Ways of rendering proper names

Proper names are defined in a very general way as nouns used to name a certain person, place or thing. Accordingly, they are varied in their nature depending on the referent and different groups they comprise are treated differently in translation. Until recently, though, proper nouns were not entered in translation dictionaries with the exception of short lists of geographic names, some personal names and their variants and derivatives that were attached to general translation dictionaries. D.I.Yermolovitch explains such an attitude of translators to proper nouns by the false assumption that proper names are not translated. The first translation dictionaries of proper names appeared in the late eighties: А.И.Рыбакин. Словарь английских личных имён, М., 1989; А.И.Рыбакин. Словарь английских фамилий, М., 1986; Д.И. Ермолович. Англо-русский словарь персоналий, М., 1999.

Translation of proper nouns is regarded as a special section of translation theory and practice and is characterized as a very complicated field of study in translation literature. This can be accounted for by several reasons:

1) proper nouns constitute a highly heterogeneous system of units which are handled differently in translation. Here belong proper nouns that refer to people (personal names, nicknames and pet names, diminutive and endearing forms and variants, tell-tale names in fiction), geographic names, microtoponyms (names of streets, squares, parks, buildings), names of ships, spaceships, weaponry, titles of newspapers, journals and magazines, names of organizations and institutions;

2) proper names can be translated following the well established tradition and the modern demands. Even when a translator sticks to the modern tendency he can’t disregard the existing forms of translating a certain name so as not to create doublets that may cause misunderstanding, cf. Isadora Duncan – ‘Айседора Дункан’( traditional)and ‘Изадора Данкан’ ( modern).

3) proper names reflect nationally peculiar and culturally relevant features of respective language systems which are important to preserve in translation and accompany with appropriate explanation, cf. the structure of English personal names (first name – middle name – family name) and Russian personal names (first name – patronymic – family name).

Taking into account the above mentioned factors proper names are further discussed with reference to different groups.

· Personal names are divided into two groups depending on their translation: those translated according to tradition and those translated in keeping with the modern tendency. The modern tendency demands retaining in translation the way a proper name sounds in SL, cf. Henry James – Генри Джеймс, Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde – доктор Джекилл и мистер Хайд. The traditional approach did not follow any solid principles and the results of such a translation are often in conflict with the modern demand. The effect of the force of tradition is still felt today in translating two groups of units: 1) names of crowned kings, queens, emperors, monarchs which used to be translated in a special way contrasted to names of common people, cf. Elizabeth – Елизавета и Элизабет, William – Вильгельм и Уильям, James – Яков и Джеймс; 2) biblical and mythological names, e.g. Icarus – Икар, Mary – Мария. This accounts for doublets used to translate names that relate in origin. The name Jesus is translated in two ways: Джизус ( a common name) Иисус (a biblical name). The same goes for Joshua that may be translated as Джошуа (common masc.) and Иисус (bibl).

Concerning names of living beings it should be noted that there may be different ways of translating them as, for example, the name of the American pianist Van Clybern was translated differently into Russian, cf. Ван Клиберн и Ван Клайберн. Those historical names the translation of which has become well-established in translation practice are not revised though it runs contrary to present-day demands as new versions of translation might result in doublets.

Translation of one and the same personal proper name may vary depending on the nationality of its bearer, cf. Hugo – Хьюго (English) and Гюго (French), Richard – Ричард (English) and Рихард (German). The choice of the way of translation can also depend on connotations that words arouse in two languages. The name Шитиков which sounds quite good and acceptable to a Russian will have to undergo some phonetic changes to suppress any negative associations with its transcription in English, Shitikov >Chitikov.

· Pet names and nicknames are used not only to single out a person in question, but also to give some additional information. They may perform various functions: 1) characterize a person in question, 2) reflect social, psychological and interpersonal distances, 3) show the attitudes, feelings, emotions expressed through interpersonal relations, etc. This additional information can be expressed either explicitly in the outer form of a word (affixes) or implicitly in the inner form of a word and its connotations.

In translation it is sometimes possible to find correlated affixal means in SL and in TL, e.g. Shorty – Коротышка, but in many cases a translator has to look for adequate means of compensation in order to retain the proper effect, cf. Scout – Глазастик. In this case there is a shift in translation from the implicit means of indicating connotations to the explicit means in Russian. Yet, the difference between the derivational systems of SL and TL does not always permit a translator to find a good solution, cf. Матрёшенька – little (tiny) Matreshka.

The choice of proper ways of translating pet and diminutive names is very often governed by translation norms reflecting tastes, rules and preferences in the receiving culture. When translation is made from English into Russian diminutive names in English newspaper texts used to refer to high-profile personalities tend to be replaced by neutral Russian counterparts, cf. Gorbi – Горбачев, Maggy Thatcher – Маргарет Тэтчер

· Names of ships, titles of periodicals, names of weaponry and military equipment, firms, companies, associations are transcribed though they may contain common nouns with transparent meanings, e.g. Queen Elizabeth (the name of a ship) – Куинн Элизабет, General Electric – Дженерал Электрик, Trident – Трайдент, Stinger – Стингер, Sunday Telegraph – Санди Телеграф. It should be noted, however, that newspapers today tend not to translate such names into Russian and leave them in their original SL form.

· Names of organizations, societies, movements are loan-translated, e.g. Фонд обязательного медицинского страхования – Obligatory Medical Insurance Fund, General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade – Генеральное Соглашение по тарифам и торговле.

· Geographic names and microtoponyms are translated depending on several factors:

a) the type of nomination – one-word nominations and multi-word complexes,

b) the structure of multi-word complexes.

One-word nominations are transcribed and / transliterated, e.g. Newfoundland -- Ньюфаундленд, Norfolk -- Норфолк. True, even in translation of one-word geographic nominations there are many points which are difficult to explain from the modern point of view.

Multi-word complexes containing common nouns are translated differently depending on the way a common noun is handled. Thus, a common noun may be:

1) transcribed and / or transliterated, e.g. Downing Street – Даунинг-Стрит, White Hall – Уайт Холл, Gordon Square – Гордон – Сквер;

2) translated, e.g. Cape of Good Hope – Мыс Доброй Надежды,

3) both transcribed / transliterated and translated, e.g. Bull Lake – озеро Булл Лейк, Black Hills – горы Блэк Хилз.

The actual practice of translation shows that there may be examples of translating common nouns that are treated differently within various proper names. Compare, White House – Белый дом, Trafalgar Square – Трафальгарская площадь, the English Channel – Пролив Ла- Манш. Such differences are hard to explain and they can hardly be neutralized in translation since the force of tradition is too strong.

It must be noted that there may be certain peculiarities in dealing with some groups of proper names, for example, Russian microtoponyms (i.e. the names of streets, squares, avenues) which when used as post address should not be anglicized.