Metaphor Typology and Translation in Shakespearean Plays
AbstractThe present study was conducted first to see if the metaphors have been maintained in Persian translation of four Shakespearean plays, and then, to see where metaphors have been maintained, and also to find out what types of metaphor in English have been translated to what types of metaphor in Persian. Finally, it aims to see whether the changes (not maintaining the metaphor or replacing its image with a Persian one) have affected Shakespeare’s rhetorical language. To answer the questions, all the metaphors (966 in total) of Richard II, Henry IV, Part 1, Henry IV, Part 2, and Henry V were extracted and categorized according to the types of metaphor in English and then their Persian translations were extracted and analyzed and their type in Persian were identified. It was found that 484 (50.01%) of metaphors were maintained and 482 (49.99%) were not. It was also shown that 77.65% of structural metaphors were translated into Mosarraheh metaphors, 61.29% of orientational metaphors and 36.94% of ontological metaphors were translated into a non-metaphorical form. While the results show that more than 50% of metaphors were maintained, it was concluded that Shakespeare’s rhetorical language is not maintained because 50% is not enough to conclude that Shakespeare’s language was maintained. Also, it was concluded that, cultural and literary differences (common usage of irony and metonymy instead of metaphor) between the languages have been substantial in not maintaining more metaphors.
How to Cite
Kamal, M., & Manafi Anari, S. (2017). Metaphor Typology and Translation in Shakespearean Plays. Translation Studies Quarterly, 14(55). Retrieved from http://journal.translationstudies.ir/ts/article/view/411