Joanna Kubaszczyk

The paper has a theoretical character. An attempt is made to grasp and define translation in its essence in accordance with Roman Ingarder’s phenomenological theory of the literary work of art. Even in ancient times it was believed that translation was imitation. In some contemporary translation theories translation is compared to an image (cf. Paepcke, Tabakowska). This prompts the author to ask how that metaphorical term relates to the translation, what common characteristics can be established and what is the difference between them. Their most important common feature is that they are representations. Their qualities also include simultaneous similarity and similarity disorder, transitivity, the connection with the original (the transcendental aspect) and the self-directedness, liberation from the original (the immanent aspect).

In the second part of the paper, the concept of translation as an object representing the original is proposed in accordance with Ingarden’s concept of the represented object. For example, the following aspects are discussed: the concealment of heterogeneity to the original by the translation, its presumption to be what it is not, the pretense of authenticity and the aspect of the illusory. With regard to the translation series, the question is asked in which the divergence of the representations is founded and which of the representations can claim to be like the original. Particular attention is paid to spots of indeterminacy and opalization. The difference between translation versions is inter alia due to different make-up of spots of indeterminacy wherein the important role is played by the translators’ reflection (their intelligence, erudition, intuition), their imagination (the ability to construct images) and their experiences (their memory). Finally, an ontological definition of translation is formulated, which clearly distinguishes translation from other operations on texts, such as adaptation and summary.

“Shellfish are Extremely Selfish”: What an Automatic Translator Cannot Do. On the Translator’s Competence and the Translation Principles in the Context of Literary Translation in the Face of the Ongoing Automation of Translation

In view of the emergence of increasingly sophisticated tools for automatic translation, a legitimate question arises: what is the difference between human translation and machine translation, which competence surplus is brought by the human factor, what conditions must be met for human translation to be more perfect than machine translation? The author tries to answer the question discussing different types of competences with particular emphasis on literary competence related to the poetic function of the language. Referring to selected principles of the Translation Studies, postulated in Kubaszczyk (2019), the author argues why human being is still irreplaceable in literary rendering and shows, in reference to Jakobson (1960), how in literary rendering the translator shifts from the selection axis to the combination axis searching for the optimal solution. In the second part of the article, the theoretical argument is supported by empirical evidence.