Translation by M.N. Muraviev of Gorasty's ode To Levkonoia (I, 11)

The article is devoted to the analysis of M.N. Muravyov's translation of Horace's ode To Leukonoe (I, 11). In the 18 century Horace was the most popular ancient author in Russia. All philologist-classics (M.L. Gasparov, I.M. Tronsky, V.G. Boruhovich, V.S. Durov, etc.) mark the development of such themes in his works as being content with very little, modesty in expectations, freedom from excessive desires, which give a person a peace of mind and internal freedom. Such philosophical position attracted M.N. Muravyov who was inclined to sentimentalism as vital interests of Horace were in harmony with his understanding of true wisdom of existence. The purpose of the work is the research of poetics of M.N. Muravyov's translation of ode 11 by Horace, revealing the peculiarities of creative assimilation of lyrics of the ancient author by the poet of the century. Ode 11 of the first book was written in a form of an appeal to a woman whose name was Leukonoe. In a short but deep in content work Horace tells us about predeterminance of the future and about the skill to be content with one's own position. The primary source and the translation are compared in lexico-semantic, syntactic and emotional plans. The advantages of translation expressed in its closeness to the semantics and the mood of the original piece to are specified. M.N. Muravyov's translation of ode 11 by Horace shows affinity to the original at semantic and emotional levels and the divergence in lexical and syntactic plans. Lexical differences of the products are explained, evidently, by M.N. Muravyov's translation approach, it was necessary for him to place his own accents caused by a literary, philosophical, religious position of the 201author. Here Chistianization of translation at a lexical level can be also pointed out. Syntactic divergences of products arise, obviously, because of the desire of a Russian poet to follow the traditions of classicism precisely to express, expand and add fundamental regulations of the philosophy of the Roman author. The rhythmic difference is caused, naturally, by different sizes of the pieces. Horace's ode is written in great asclepiad verse, its rhythmic cannot be expressed by means of the Russian language; however, iambic tetrameter used by M.N. Muravyov successfully reflects semantic accents of the original. Old slavisms and archaic forms of words which were included by M.N. Muravyov into the text give it a high, solemn, smooth sounding similar in its tonality with Horace's ode. The absence of an appeal to a woman is significant; it leads to the exclusion of her hidden image from M.N. Muravyov's version. Evidently, it is more important for the author to show the basic idea of the ancient author in traditions of classicism aesthetics then to show feelings. The affinity of translation to the original, expressed in transferring the mood of the ode, the general semantic plans, motives and images are explained by concurrence of philosophical and moral principles of Horace to internal needs of M.N. Muravyov, who by 1776 perceives and acquires much from creative and philosophical heritage of the antique author.

Keywords

Authors

References