CC BY
16К вопросу о переводе стилистических пластов поэзии хинди (на примере санскритской лексики в стихах Кунвара Нараяна)
Гурия Анастасия Георгиевна,
научный сотрудник, Институт стран Азии и Африки Московского государственного университета им. М.В. Ломоносова E-mail: agguria@gmail.com
Статья посвящена разным лексическим пластам в современной поэзии хинди, сознательный выбор между которыми позволяет поэту менять стилистические регистры текста. Рассмотрены контексты, в которых в поэзии хинди используется маркированная лексика (санскритская, арабо-персидская, простонародная лексика деши). Отмечена роль санскритизмов как маркера высокого стиля (официального, эмоционально приподнятого и пр.), употребление санскритских и персидских слов в гражданской поэзии, применение разных лексических пластов языка для создания особого колорита изображаемого места и эпохи, юмористическое соположение разных по происхождению лексем. В качестве примера разбираются способы и цели использования санскритской лексики в поэзии классика современной индийской поэзии Кунвара Нараяна. Показано, что она в основном служит созданию исторического колорита, а также используется для донесения сложных мыслей и идей автора при создании неологизмов, которые читатель способен расшифровать. Обсуждаются аспекты и проблемы адекватного перевода этой лексики на русский язык. Отмечается, что отбор высокой лексики, происходящей из церковнославянского языка или языковых норм XVIII в., не должен приводить к подмене индийских реалий и культурных концептов русскими. Обсуждается ряд других проблем, связанных с переводом разных стилистических пластов лексики хинди.
Ключевые слова: литература хинди, Кунвар Нараян, стилистика, теория перевода, санскрит.
о с
U
The multi-layered nature of Indian culture implies the co-existence of many distinctly different stratae within one common cultural context. This feature is much akin to the Soviet and modern Russian perception of different sub-cultures, both ethnical, cultural and religious, that are simultaneously «ours», familiar, - and different from the neutral «us». It brings to life a number of attempts to compare the juxtaposed cultures in their different aspects, to learn from each other and find common values, et cetera; it also results in many humorous sketches and jokes about each other, also not alien to the Indian culture (we joke about Caucasians and Kamchatka people, Hindi speakers humorously depict Panjabis and Bengalis, and receive the same from them). But this co-existence also answers for the considerable role of stylization in modern Hindi poetry.
The major part of these stylized verses that I have met with is stylized for one of the four reasons. 1. Attempt to reproduce a historical atmosphere (be it the epical aura of the Mahabharata or the elaborate elegance of the Muslim Nawabi Audh - with Sanskrit or Farsi and Arabic vocabulary respectively). 2. Stylization of common people's speech, of the illiterate, simple country (desi) people, either the poor and downtrodden contrasted to the educated audience, - or of the dear simple memories of the childhood spent by the poet in a village far from urban sites. This nostalgia for a simpler, purer life before the Westernization, this homesickness of spirit is, by the way, quite common for both our counries (take Yesenin in Russian for example). 3. Stylization of Urdu speech1 - deliberate usage of Arabo-Persian vocabulary in the verses written against communalism during the Hindu-Muslim conflicts or about them. This usage of Urdu words is a solidarity manifest, the aim is to show that, in spirit, the poet is with the injured side, «if they are all guilty, count me guilty too». 4. Comical stylizations - either of the macaronical speech with much English loans, or of Sanskritized declarations of politicians etc.
As a translator, one certainly feels when, at this or that point, the poet is imitating another manner of speech. The question is how to convey it adequately into Russian. With the first case it is relatively simple -you take the Russian translation of the Mahabharata, stylistically very well-done, or some other source, and try to imitate the intonation and sometimes the vocabulary used there. Russian language also has its stylistic and cultural layers, and with a certain measure of tact one can choose between the 18-century magnificent vocabulary and the more ascetical but picturesque language of the 1900-es poetry, very fond of Oriental subjects, by the way. The second case is
equally lucid - the common illiterate people's speech has been very distinct from the language of the educated elite in Russia not only throughout the XIX century, but even as late as the 1970-s (see Shukshin's humorous short stories on the city people meeting the villagers). The third case is perhaps the most difficult of all, because despite the perceptible presence of the Muslim part of the multicultural entity of Russia/Soviet Union, the literature language has no such obvious «own language» for this strata of our society. The translator is reduced to giving footnotes and explaining, «this poem is against this and in defence of that..», which is, frankly speaking, a declaration of artistic failure. But the problem appears inexorable. The fourth case, the comical one, is both simple and complex at the same time. With English we've had our share during the 1990-es when a huge amount of new words were being loaned from English, and we can represent this feature of «fashionable cool speech» of the young or foolish by an equally anglicized Russian. But when it comes to sanskritisms, the matter requires much tact again because the Russian reader may be familiar with the Sanskrit cultural background, but he may also be not. This knowledge is easily accessible but less wide-spread, it depends on the interests of the reader. So in this case, once again we have to give footnotes and explain - both the names and allusions to Indian myths or epics, and the concepts of religious philosophy et cetera. But this, it seems, can't be helped - a translation from another language is also a transplantation of a piece of the other country's history and culture into the Russian soil. It takes some extra-literature work sometimes before it can grow into the new ground.
This article will deal with a particular example of one such stylistic layer - the Sanskrit vocabulary - in one poet's works, namely, those of Kunwar Narain, -commenting also on some features of translating it.
Kunwar Narain (born in 1927) is a prominent poet of modern Hindi literature. He first earned his fame in late 1950-es as one of the remarkable poets of Ex-perimentalism (Prayogvad) and the emerging New Poetry movement in Hindi literature, and evolved into a very special and dignified figure of the same creative scale as Kavafis or Borges. (On Hindi New poetry see [Сенкевич: 246-291].) I had the exquisite experience of translating his poems into Russian, together with Prof. Guzel Strelkova, resulting in a book «Flowers of the neem tree» coming out in 2014 [Narain 2014]. The poetry of Kunwar Narain is known for its depth of thought, subtlety of feeling, but also for its complexity. A detailed survey of the numerous studies of his works (Hindi literature textbook chapters, research articles, PhD theses etc.) is certainly beyond the scope of the present work, but we may mention a few relevant articles in Russian [Стрелкова, Гурия 2014, Лесик 2021а, Лесик 20216].
For the present I will touch upon just one aspect of his style: the choice of vocabulary. It is often said of this or that poet that his vocabulary is unique, uncommon. However, the very concept of common, so to say, «normal» vocabulary, is an abstract ideal: it
does not exist in reality. Still it seems sensible to speak of marked and non-marked vocabulary. How do we tell between them? Marked vocabulary is something we feel as different, «unusual». It evokes some emotions because it has a trail of associations behind it (see [Гаспаров: 390+]), or because it's rare or even incorrect, strange to our eye. The three main layers of marked vocabulary in Kunwar Narain's works are Sanskrit words, Urdu words and colloquial or dialect variants (deshi or tadbhava words)2. Sanskrit has a special place in his poetry, filled with many traces of the cultural heritage of Ancient India. Many of his poems are based on Sanskrit legends - like the stories of Ab-himanyu the Mahabha'rata hero, Bhartrihari the Sanskrit poet, Sudama the childhood friend of Krishna. In that case we observe a conscious choice of Sanskrit vocabulary, stylized to follow the original legend's language.
Just as he carefully chooses Urdu terms for poems on Mughal India history - Amir Khusro the renowned medieval Muslim poet, sultan Akbar's capital city Fatehpur Sikri, and Anarkali the lovely dancer who was buried alive by a sultan in wrath3. However, apart from such cases, mostly Kunwar Narain's poetry shows a balanced use of Sanskrit, Urdu and deshi vocabulary, and sometimes their poetic juxtaposition. dudhmuhr паГ-паГ samsrti ko / bal-ma'navta' ke svabhavik sapno tak ane do: «let the baby-like crisp-new world / reach the unsophisticated/ innocent dreams of newborn mankind» (Madhyam, «The Medium» [Narain 2008: 2-5]). A lovely example of the juxtaposition is found in ajkal kabrdas, «Kabirdas these days» [Narain 2008: 67-76]: ajkal kam hrlautte hai ve / apne madhyakal me, / rahte hai trikal me. // Ek din dikh gaye mujh ko/filhal me... One can see that while madhyakal is a common non-marked scientific term of a Sankrit origin, trikal is either a neologism or a Sanskrit scripture loan - «three-times-taken-together», i.e. past, present and future; and filhal - a colloquial Urdu word. One had to try and preserve all three peculiar flavours: common-scientific «Middle ages», decoda-ble neologism «three-time-ness», and the most trivial «one of these days». (»Нынче редко-редко заходит он / в свое Средневековье / живет в тривременье. / Раз как-то вижу его / на днях» [Нараян 2014: 3944]). In the same beautiful way the poet here places together the Sanskrit prabhav «influence» and Khariboli dabav «pressure», and uses the Sanskrit anant «endless» and Urdu behad «limitless» as synonyms, clearly denoting Kabir's all-embracing idea of God. Same elegance can be seen in us zara-se dikhte asman, vartman aur khulf hava'ke lie (»the sky, the present and the open air barely visible») in vah kabhrnahn soya', «<He never slept» [Narain 2008: 10].
So, Kunwar Narain naturally uses Sanskrit vocabulary when dealing with some Sanskrit legend. But it's not all. In non-legend-related poems sanskritisms have two main purposes of usage. The first one is -to bring to mind Vedic/Upanishadic reminiscences in philosophic poetry. Kunwar Narain uses Sanskrit nouns or participles with a rich trail of cultural associations. So it is in Chakravyuh, «<Circular defence»
C3
о
CO "O
1=1 А
—I
о
C3 t; о m О от
З
ы о со
[Narain 2008: 7+]: pra'rabdh for «destiny», yuddhagni «fire of war», nispap «sinless», «innocent», upadesho, upakhyano, kathao me - «in teachings, sub-legends (epic term), tales»; yoddha'for «warrior» (vah kabhf nahin soya), aihik silsilo se dur «far from the sequences of this <world>» (ye panktiya" mere nikat). All these examples carry behind them an echo of earlier Sanskrit literary tradition. Another such example is the following quote, richly filled with Sanskritisms: Phir kaise na manu vah vanaspati hfamar hai/jo sada'bastrrahr dara'rö me samay ki~/ aur jiska'dirgh a'gat / purn raksit hai hama're gagan-chumbr mahal sapno me... (»Than how can I fail to accept that it is only the flora that is immortal / that has always been there inhabiting the crevices of Time / and whose long presence / is fully granted in the sky-kissing palaces of our dreams...») (citke svapn, «Fractured dreams» [Narain 2008: 17+]).
The second purpose of the introduction of Sanskrit-isms can be seen when Sanskrit models of word formation are used for creating new words, decodable for the reader, and for providing logical patterns within a poem. New word formation is the medium for poets-philosophers who try to convey very fine distinctions of thought, and common language somehow seems too narrow for them. The poet himself speaks of this with mild irony in Uttardayitva (Responsibility, [Narain 2009: 125]): bhasa'me vyakaran ke dhith ullanghan hai / cintan me kalpana' kr äva'ra' sairo ki~ bhatkane (»there are impertinent breakings of grammar / and gypsy wanderings of fancy in the thinking»). One of the simpler examples is from abki~ agar lauta'to (If I return this time, [Narain 2008: 119]): Kunwar Narayan, speaking of how he will return a changed person from a journey, finishes each paragraph with a Sanskrit comparative-form suffix -tar: brhattar, manusyatar, krtajnatar, purnatar. He seems to rather often construct new words for new concepts, using Sanskrit models of word formation, but not being a born Hindi speaker I can only suppose when it is a poet's own neologism and not common vocabulary. So in Madhyam (The Medium): astitv ko dusre artho men bhi'praka'shit karta'hu, «<I> illuminate existence in other meanings too» - note the literal Sanskrit meaning of praka'sit «illuminated», not the common Hindi «published», sams-rti instead of the common samsa'r for «world, created universe», compound bhavodvel - «the rising wave of feeling» (Madhyam), samayatit - «transcending time» (Cakravyuh), anurakti instead of anurag (Citke svapn) and numerous others.
Now we come to the aspects of poetic translation of sanskritisms into Russian. Somehow it seems right to view the same three aspects (»quotations» from Ancient Indian tradition, Sanskrit words for Vedic/Upani-shadic atmosphere, and neologism formation by Sanskrit models in philosophical poems) in the reverse order. A lucky circumstance for a translator is the applicability of Sanskrit word formation model to Russian as an Indo-European flective language. The principles of word formation in Sanskrit and Russian are similar: the same variety of suffixes, prefixes, compound words that can be created anew like Lego constructor, and decoded by a reader at first
sight (by the way, that's what many poets did in the beginning of the XX century - in the Silver Century of Russian poetry). Therefore sometimes I could imitate the poet's vocabulary play by choosing or creating a similar (completely analogous) word in Russian: asantust as «not fed», hungry, instead of simply «not satisfied» (Madhyam); disha-bodh - «sense of direction» (Kavita'ka man, [Narain 2009: 115]), mere amodhn antar as «where there used to be joy inside me, where it is no more» (Anbhula'dard, «Unforgotten pain» [Narain 2008: 135]), kisi'daivi'rupakar ki~/ man-sal amarta'- «the flesh-bound immortality / of some divine image» (Ma'risha'[Narain 2009: 43]). Or it was possible to decompose a Sanskrit word into a Russian analogue; so it was with the last line of Uttardayitva, speaking of the poetic world he created: «svikar karta' hu/ ki merrhi~tarah / meri~ duniya'bhi~/ manaviya hai» [Narain 2009: 129]. The problem is, Hindi maanaviiya means both human and humane, the two aspects are inseparable; while in Russian we have two separate words. But, luckily, the word manavfya is Sanskrit: it is an adjective formed by a vRddhi+suffix -rya model, meaning «belonging to someone» or «descended, born from someone». Therefore the Russian lines go: «I admit that / just like myself / my world is also / born from a human».
Another aspect was the creation of «Vedic» atmosphere. This meant searching for the language of mythical past for a Russian reader. The archaic layer of Russian vocabulary is the language of Russian Bible in Church-Slavic and Russian as such, and also the poetry of the XVIII century. The Biblical language is both a valid and a non-valid analogy. Valid because it has an analogous role in Russian culture - the lofty language of Holy Scripture, of wisdom and purity. Non-valid because there is a difference between two cultures and you can't turn an Indian poet into a Christian. One instance of such misleading usge is the common translation of Sanskrit tapas as «penance»: it adds the Christian concept of repentance for your sins, while holy Sanskrit seer-rishi has no need to atone for any wrongs of the past. They gain spiritual power by rising to new degrees of purity, not by cleansing off the sin. It's only asceticism, never penance. So, one has to be careful in choosing only the Scripture vocabulary applicable to both cultures, Russian and Indian. As to the other «archaic» layer of Russian poetic language, the poetry of the XVIII century, it was a very curious period of Russian literature: the first stage of the formation of literary Russian language. There was much experimenting with Latin and Greek models of word formation, quite isomorphic in their way to the formation of new Hindi words on the basis of Sanskrit. Of course we don't reflect too much upon this when we use archaic, 18-century flavoured words, we just know that they are lofty, unusual and expressive. A bit theatrical or epical at times. One has, however, to be careful and to avoid pompousness of speech associated with archaic vocabulary. Still it came in helpful during translation. These two sources of archaic vocabulary were, however, not enough to convey the atmosphere of poems based on Sanskrit cultural heritage.
But, luckily, there has been a proliferation of Sanskrit terms into Russian over the age-long cultural interaction between our countries. Dharma, moksha, raja, ma'ya' samsa'ra - are all more or less familiar words to the Russian ear. On the other hand, overloading the text with Sanskrit-origin terms vaguely understood (or misunderstood) by a common reader may lead to unclearness of the text. The balance was especially frail in poems like Chakravyuh, Ayodhya, 1992 or Bhartrihari ki virakti, for different reasons. Chakravyuh is full of philosophy and difficult nuances of thought; Ayodhya', 1992 speaks of a bloody Hindu-Muslim conflict widely known by Indian audience and hardly known to the Russian one. The legend of Bhartriha-ri is also far more well-known in India than in Russia, though his poems have been translated more than once (see, for instance, [Индийская лирика: 34-60, 126-141]). I often preferred to duplicate the Sanskrit term - more or less familiar - by its Russian equivalent: «wise man - rishi» (Bhartrihari ki virakti), «great poem - mahakavya», «place-without-wars, your Ayodhya"» (Ayodhya', 1992); or to seek a descriptive way of expressing the same meaning: a'ryalok as «the land of the worthy» (Madhyam). Thus, knowledge of Sanskrit can be seen as one of the keys to deciphering more layers of meaning in Kunwar Narayan's poetry.
Notes
1 A detailed account of the relation, history and vocabulary differences of Hindi and Urdu languages can be found in [Васильева: 34-80]. Put short, it is as follows: both languages used to be one single language known as Hindustani. Hindi and Urdu were then artifically divided and further alienated from each other, by consistently preferring Sanskrit and Arabic/Farsi vocabulary respectively. They still share the same grammar structure, with few exceptions, but they use different script - Arabic for Urdu, and Sanskrit Devanagari alphabet for Hindi.
A brief overview of the vocabulary layers of Hindi can be found, for instance, in [Гуру: 45-58].
Most of the poems quoted here come from the 2008 bilingual collection of Kunwar Narain's poetry, No Other World [Narayan 2008], which contained a selection of the author's earlier classical poems with come additions, translated into English by his son Apurva. Some poems are taken from the 2009 Hindi collection Hasiye ka gavah (»Witness on the Margin») [Narayan 2009]. All poems quoted here in the original and rendered into English (by me) are also available in Russian translation done by Prof. Guzel Strelkova of the Moscow State University and myself [Нараян 2014]. All quotes are given by her kind permission.
Литература
1. Васильева Л.А. Становление газели урду. У истоков жанра. М.: ИВ РАН, 2015. - 382 с.
2. Гаспаров М.Л. Подстрочник и мера точности. // Гаспаров М.Л. О русской поэзии: Анализы, интерпретации, характеристики. - СПб.: Азбука, 2001. - С. 361-372.
3. Гуру К. Грамматика хинди. Часть I.M., Издательство иностранной литературы, 1957. -237 с.
4. Индийская лирика II-X веков / пер. с пракрита и санскрита Ю. Алихановой и В. Вертоградо-вой. М.: Наука, 1978. 206 с.
5. Лесик К.А. Мотив странствия в творчестве Кун-вара Нараяна // Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Востоковедение и африканистика. - 2021а. - Т. 12, № 4. - С. 521-533.
6. Лесик К.А. Образ мусульманского прошлого Индии в творчестве Кунвара Нараяна. // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 13. Востоковедение. - 2021б. - № 1. - С. 88-96.
7. Нараян К. Цветы дерева ним. М., У Никитских ворот, 2014. - 176 с.
8. Сенкевич А.Н. Основные тенденции развития «новой поэзии». // Художественные направления в индийской литературе XX века. Поэзия хинди. М., Наука, 1977. - С. 246-291.
9. Стрелкова Г.В., Гурия А.Г. Kavitaa kii zaroorat -Необходимость поэзии. // CRITIC: a journal of the Centre of Russian Studies. - 2014. - № 12. -С. 90-99.
10. Narain K. No other world. New Delhi, Rupa & Co, 2008. 276 p.
11. Narain K. Hasiye ka gavah. New Delhi, Medha Books, 2009. 129 p.
ON THE QUESTION OF TRANSLATING STYLISTIC
LAYERS IN HINDI POETRY: SANSKRIT VOCABULARY
IN KUNWAR NARAIN'S POEMS
GURIA A.G.
Lomonosov Moscow State University
The article is devoted to different lexical layers in modern Hindi poetry, the choice between which allows the poet to change stylistic modes of the text. The contexts in which marked vocabulary is used in Hindi poetry are considered. The role of Sanskritisms as a marker of high style (official, emotionally lofty, etc.), the use of Sanskrit and Persian words in patriotic poetry, the use of different lexical layers of the language to create a special atmosphere of the depicted place and era, humorous juxtaposition of words of different origins are noted. The article examines the ways of using Sanskrit vocabulary in the poetry of the classic of modern Indian poetry Kunwar Narain. It mainly serves to create a historical flavor, and is also used to convey complex thoughts and ideas of the author by creating neologisms. Aspects of adequate translation of this vocabulary into Russian are discussed. It is noted that the selection of high vocabulary from the Church Slavonic language or 18th century vocabulary should not lead to the replacement of Indian realities and cultural concepts with Russians. A number of other problems related to the translation of different stylistic layers of the Hindi vocabulary are discussed.
Keywords: Hindi literature, Kunwar Narain, stylistics, translation theory, Sanskrit.
References
1. Vasilyeva L.A. Formation of an Urdu gazelle. At the origins of the genre. Moscow: IV RAN, 2015. - 382 p.
2. Gasparov M.L. Interlinear and measure of accuracy. // Gasparov M.L. On Russian poetry: Analyzes, interpretations, characteristics. - SPb .: Azbuka, 2001. - S. 361-372.
3. Guru K. Hindi grammar. Part I.M., Foreign Literature Publishing House, 1957. - 237 p.
4. Indian lyric poetry of the II-X centuries / per. from Prakrit and Sanskrit by Yu. Alikhanova and V. Vertogradova. Moscow: Nau-ka, 1978.206 p.
C3
о
CO "O
1=1 А
—I
о
C3 t; о m О от
З
ы о со
5. Lesik K.A. The motive of wandering in the work of Kunvar Narayan // Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Oriental studies and African studies. - 2021a. - T. 12, No. 4. - P. 521-533.
6. Lesik K.A. The image of the Muslim past of India in the work of Kunwar Narayan. // Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 13. Oriental studies. - 2021b. - No. 1. - P. 88-96.
7. Narayan K. Flowers of the tree nim. M., At Nikitsky Gate, 2014. -176 p.
8. Senkevich A.N. The main trends in the development of «new poetry». // Artistic directions in Indian literature of the XX century. Hindi poetry. M., Nauka, 1977. - S. 246-291.
9. Strelkova G.V., Guria A.G. Kavitaa kii zaroorat - The need for poetry. // CRITIC: a journal of the Center of Russian Studies. -2014. - No. 12. - P. 90-99.
10. Narain K. No other world. New Delhi, Rupa & Co, 2008.276 p.
11. Narain K. Hasiye ka gavah. New Delhi, Medha Books, 2009. 129 p.
o d
u
