Author: María Belén Bistué

Publisher:

Published: 2009

Total Pages:

ISBN-13: 9781109661521

This dissertation studies collaborative and multilingual translation practices that were common in medieval and Renaissance Europe but have been excluded from Western translation history. I focus on team-translation and multilingual editions, and the difficulties they created for Renaissance thought. These practices and their textual products make visible that translation involves not only more than one language and version, but also more than one writer, writing event, and interpretive position. In the context of political unification processes, and of linguistic and stylistic ideologies that accompanied them, such multiplicity became conceptually problematic. It is through the problems that multiplicity creates for the theorization and study of translation that I gain access to collaborative, multilingual practices. Chapter 1, "Res difficilis," explores the problems that Renaissance theoreticians faced in defining translation as the activity of a single writing subject, and in determining that the translation-text must present a single version--when neither of these singular structures could really accommodate translation. Chapter 2, "Unthinkable Practices," studies the work of medieval and Renaissance translation teams, examining the difficulties they continue to pose to national-literature studies and to traditions of literary analysis that consider the author and the reader as fundamental units. I further explore these difficulties in chapter 3, "Unthinkable Texts," where I discuss examples of multilingual translations (Scriptures, poems, herbals, Greek and Roman classics, grammars, dictionaries, dialogs, proverb-collections, broadside news, romances). In the final chapter, "Translation as Discredited Text-Model in Miguel de Cervantes's Don Quixote," I look at Cervantes's work and at other medieval and early modern fictional narratives that make reference to the translation practices described in previous chapters, using them as a source of variety, ambiguity, and interruption in the narrative--and, thus, offering another response to the problem of translation's multiplicity. Analyzing the difficulties described above, I outline an alternative text-model, which has been excluded from literary history because it does not have continuities with the modern model of the unified, monolingual text. Thinking about the difficulties of thinking translation enables me to propose a conceptual frame inside of which it once could make sense to produce and read multi-version texts.