method initiated by Horace and his adherent Apuleius, who applied their practice to free treatment of secular works under translation. That approach, meeting little if any resistance, dominated in European translation of secular works all through the Middle Ages and up to the 18^lh century. The only voice against the deliberate and unrestricted «freedom» in translation was raised by the English scientist and philosopher Roger Bacon (1214? -1294), who strongly protested against this kind of rendering of Aristotle's works into English. In his work Opus Majus he demanded a thorough preliminary study of the source language works and a full and faithful conveyance of their content into the target language.

No less intensively practised alongside of the free sense-to- sense rendering in Europe during the Middle Ages was the strict word- for-word translation. Its domain of employment was naturally restricted to ecclesiastic and philosophic works. By this method the first ever translation of the Bible from Latin into English was accomplished in 1377-1380 by the noted religious scientist and reformer John Wycliffe/ Wycklif (1320? - 1384) who worked at the translation together with his helpers N.Hereford and J.Purvey.

Strict word-for-word translation continued to be constantly employed during the Middle Ages, and even much later in most European countries to perform translation of scientific, philosophic and juridical matter. An illustrative example of this is found in Germany of the thirteenth, fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Thus, the prominent translator and literary critic Nicolas von Wyle (1410-1478) openly and officially demanded that translators of Latin juridical documents alter the German target language syntactically and stylistically as much as possible to mirror some particular peculiarities of classical Latin source language, which enjoyed the position of a world language in those times.

TRANSLATION DURING THE RENAISSANCE PERIOD

The Renaissance period which began in the 14^lh century in Italy was marked by great discoveries and inventions, the most significant of which for cultural development was the invention of the moving printing press by the German J.Gutenberg in the middle of the 15^th century (1435). Its consequence was the appearance of cheaper printed books and a quick growth of the number of readers in West European countries. This demand of books for reading in its turn called forth an increase in translation activity due to which there was soon noticed an ever increasing number of fiction translations. Alongside of this, the birth and strengthening of national European states raised the status of national languages and reduced the role of Latin. Hence, translations began to be performed not only from classic languages but also from and into new European languages. These real changes resulted in a wider use of faithful as well as free translations which started almost at one and the same time in France, Germany and England. During this period Albrecht von Eyb (translator of T.PIautus' works), Heinrich Steinhowel (translator of Aesop's and Boccaccio's works), were active in Germany. The new free/unrestricted freedom of translation in France was also practised by the noted poet and translator of Ovid's poems Joachim du Bellay, who in his book Defence et Illustration de la Langue Française (1549) also included some theoretical chapters on translation. Another outstanding translator, publisher and scientist in France was Etienne Dolet. He was put to the stake, however, in 1546 for his free sense-to-sense (and not word- for-word) translation of Socrates' utterances in one of the dialogues with the philosopher Plato. E.Dolet was also the author of the treatise «De la maniéré de bien traduire d'une lange en l'altre», 1540 (On How to Translate Well from One Language into the Other). Among other French translators who would widely practise the unrestricted freedom of translation were also Etienne de Laigle, Claude Fontaine, Amyot, and others.

Certainly the greatest achievement of the Renaissance period in the realistic approach to conveying the source language works was the translation of the Bible into several West European national languages. The first to appear was the German Bible in Martin Luther's translation (1522-1534). This translation of the Book of Books was performed by Martin Luther contrary to the general tradition of the

Middle Ages, i.e. not strictly word-for-word, but faithfully sense-to- sense. What was still more extraordinary for those times, was that Martin Luther resorted to an extensive employment in his translation of the Bible of spoken German. Moreover, the principles of translating the Bible in this way were officially defended by Luther himself in his published work (1540) On the Art of Translation (Von der Kunst des Dolmetschen). That faithful German translation of the Bible was followed in 1534 by the English highly realistic translation of the Holy Book performed by the theologian William Tyndale (1492? -1536). A year later (in 1535) the French Calvinist Bible came off the press. William Tyndale's version of the Bible was the first ever scientifically grounded and faithful English translation of the Holy Book. That translation served as a basis for the new Authorized Version of the Bible published in 1611. Unfortunately, Tyndale's really faithful sense-to- sense English translation of the Bible met with stiff opposition and a hostile reception on the part of the country's high clergy. William Tyndale's true supporters tried to justify the use of the common English speech by the translator (this constituted one of the main points of «deadly» accusations) by referring to Aristotle's counsel which was «to speak and use words as the common people useth». W.Tyndale himself tried to defend his accurate and really faithful translation, but all in vain. In 1536 he was'tied to the stake, strangled and burnt in Flanders as a heretic for the same «sin» as his French colleague Etienne Dolet would be ten years later. Hence, the faithful approach to translating (this time of ecclesiastic and philosophic works) introduced by W.Tyndale and E.Dolet and supported by their adherents in England and France was officially condemned and persecuted in late Renaissance period.

TRANSLATION DURING THE PERIOD OF CLASSICISM AND ENLIGHTENMENT

Despite the official condemnations and even executions of some outstanding adherents of the idea of sense-to-sense translation of any written matter (including the ecclesiastic and philosophic works), the controversy between the supporters of now three different approaches to translating continued unabated all through the periods of Classicism (17^th - 18^th centuries) and Enlightenment (the 18^th century). These three trends which appeared long before and were employed during the Middle Ages, have been mentioned already on the preceding pages and are as follows:

1. The ancient «strict and truthful» word-for-word translation of ecclesiastic (the Septuagint) and philosophic works. The basic principles of the trend were considerably undermined by Luther's and Tyndale's translations of the Bible;

2. The unrestricted free translation introduced by Horace and Apuleius, which had established an especially strong position in France and gained many supporters there;

3. The old trend adhering to the Cicero's principle of regular sense-to-sense translation without the unrestricted reductions or additions to the texts/works in their final translated versions.

The supporters of the latter approach, whose voices began to be heard more and more loudly in the 17^th and 18^th centuries in various West European countries, strongly condemned any deliberate lowering of the artistic level or changing of the structure of the original belles- lettres works. They demanded in J.W.Draper's words that «Celtic literature be as Celtic as possible and Hottentot literature as Hottentot in order that the thrill of novelty might be maintained»^{^[6]}. The English critic meant by these words that the translator should faithfully convey not only the content but also the artistic merits of the source language works. John Dryden (1630-1700), another outstanding English author and literary critic, tried to reconcile these two historically opposite trends and sought a middle course between the «very free», as he called the second trend, and the «very close» (i.e. word-for-word) approach. He demanded from translators «faithfulness to the spirit of the original» which became a regular motto in the period of Classicism and Enlightenment, though far from all translators unanimously supported this idea. Thus, the German translator and literary critic G.Ventzky put forward the idea (and vigorously supported it) that the translated belles-lettres works «should seem to readers to be born, not made citizens».^{^[7]} This was not so much a demand for a highly artistic rendition, in the true sense of present-day understanding of faithful artistic translation, than a slightly camouflaged principle of adjustment of the source language works to current readers by way of free, unrestricted sense-to-sense rendering. And he realized this postulate in his translation practice.

Alongside of these trends regular free adaptation was widely practised during the 17^th -18^,h centuries. The latter was considered to be a separate means or principle of translation as well. The most outspoken defender of this kind of «translation» in Germany was Frau Gottsched and her adherents Kruger, Laub and J.E.Schlegel. She openly recommended «to modernize and nationalize» the foreign authors' works, «to change their scenes of events, customs and traditions for the corresponding German customs and traditions.»^{^[8]}Moreover, Frau Gottsched recommended the use of dialectal material in translation and practised unrestricted free interpretation of original belles-lettres works.^{^[9]} These views of Frau Gottsched, G.Ventzky and their adherents on translation radically differed from those expressed by their sturdy opponent, the noted critic and translator J.Breitinger, who considered the source language works to be individual creations whose distinguishing features should be fully rendered into the target language.^{^[10]}

THE EPOCH OF ROMANTICISM AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PRINCIPLES OF FAITHFUL TRANSLATION IN EUROPE

In the second half of the eighteenth century, especially during the last decades, the controversy between the opponents of the strict word-for-word translation, and those who supported the free sense-to- sense translation (or simply the unrestricted free interpretation) continued unabated. In fact, new vigorous opponents appeared within both trends, the most outspoken among them were J.Campbell and A.F.Tytler in England, and the noted German philosopher and author J.G.Herder (1744-1803). Each of them came forward with sharp criticism of both extreme trends in belles-lettres translation and each demanded, though not always consistently enough, a true and complete rendition of content, and the structural, stylistic and artistic peculiarities of the belles-lettres originals under translation. These proclaimed views regarding the requirements of truly faithful artistic translation were also shared by several authors, poets and translators in other countries, including France, where free/unrestricted translation was most widely practised. Campbell's and Tytler's requirements, as can be ascertained below, are generally alike, if not almost identical. Thus, Campbell demanded from translators of belles-lettres the following: 1) «to give a just representation of the sense of the original (the most essential); 2) to convey into his version as much as possible (in consistency with the genius of his language) the author's spirit and manner, the very character of his style; 3) so that the text of the version have a natural and easy flow»^{^[11]} (Chief Things to be Attended to in Translating, 1789).

A.F.Tytler's requirements, as has been mentioned, were no less radical and much similar, they included the following: 1) «the translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work; 2) the style and manner of writing should be of the same character with that of the original; 3) the translation should have the ease of an original composition.»^{^[12]} (The Principles of Translation, 1792). These theoretical requirements to belles-lettres translation marked a considerable step forward in comparison to the principles which existed before the period of Enlightenment and Romanticism. At the same time both the authors lacked consistency. Campbell, for example, would admit in his Essay that translators may sometimes render only «the most essential of the original» and only «as much as possible the author's spirit and manner, the character of his style». This inconsistency of Campbell could be explained by the strong dominating influence during that period of unrestricted freedom of translation. Perhaps this explains why Campbell and Tytler quite unexpectedly favoured approval of the indisputably free versification by A.Pope of Homer's Odyssey into English.

Much more consistent in his views, and still more persistent in his intention to discard the harmful practice of strict word-for-word translation as well as of the unrestricted freedom of translating belles- lettres works was J.G.Herder (1744-1803). He visited several European countries including Ukraine and studied their national folksongs, the most characteristic of which he translated into German and published in 1778-79. Herder was captivated by the beauty of the national songs of the Ukrainian people, for whom he prophesied a brilliant cultural future. Herder himself, a successful versifier of songs, understood the inner power of these kinds of literary works and consequently demanded that all translators of prose and poetic works render strictly, fully and faithfully not only the richness of content, but also the stylistic peculiarities, the artistic beauty and the spirit of the source language works. His resolute criticism of the unrestricted freedom of translation and verbalism found strong support among the most outstanding German poets such as Gothe and Schiller among other prominent authors. He also found support among the literary critics in Germany and other countries. This new approach, or rather a new principle of truly faithful literary translation, was born during the period of Enlightenment and developed during early Romanticism (the last decades of the eighteenth century). It began slowly but persistently to gain ground in the first decades of the nineteenth century. This faithful/realistic principle, naturally, was not employed in all European countries at once. After centuries long employment the word-for-word and unrestricted free translation could not be discarded overnight. As a result, the free sense-to-sense translation/unrestricted free translation as well as free adaptation (or regular rehash) continued to be widely employed in Europe throughout the first half of the nineteenth century and even much later. In Russia and in Ukraine, free sense-to-sense translation/free adaptation was steadily practised almost uninterruptedly both during the first and second halves of the nineteenth century. Among the eighteenth century Russian poets who constantly resorted to free sense-to-sense translation and free adaptation were Lomonosov, Sumarokov, Trediakovskii and others. In Ukraine, free sense-to-sense translation in the second half of the eighteenth century was occasionally employed by H.Skovoroda (in his translations from the Latin). During the nineteenth century the number of free interpretations increased considerably, among the authors in Russia being Zhukovskii, Pushkin, Katenin and Vvedenskii^{^[13]}, and in Ukrainian PHulak-Artemovs'kyi, P.Bielets'kyi-Nossenko and others. Every translator mostly employed free sense-to-sense translation or even free adaptation of foreign poetic and prose works. Only Zhukovskii would sometimes change his former practice and try to versify some poetic works as, for instance, Byron's Prisoner of Chillon (1819) faithfully, i.e., conveying full sense, the poetic meter and the artistic merits of the original work.

TRANSLATION IN KYIVAN RUS' DURING THE 10^th - 13™ CENTURIES AND IN UKRAINE DURING THE 14^th - 16™ CENTURIES

Ukrainian history of translation is today more than one thousand years old. It began soon after the adoption of Christianity in the tenth century (988) and continues in ever increasing measure up to the present day. The very first translations, however, are supposed to have been made several decades before that historical date, namely as early as 911, when the Kyivan Rus' Prince Oleh signed a treaty with Byzantium in two languages (Greek and the then Ukrainian). Regular and uninterrupted translation activity, which started in the late tenth - early eleventh centuries had continued almost uninterrupted for some 250 years. According to Nestor the Chronicler the Great Prince of Kyivan Rus', Yaroslav the Wise, «gathered together in 1037 in the St. Sophia Cathedral many translators (nucapi as they were called) to translate books (from Greek) «into the (Old) Slavonic language» («словінське письмо»), which was in those times the language of many ecclesiastic works and was understood in all Slavic countries. In many translations, as will be shown further, it contained local old Ukrainian lexical and grammatical elements.

Initially, in the last decades of the tenth - early eleventh century, only the materials necessary for church services were translated, but soon the Bible began to appear in different cities of Kyivan Rus'. These Bibles are historically identified after the names of places where they first appeared or after the names of their owners, translators or copiers. Among the fully preserved Bibles of those times today are the Reims Bible (first half of the eleventh century), which belonged to Princess Anna, daughter of Yaroslav the Wise and later queen of France, the Ostromyr's Bible (1056-1057), the Mstyslaw's Bible (1115— 1117), the Halych Bible (1144). In the eleventh and twelfth centuries there also appeared several Psalm books (Psalters) which were followed by the «Apostles» (1195, 1220). In those times, semi- ecclesiastic works, which were called apocrypha became well-known. These works included such titles as The Life of Mary of Egypt, The Life of Andrew the Insane (Андрій Юродивий), The Life of Eustaphius Plakyda as well as stories on the life of monks including numerous Egyptian, Syrian and Greek legends composed between the third and fifth centuries AD. Apart from these some historical works of Byzantine chroniclers G.Amartol and J.Malala were translated and read in Kyivan Rus'. It is important to note, that the Old Slavonic translations of Psalms and larger works as The Jewish Wars by Josephus Flavius (37 - after 100) contained several lexical, morphological (vocative case forms) and syntactic features of the then old Ukrainian which are used also in present-day Ukrainian. This influence of the Ukrainian language is one evident proof of it having been in common use in Kyivan Rus'. This fact completely discards the ungrounded allegations cited by official Soviet and Russian linguists who portray the Ukrainian language coming into being as a separate Slavic language only in the fourteenth or even in the fifteenth centuries, i.e., at the same time with the Russian language. As can be ascertained from some stanzas of the translated Psalms below, their Old Slav speech, as presented in present-day orthographic form, is more than similar in many places to present-day Ukrainian:

Аще бо зіло шатаются іюдеї, Же суть і без чину борются.

І смерті не помнять, І не наричаются вої,

Но обаче не іскушені во брані Но народ суетен.^{^[14]}

The underlined words and word-combinations (Аще, шатаются іюдеї. смерті не помнять, не іскушені во брані, без чину борются) have each a close or practically identical orthographic form and almost the same meaning in modern Ukrainian. Thus, шатаются іюдеї means бігають, метушаться; смерті не помнять can be understood as not being afraid of or not thinking of their death, i.e., fully engaged in fighting (во брані). The latter noun (брань) is in contemporary Ukrainian poetic (and archaic) for fight or fighting. The only word in the above-cited fifth line, which is not quite clear lexically is наричаются /не наричаются whereas вої Is again poetic and archaic for воїни fighters. Neither is it difficult to comprehend this noun today. The last line Но народ суетен is also easy to understand and means that people were agitated, uneasy.

In some other stanzas translated from Greek or Latin in the eleventh or twelfth century one may come across even more contemporary Ukrainian speech patterns as in the following lines from the hymn by Ambrose of Milan versified by an anonymous translator of the tenth or twelfth century:

Тебе, Бога, хвалим, Тебе, предвічного Отца,

Тебе, Господа, ісповідуєм, Вся земля величает...^{^[15]}

AN four lines of the stanza above are practically in contemporary Ukrainian. There is no doubt they could have been translated so not accidentally but only by a person whose mother tongue was the then Ukrainian and who spoke this language every day. The author of those translated lines naturally thought in Ukrainian as well, but perhaps owing to fatigue or inattention, he lost his concentration and used Ukrainian instead of the Old Slavonic, which was in those and succeeding days the literary official language which the translator used while accomplishing his versification. One more evidence of the Ukrainian language having been already then much like modern Ukrainian can be found in the anonymous tenth or twelfth century versification of an excerpt from St. John's the Prophet (іоанн Златоуст) Psalm:

Радуйся, Благодатная Христос, Бог наш,

Богородице Діво, Провіщай сущія во тьмі,

Із Тебе бо возсія Солнце правди, Веселися і ти, старче праведний.. ,^{^[16]}Thus, all translations of the tenth and twelfth centuries in Ukraine-Rus' give much evidence not only about the level of faithfulness, but also help to a great measure establish the nature of the language of translation itself.

All in all, the period of the eleventh-thirteenth centuries as presented in the history of Ukraine, demonstrated a regular upheaval in translation with many ecclesiastic and secular works of different kind turned generally in Old Slavic as well as in Old Ukrainian. The ecclesiastic works included not only sermon books (богослужбові книги), Psalms and Bibles (as the Buchach 13^th century Bible) but also some theoretical works by prominent Byzantine church fathers (G.Naziazinus, I.Sirin and others). Examples from secular literature include works of Byzantine, Roman and other poets and philosophers, the most noticeable among them being didactic precepts, «Addresses», wise expressions and aphorisms selected from the works of Plutarch, Plato, Socrates, Aristotle and other prominent ancient figures. Apart from these, some larger epic works were translated in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries as well. Very popular among them were the novel Alexandria (about the life and heroic exploits of Alexander the Great of

Greece), a narrative about the life and many exploits of Didenis Akrit «Подвиги Діденіса Акріта», the work Akirthe Wise «Акір Мудрий», a collection of Byzantine fables and fairly tales entitled Stephanit and Ihnilat «Стефаніт та Ігнілат», another narrative called The Proud King Adarianes «Гордовитий цар Адаріан» and a collection of narratives on nature (The Physiologist) «Фізіолог», in which both real and fantastic beings and minerals were described. These and other works were translated mostly from old Greek, while some originated also from Latin and Hebrew languages.

The Tartar and Mongol invasion in 1240, the downfall of Ukraine- Rus' and the seizure of Constantinople by the Turks in 1453, which completed the collapse of Byzantium, considerably slowed the progress of translation in Ukraine-Rus', which despite these tragic events, did not die out completely. Thus, the first to appear in the 14^th century (1307) was the Bible of Polycarp. Apart from this there were some versified translations of ecclesiastic works as the Treatise on Sacred Theologyby D.Areopagitis, D.Zograf's translation of God's Six Days Creation by G.Pisida, Kiprian's translation of Ph. Kokkin's Canon of Public Prayer to Our Lord Jesus Christ, excerpts of Ph. Monotrop's Dioptra, the Cronicle of C.Manassia, the anonymous translation of the Tormenting Voyage of the Godmother and others. The attention of Ukrainian translators during the 14^th and 15^th centuries now turned to numerous apocrypha, aesthetic, philosophic and semi-philosophic works of Byzantine authors E.Sirin, D.Areopagitis, Maxim the Confessor, G.Sinaitis, G.Palama and P.Monotropos (known best for his work Dioptra). All of these works were much read then. Several historical works are also known to have been translated in those times, the most outstanding of all being K.Manassia's Chronicle and The Trojan History. From the literary works which were translated in the fifteenth century are known the narratives: A Story of the Indian Kingdom, A Story of Towdal the Knight and The Passions of Christ. New translations of ecclesiastic works included The Four Bibles, The Psalm-Book, The Apostle and some sermon books. Apart from these there were translated or retold during the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries the «ecclesiastic narratives» the Kings Magians, written by the Carmelite J.Hiludesheim (- circ. 1375), the legend about Saint George, the treatise Aristotle's Gate and the treatise on logic by the Spanish rabbi Mosses ben Maimonides (1135-1204).

It must be pointed out that it was the fifteenth century which marked a noticeable change in the orientation of Ukrainian society, culture and translation towards Christian Western Europe. The first Ukrainians went to study in the universities of Krakow, Paris, Florence and Bologna, from which the Ukrainian scientist Yuriy Drohobych (Kotermak) had graduated. He was also elected rector of the latter university in 1481 -1482. Among the first translations of the fifteenth century was the King's Bible of 1401 (Transcarpathian Ukraine) and the Kamyanka-Strumyliv Bible which appeared in 1411, followed by the Book of Psalms (translated by F.Zhydovyn) and some collections of stories about the lives of saints. The main of them was the Monthly Readings/ChetiiMinaii(1489) aimed at honouring each month the name of a saint. Unfortunately the fifteenth century translations of secular works are represented today only by two anonymous versifications from Polish of the well-known in Western Europe work The Struggle between Life and Death and A Story about Death of a Great Mistr or Philosopher. Both these translations testified to the growth of the syl- labic-accentual versification, which separated itself from the pre-Mon- golian accentual prosody. The latter, however, continued to be practised during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which were dominated in Ukraine's history by a constant struggle of our people and culture against the Tartars and Turks in the South and South-West, and against the Poles, who occupied Ukrainian lands from the right bank of the Dnieper river to the West of it. But despite the constant uprisings and wartime danger, many Ukrainian young men went to study in European universities. Thus, in early seventeenth century two Kyivans named Hnyverba and Ivan Uzhevych studied in Sorbonne University, the latter having been the author of the first ever Ukrainian grammar written in Latin (1634).

Translations of belles-lettres during the sixteenth century were probably not numerous either. They include a well-known in Western Europe work The Meeting of Magister Polycarp with the Death which had already been translated once at the end of the fifteenth century, the Solomon's Song, Alexandria, Guido de Columna's History of the Trojan War, History of Attila, King of Hungary, a narrative on the Revolt of Lucifer and the Angels, a Story about the Fierce Death which Nobody Can Escape and others.^{^[17]}

As in Germany, France and England during the first half of the sixteenth century, Ukrainian translators were engaged in bringing mostly ecclesiastical works into our language. Thus, in 1522 the readers received the small Traveller's Booklet, in 1525 - The Apostle and in 1556-1561 - the famous Peresopnyts'ka Bible which was translated with many Ukrainian elements by Mykhailo Vasyl'evych. In 1570 one more translation of the Bible was completed by Vasyl' Tyapyns'kyi which was followed by the Books of the New Testament in 1580. The year 1581 saw two new Bibles - the first was translated by the Volyn' nobleman Nehalevskyi and the second - the famous Ostroh Bible published by Ivan Fedorov, whose first book TheApostlebad come off the press in 1574. The Ostroh Bible was the first ever complete translation of the Holy Book in Slavic countries. It ushered in a new era not only in Ukraine's book publishing tradition but in translation as well. One of the first belles-lettres translations into Ukrainian was an excerpt from F.Petrarca's Letters without Address turned into our language by a pen-named translator Kliryk Ostrozkyi.

THE KYIV MOHYLA ACADEMY AND REVIVAL OF TRANSLATION ACTIVITIES IN UKRAINE

A considerable intensification was witnessed in Ukrainian translation during the seventeenth century, which could have been influenced by the initial activities in the Kyiv Mohyla Academy (founded in 1632), where translations were at first employed to further teaching processes. Thus, in the first half of the seventeenth century there appeared translations from the Greek (G.Nazianzinus' works, translated by Skulskyi and D.Nalyvaiko) and from Latin (L.A.Seneca's works) translated by K.Sakovych. These translations were of higher quality though they were mostly free adaptations as those versified by a certain Vitaliy (P.Monotrop's Dioptra) or anonymous free interpretations, exemplified with the Book of Psalms and some other works among which were also poems of the Polish poet K.Trankwillian-Stawrowski. Apart from the ecclesiastic works some previously translated works were accomplished (The Physiologist). The seventeenth century also witnessed the appearance of the work by Archbishop Andreas of Kessalia (1625) on the Revelation (Apocalypse) in Lavrentiy Zizaniy's translation. The seventeenth century in Ukraine was also marked by regular versifications of prominent Italian and Polish poets of late Renaissance period as Torquato Tasso (10 chapters of his poem The Liberated Jerusalem, which was translated on the basis of the perfect

Polish versification of the masterpiece by P.Kokhanowski, as well as by a versified translation (accomplished by Kulyk) of one of G.Boccaccio's short stories from his Decameron.

During the second half of the seventeenth century after the domination over Ukraine was divided between Russia and Poland (according to the Andrussovo treaty of 1667), translation practically survived only in the Kyiv Mohyla Academy. Active for some time was Symeon Polotskyi (1629-1680), who left a small number of free versifications of Polish Psalms written by P.Kokhanowski, and D.Tuptalo (1651- 1709), who translated some poems of anonymous Polish poets. Several renditions were also left by S.Mokiyevych, who belonged to Mazeppa's followers. He accomplished several free versifications of some parts of the Old and New Testament, as well as the Bible of St.Matthew. Besides these free translations of some Owen's English epigrams were performed by the poet I. Welychkovskyi (? -1701).

The last decades of the seventeenth century and the first decade of the eighteenth century were far from favourable for Ukraine, its culture or translation. Today only a few known versifications exist, which were mainly accomplished by the Kyiv Mohyla Academy graduates Ivan Maksymovych (1651-1715) and his nephew and namesake I.Maksymovych (1670-1732). The uncle left behind his versification of an elegy by the fifteenth century German poet H.Hugo. No less active at the beginning of his literary career was also the Mohyla Academy lecturer Feophan Prokopovych (1681-1736), who, when he moved to Russia, became subservient to the Russian czar Peter I and helped suppress Ukraine. The Psalms, and poetic works of the Roman poets Ovid, Martial and of the French Renaissance poet Scaliger (1540- 1609) were often translated at the Academy as well.

The first decades of the eighteenth century were marked by an unbearable terror imposed on the Ukrainian people by Peter I. It was the period when the first bans on the Ukrainian language publications (1721) were issued. Ukrainian scientists and talented people were either forced or lured to go to the culturally backward Russia. With the enthroning of Catherine II the Ukrainian nation was completely enslaved. It was no wonder that Ukrainian translation and belles-lettres in general fell into obscurity as a result of these oppressions. The official Russian language eventually took the upper hand. As a result, even the great philosopher H.Skovoroda had to perform his essentially free translations more in Russian than in bookish Ukrainian. His best known translations today are: an ode of the Flemish poet Hosiy (1504- 1579), excerpts from Cicero's book On Old Age and Plutarch's work on Peace in One's Heart (translated in 1790). More prolific in translation than H.Skovoroda was his contemporary and fellow a Kyiv Mohyla Academy alumnus K.Kondratovych who translated Ovid's elegies (1759), twelve speeches by Cicero, Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, Cato's distichs (flBOBipmi) and some other works by ancient Greek and Roman authors which remained unpublished, however.

KOTLYAREVSKYI'S FREE ADAPTATION OF VIRGIL'SAENEID AND THE BEGINNING OF A NEW ERA IN UKRAINIAN TRANSLATION

The standstill in Ukrainian translation, which characterized the 17^th and the larger part of the 18^th centuries was broken in the last decade of the eighteenth century by the appearance of Pious Songs (Побожник) in 1791 in Pochaiv. This collection contained original Ukrainian poetic works, translations, free interpretations and free adaptations of pious songs and Psalms from different languages into Ukrainian, Old Slavic and Polish. But the real outbreak and a regular epoch making event in Ukrainian literature, culture and translation happened at the very close of the eighteenth century, in 1797, when the first parts of I .Kotlyarevskyi's free adaptation (перелицювання) of Virgil's Aeneidcame off the press in colloquial Ukrainian. The appearance of this brilliant work marked a significant historical turning-point in Ukrainian literature and culture. It had started a quite new period in the history of Ukrainian literary translation as well. Kotlyarevskyi's free adaptation of the Aeneid immediately began the eventual rejection of further translations in old bookish Ukrainian. It paved the way to a spontaneous, and uninterrupted functioning of spoken Ukrainian in original literature and in translated works. The first to have employed the manner of free interpretation after Kotlyarevskyi at the beginning of the nineteenth century was the poet and linguist P.Bilets'kyi-Nosenko who made a free adaptation of Ovid's epic poem under the title «Гэрпинида чи Вхопленая Прозерпина» (1818), which was published only in 1871. The artistic level of this free adaptation, however, could not compete in any way with the already popular free adaptation of the Aeneid by I. Kotlyarevskyi. As a result, it remained unpublished for more than five decades and consequently was unknown to Ukrainian readers.

Much more successful were free interpretations/free adaptations accomplished at a high literary level by the well-known Ukrainian poet P.Hulak-Artemovskyi. His free interpretation of I. Krassitski's Polish short poem under the title The Landlord and His Dog (1818) which he extended to more than fifty lines to become a regular poetic narrative, brought him recognition in Ukrainian literature. Free unextended translations were also made by this poet of Mickiewicz's ballads (Mrs. Twardowska), Gôthe's poems (The Fisher), Horace's odes and some Psalms (from Old Slavic).

A positively different approach existed among translators in the first half of the nineteenth century to Russian national poetry which was sometimes almost faithfully versified. It can be observed in Borovykovskyi's translation of Pushkin's poems as in this one: Буря мглою небо кроет, Буря в хмари небо криє,

Вихри снежные крутя, Сипле сніг, як з рукава,

То как зверь она завоет, То звірюкою завиє,

То заплачет, как дитя. То застогне, як сова.

Similar, near faithful versification, can be observed in Y.Hrebinka's translation of Pushkin's Poltava (1836), which the poet himself identified, however, as «a free translation»: Богат и славен Кочубей. Багатий дуже Кочубей:

Его луга необозримы, Його ланам конця немає;

Там табуны его коней Його отара скрізь гуляє

Пасутся вольны, не хранимы. В зеленім лузі без людей.

Though not without traces of free translation (cf. Його отара скрізь гуляє В зеленім лузі без людей), both these versifications convey almost completely the content of Pushkin's stanzas, the iambic or choraic rhythm, their vocalic or consonantal lines, their ease and melody. Therefore, despite some minor divergences in picturesque- ness, phraseology, poetic licence (Його отара скрізь гуляє) and some other drawbacks, these translated works already bear all the characteristic features of a faithful versification. Consequently, the first half of the nineteenth century may be considered to have been the starting date in the history of faithful Ukrainian versification/translation. Actively participating in the literary process of that same period, were the poet A.Metlynskyi (translations of German, French and other poets) and M.Maksymovych (versification of The Tale of the Host of Ihor).

Almost the same year with Hrebinka's published versification of Pushkin's poem Poltava, in a publishing house in Budapest was produced the historic Rusalka Dnistrovaya collection (1837) composed by M.Shashkevych, I. Vahylevych and Y.Holovats'kyi. This collection contained apart from these authors' own verses, translations by Vahylevych from the Czech (Kraledvorsky Manuscript), and from Old Ukrainian (The Tale of the Host of Ihor), as well as Y.Holovats'kyi's translation of Serbian songs. This collection marked the beginning of regular belles-lettres translations in Halychyna. Hence, the process of translation in Eastern (Russian) and Western (Austro-Hungarian) parts of divided Ukraine began and continued to develop at almost the same time and in the same manner, though the Eastern part of Ukraine had already several talented poets, prose writers, playwrights and translators. The greatest and the most influential of them in early 1840's was our national genius, poet and painter Taras Shevchenko. He had already succeeded to create his principal poetic masterpieces and had even successfully versified (1845) ten of David's Psalms from Old Slavic into Ukrainian.

Participating in the process of unification of Ukrainian literature and culture into one national stream were also some other prominent figures of the first half and of the first decades of the second half of the nineteenth century. Among these were some already well-known Ukrainian poets and authors as Y.Hrebinka, M.Maksymovych, L.Borovykovs'kyi, Y.Fed'kovych (Austrian and German poetry), O.Shpyhots'kyi (Mickiewicz's works), K.Dumytrashko (The War between Frogs and Mice, from ancient Greek), M.Kostomarov (Byron's works), M.Staryts'kyi and others. All the above-mentioned poets and authors, though generally amateurish translators themselves, nevertheless inspired the succeeding men of letters to turn to this field of professional activity. Apart from these regular men of the pen, taking part in the process of translation were also some noted scientists as O.Potebnya and I. Puliuy and some others.

Soon, there appeared such great translators in Ukrainian literature as poets, authors and public figures PKulish, I.Franko, Lesya Ukrainka, O.Makoway and some others. PKulish (1819-1897), a close friend of T.Shevchenko, was also the first professional translator in the nineteenth century Ukraine. His large output includes the most outstanding works of Shakespeare (fifteen best-known tragedies and comedies, of worldwide renown, which were edited by I.Franko and published in 1902), Byron's Childe Harold's Pilgrimage (in blank verse), part of Don Juan and some other poems. He also translated several poems by Gothe, Schiller and Heine (from German), produced several free interpretations and free adaptations from Russian poetry (Pushkin, Fet, Nikitin, A.Tolstoy, D.Minayev). He was also the first to translate The Psalter (1879) and the Bible (together with Puliuy and Nechuy- Levyts'kyi) into contemporary Ukrainian. In addition, Kulish is the author of the contemporary Ukrainian alphabet.

TRANSLATION AND TRANSLATORS DURING THE LATE 19^th - EARLY 20^th CENTURIES

The second half of the nineteenth century was marked by a regular revival of translation in Ukraine on the one hand and by ever increasing suppressions and direct prohibitions of the Ukrainian language and culture in Czarist Russia on the other (Valuyev's edict of 1863 and the Czar's Ems decree of 1876). As a result, the publishing of Ukrainian translations and works of Ukrainian national authors in general was greatly hindered. It survived only thanks to the Halychyna (Western Ukraine) publishers who received financial support from wealthy Ukrainian patriotic sponsors, whose names deserve to be mentioned again and again. Among the most influential of them were V.Symyrenko, Y.Chykalenko, M.Arkas and others.

During the period of these humiliating Czarist suppressions of Ukrainian literature and culture in the 1860's, 1880's and 1890's, many outstanding Ukrainian translations could not be published. This happened to accurate versifications of Homer's Iliad and the Odyssey by O.Navrots'kyi and to the versified parts of the Odyssey and the Iliad by P.Nishchyns'kyi. Only much later were the free interpretation of the Iliad (IribMot-mHKa) by S.Rudans'kyi also published, along with excerpts of Homeric poems versified by P.Kulish, O.Potebnya, I. Franko, Lesya Ukrainka and some other translators. There was soon felt a general upsurge in the domain of literary translation during the second half of the nineteenth century in the Austro-Hungarian (Western) part of Ukraine. There translations or rather free adaptations began to appear at first in magazines and journals Dzvin, Zorya, Bukovyna, Dilo and others. Somewhat later, during the 1870's, larger works of West European and American authors in Ukrainian translation came off the press. Not all these works of art were translated directly from the original, however. Some had been accomplished first through Polish or German languages as it was with Y.Fed'kovych's translation of parts of Shakespeare's Hamlet and The Taming of the Shrew, though his versification of Uhland's and Schiller's poems were achieved from their original (German) language.

Probably among the very first almost real translations published in Halychyna (Austrian part of Ukraine) in 1870's - 1880's were A.Dumas' Notes of the Old Captain (1874), H.Beecher-Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin (published in 1877) and A.Daudet's novel Zouave (1887) brought into Ukrainian by O.Ovdykows'kyi. Among the almost regular translations was J.Edward's work Stephen Lawrence (1881) rendered into Ukrainian by N.Romanovych-Tkachenko and the free translation of C.Dickens' Christmas Carol (1880), The Cricket in the Hearth (1891) and somewhat later, of Oliver Twist. Freely interpreted/adapted were also some works by F.Bret Harte, Mark Twain and a number of others to be named later. Hence, the translation and publishing activity during the last decades of the nineteenth century in Halychyna and in neighbouring Bukovyna (Chernivtsi) and to some extent in Transcarpathia (Uzhhorod) was gathering momentum. An influential role in this process played the Taras Shevchenko Scientific Society founded in 1873 (Lviv) and its Literary Journal where the best translations were published. In large measure, those translations appeared due to the titanic achievements in the domain of literary artistic translation of I. Franko, Lesya Ukrainka, O.Makoway among other great Ukrainian men and women of letters. This was also a political breakthrough which openly ignored the czarist prohibition of the Ukrainian language, literature and culture.

The Literary Journal and prior to it the Taras Shevchenko Scientific Society itself received financial support from some personal funds belonging to such great patriots of Ukraine as P.Pelekhin, T.Dembyts'kyi, M.Hrushevskyi, O.Ohonovs'kyi, A.Bonchevs'kyi, O.Konys'kyi. The Literary Journal was also supported financially by the D.Mordovets' and I. Kotlyarevs'kyi social funds^{^[18]}. Due to the support it managed to publish only in the first decade of the twentieth century the works of the following authors: Conan Doyle, T.S.Eliot

(1903) , Mark Twain (1904,1906), poetic works of West European and Russian authors translated by PHrabovs'kyi, some works of O.Wilde

(1904) , K.Ritter (1906), E.A.Poe (1906,1912), J.Milton (1906), works of some Australian authors (translated by I. Franko, 1910), as well as works of such well-known English and American authors as R.Kipling (1904,1910), C.Roberts (1911), C.Dickens and H.Longfellow (The Song of Hiawatha), (1912), J.London (1913) and several others.

Among the translators of these and other works besides I. Franko and his son Petro Franko were later N.Romanovych-Tkachenko,

0. Mykhalevych, P.Karmans'kyi, O.OIes', I.Petrusevych, D.Dontsov, Y.Siryi, A.Voloshyn, M.Lozyns'kyi, V.Stepankovs'kyi, M.Zahirnya, and some others.

The revival of literary translation in Eastern and Western parts of Ukraine in early 70's and especially in the 1880's was greatly enhance