Müntehabat ı Teracim i Meşahir

8/10/2019 Mntehabat Teracim i Meahir

1/30

15

.. eviribilim Dergisi, Say: 6 (2-2012) s. 15-43I.U. Journal of Translation Studies, Issue: 6 (2-2012) p. 15-43

MNTEHABAT-I TERACM- MEAHR:

AN EXPLORATION OF ITS PARATEXT FROM THEPERSPECTIVE OF CULTURAL MEMORY

Cemal DEMRCOLU*

AbstractThis paper will briefly look at one of the key works that has not been

studied formerly from the late Ottoman tradition of translation:Mntehabat-Teracim-i Meahir (TheCollection of Famous Translations), edited by brahim

Fehim and smail Hakk, and published in 1889/90. This work appears as thesecond collection of translations from the west approximately thirty years after

Ibrahim inasis Terceme-i Manzume (Translation of Verse), which was thefirst collection of Turkish translations of Western poetry in 1859. This paperdoes not only bring to the fore an Ottoman work that remained in the margin,introducing it to scholarly circles with a special focus on the paratextual data.It also intends to draw attention to translation history in the Turkish context, as

a powerful way to recover the hidden or erased past of translation, especially

when looked at from the perspective of forgettingand rememberingin thecourse of the Turkish transition from empire to nation-state.

Key Words:Ottoman translation history, translation archaeology, culturalmemory, forgetting and remembering,Mntehabat- Teracim-i Meahir[TheCollection of Famous Translations]

zetBu makale, Osmanl eviri geleneine ait daha nce hi allmam

nemli eserlerden birini ksaca ele almaktadr: Mntehabat- Teracim-iMeahir(Mehur Tercmeler Sekisi). brahim Fehim and smail Hakk tara-fndan hazrlanan ve 1889/90 ylnda yaymlanan bu eser, brahim inasininBat iirinden Trkeye yaplan ilk evirilerini ieren sekisi Tercme-i

Manzumeden yaklak otuz yl sonra Batdan yaplan evirileri ieren ikinci

eviri sekisi olarak yaymlanmtr. Makale, bir taraftan kenarda kalm buOsmanlca eseri, metinyan elere odaklanarak aratrmaclarn dikkatinesunmay amalamakta; te yandan, Trkiye balamnda imparatorluktanulus-devlete gei srecinde hatrlamave unutmaperspektifinden bakld-nda eviri tarihinin evirinin unutulan ya da silinen gemiini grmemizeyarayan gl bir ara olduuna dikkat ekmektedir.

Anahtar Szckler:Osmanl eviri tarihi, eviri arkeolojisi, kltrelbellek, unutu-hatrlay ilikileri,Mntehabat- Teracim-i Meahir[Mehureviriler Sekisi]

*Assist. Prof. Dr., Okan University, Department of Translation StudiesYrd. Do. Dr., Okan niversitesi, eviribilim Blm


2/30

16


1. Introduction

This paper is based on reviewing one of the works not formerly studied

from the late Ottoman literary tradition:Mntehabat- Teracim-i Meahir(TheCollection of Famous Translations).1The work is the second collectionof translations from the West, edited by brahim Fehim and smail Hakkand published in 1889/90 with the support of an Armenian publisher, Ar-akel Tozluyan Efendi. The Collection came out approximately thirty yearsafter Ibrahim inasis Terceme-i Manzume (Translation of Verse), the rstcollection of Turkish translations of Western poetry circulated as stone-print

in 1859. With its content and composition,Mntehabat

offers an accountof Ottoman translation practice from the mid-nineteenth century onwards,thus helping us to see how translation/s contributed to the making of Ot-toman literary repertoires (Even-Zohar 2002: 166), in connection withEuropean culture and literature. Especially the prefaces, one by KemalPaazade Said, member of the Sublime Council and well-known authorityon translations from French, and others by the editors, provide important

data to see translation discourse and conceptions at that time. Additionally,the Collection shows us the position of the well-known literary translations

from Europe that were still in circulation during the 1890s.The purpose of this paper is two-fold: rst, it aims to introduceMnte-

habatto contemporary scholarly circles so as to bring to light a forgotten

work, especially through the analysis of the paratextual data. In this sense,the paper attempts to convey a kind of microhistory to be the eld lead-ing to historical awareness, dealing with the issues in the margin and

helping to recover fragmented relations with the past as dened by SergioAdamo (Adamo 2006: 84). In a similar vein, Lieven Dhulst considersawareness an implication of translation history. Arguing that translationstudies returns to history, Dhulst thinks of history as a fruitful subeld thatprovides researchers with an intellectual exibility in adapting ideas to newperspectives and hence contributing to the development of a culture of

translation (Dhulst 2001: 21, 22).

1 I will refer to this work as Mntehabatin this article. The initiation of this paper goes back tomy presentation at the international conference organized by Boazii University, Department ofTranslation and Interpreting Studies in 2008: Translation, History and Culture: A Colloquium intribute to Saliha Paker.


3/30

17


Secondly, the paper intends to draw attention to the exposing functions

of translation history, arguing that translation history in the Turkish contextfunctions obviously as a powerful way to recover the hidden or erased past

of translation in the course of Turkish nation-building. In this framework,archaeology, an indispensable subeld of translation history (Pym 1988:5), appears to be an important instrument that can best serve to see the accu-mulated texts, images and back-or-foregrounded aspects of translation in the

shaping of a Turkish cultural memorybased on translation. In hisMethodin Translation History, Anthony Pym denes translation archaeology asthe set of discourses concerned with answering all or part of the complex

question who translated what, how, where, when, for whom, and with whateffect? (ibid.). In Pyms framework, archaeology tends to be seen just as aresearch eld that includes difcult detective-like efforts and hard-work inthe service for various areas of translation history. However, in the case ofMntehabat-maybe in the case of other Ottoman works on translation to bediscovered- archaeology has a potential to violate ideological constructions

around the cultures memory on translation or through translation, especiallywhen looked at from the perspective of remembering and forgetting during

the process of Turkish nation-building.

In this manner,Mntehabatallows for a double point of departure: (i)On the one hand, by presenting a history of Ottoman translation activityin the context of westernization, this work recaptures its very own recentpast. Textual predilections of the book can be read as the indications of aneffort for the shaping of acollective memory (Halbwachs 1992) duringthe time of Ottoman modernization. The Collection with its discourse seemsto indicate a new horizon so that the Ottomans could measure their degreeof modernization by looking at the cultural and literary texts imported from

Europe since the mid-19thcentury. (ii) On the other hand, the Collection alsoprovides todays translation scholars, especially conducting a Turkish-ori-ented translation history, with an opportunity to rememberthe forgotten,

erased or manipulated aspects of translation in the period of transition from

empire to nation-state. Hence, I think thatMntehabatstimulates a kind ofawareness, helping us not only to examine how the late Ottoman contextof translation was represented in the discourse of republican historians, but

also to see the changing conceptions of translation in the Turkish tradition

in general.


4/30

18


Translation history appears as a eld related to the realm of cultural

memory studies, which has been extensively developed on a global scalesince the mid-20thcentury. The idea behind such a perspective may be dueto an awareness of the shaping and image-making power of history as Andr

Lefevere points out in his concept of rewriting (Lefevere 1990: preface, 15).Although there are not many studies examining translation history from the

cultural memory perspective, certain translation scholars, speaking from a

postmodern standpoint, have been questioning the traditional tendencies

of history which regard it to be an objective account of the past. In searchof a model for comparative translation historiography, Judy Wakabayashi

considers history-writing as a translation of things, past into present, thatallows various selective interpretations, bringing to the fore the question

of how we reconstruct history (Wakabayashi 2004: 2). Michaela Wolf, inthe writing of history, mentions a crisis of representation by postulating

representation not as the reconstruction of some pre-existing reality, but

as a literary construct (Wolf 2002: 181). In the same vein, Saliha Pakeraddresses the Turkish cultural system, questioning for the rst time, thefunction of historical studies with reference to Andreas Huyssens discussionof memory and amnesia in postmodernity (Paker 2004).

The above mentioned studies indicate more or less that translation history

is linked with the past of a given culture by means of several reconstructed

narratives. For Renate Lachmann, historical narratives function as a mne-monic medium that not only creates new texts to be remembered, but also

recovers suppressed knowledge (Lachmann 2004: 172, 173). Similarly,from Jan Assmanns framework of cultural memory, we can see that suchnarratives appear as gures of memory taking part in the concretion ofidentity (Assmann 1995: 129-130). Referring to Maurice Halbwachss de-

nition of collective memory, Assmann points out that societies reconstructtheir past within their contemporary frame of reference and thus cultural

memory operates by reconstructing the knowledge of the past and tailoring

the past to an actual situation (ibid.).

What seems important here is Assmanns denition of the two modes bywhich cultural memory exists. For him, cultural memory exists rst, in themode of potentiality of the archive whose accumulated elements such as

texts, images act as a total horizon, and second in the mode of actuality,


5/30

19


whereby each contemporary context puts the objectivized meaning into its

own perspective, giving it its own relevance (ibid.). I think that the mode ofactuality enlightens us to see cultures as the entities that survive not only byremembering their own past but also by forgetting it. Ernest Renan discussesthe dynamics of remembering and forgetting in relation to becoming a nation

in his inuential essay Quest-ce quune nation?(What is a nation?), rstdelivered at the Sorbonne in 1882 (see Renan 1996: 41-55). Renan speaks ofa nation, dening it as a soul and a spiritual principle (ibid.). He pointsout that the inhabitants of a nation must share a common past, a rich legacy of

memories --even without sharing any borders--, and also have a present-day

consent or a desire to live together. According to Renan, to be a nation, it isnecessary that people must forget as well as remember a shared history. Inhis view, forgetting appears to be a key factor in the creation of a nation; andunity is always related to such a brutality that is in some way associated with

forgetting. Paul Ricoeur sees forgetting as a necessary component of culturalmemory, emphasizing that to remember is also to know what you need toforget (Ricoeur 2006). From the perspective of Itamar Even-Zohars theoryof culture repertoire, remembering and forgetting may also be considered

as options which serve for the organization of social life and by which the

life of societies is shaped and organized (Even-Zohar 2002: 166).

Regarding the ideological, political, and cultural turn in the Turkishnation-building process, several questions need to be asked within the

framework outlined above. In the Turkish cultural context, can we thinkof the historical narratives of translation as a means to see the invented,

remembered, or forgotten elements of Turkish cultural identity? From the

point of view of translation, by rethinking the relations between the Turkish

Republic and the Ottoman Empire, and by describing the Ottoman Empire

to be the cultural other of the Turkish Republic, can we say that forgettingis much more than remembering in our cultural memory, and why? Can

we think that our westernized cultural memory of translation is mostly

reshaped by the discourse of early-republican historians? Such questions

obviously imply a complex situation in which our memories of translation

tend to be captured by the dramatic and drastic rupture between our pastand present, which emerged in the transition from empire to nation-state in

the last century. In terms of rupture and erasure, Andreas Huyssen mentionsthat if the past is forced to be forgotten, then the past would be in danger of


6/30

20


being erased from memory (Huyssen 2003). This explains the unique situ-

ation experienced during the Turkish nation-building process that includesthe ideological erasure of Arabic/Persian cultural, linguistic, and literaryelements. For Huyssen, the legitimization of the present time is achieved

by destruct[ing] past ways of living and being in the world, resulting in

many ways to forget the cultural, political, and social settings of the new

(Huyssen 2003: 1-2). In this context, what has been forgotten or what hasbeen erased from memory in the Turkish context of translation appears to

be an interesting case to examine. Saliha Paker objects to erasures in theTurkish culture with a strong emphasis on a rich tradition of translations

from Arabic and Persian into Turkish, drawing attention to the faults in thehistorical writings of culture, literature, and translation in the republican

period. In her view, a general agreement does exist in the modern Turkishscholarly discourse on translation. That is, Turkish translation history startswith the translations from Europe in the Tanzimatperiod (Paker 2004: 277;also see Paker and Toska 1997).

Another tendency of erasure is evident in the republican interpretations

of Ottoman translation context. The culture-specic strategies of Ottoman

translation practice, for instance imitation(taklid), emulation(tanzir), com-mentary(erh), borrowing(iktibas), conveying(nakl), conversion(tatbik),summary(hulasa) and dialogue(muhavere), are nearly depreciated in the

literary discourse of the Republic since these strategies are seen as the indi-cation of a derivative literature which is lack of creation (Demirciolu 2009:174-75). For the present situation, all these strategies represent the imperialways of appropriating texts from Arabic and Persian, which were the mod-el-cultures for the Ottomans for centuries and sharing the similar epistemicdomain. The intricate attachments of translation to the construction of cultural

memory and identity by means of remembering and forgetting, thus, seemimportant, especially for the cultures which undergo great socio-political,

ideological transformations similar to those experienced by the Turks. Onecan distinguish continuing/discontinuing aspects of translation between therepublic and its cultural other, the Ottoman Empire, if the representationof the late Ottoman translation practice that appears in the discourse ofhistorians from both periods is analyzed. Such an analysis will help us tosee how the reconstruction of the past is achieved within a contemporary

frame of reference as pointed out by Assmann, Huyssen, and Paker.


7/30

21


The underlying idea in the late Ottoman context of translation, which can

also be observed in the paratextual data of Mntehabat,2

was concernedwith translations and their innovative functions to ll the gaps of the targetsystem. In the Ottoman discourse on translation, the cultural exchange wasinterpreted on the basis of renewal, resulted in contact with Europe through-

out the 19thcentury. However, in the process of nation-building, especiallysince the 1920s, a gradual shift is clearly seen in many interpretations of theOttomans contact with Europe. The import of cultural and literary mate-rials from Europe turns out to be considered as an acculturation. Thus, theOttoman literature and the translation practice as part of it were considered

imitative since many literary historians with nationalistic inclinations werethinking of the Ottomans as appropriating a literature from Arabic and Persianthrough import. In the eyes of the intellectuals of this kind, the culture-spe-cic strategies of Ottoman translation practice were seen as outdated andthe traditional ways of textual transfer performed for centuries between the

members of a common Islamic domain. Such disapproval against imitationcan also be clearly seen especially in Mehmed Fuad Kprls discourseon Ottoman translation practices (see Paker 2007).

During the rst decades of the republic, historical narratives are seen asextremely engaging in western translations, offering many inventories ofthe Ottoman translated corpora mainly from Europe. This situation can beregarded as the powerful efforts intending to uplift the westernization oftranslation through reshaping a new discourse. As literary construct[s](Wolf 2002: 181), such narratives functioned as providing young repub-lican generations with a Turkish cultural and literary background that

promotes Europeanization. As presenting a total horizon, this discourseseems to emphasize that modern Turkish culture had originated from the

West and had been established mainly through European translations sincethe mid-19thcentury. An obvious change on the titles of history books(from the history of Ottomanliterature to the history of Turkishliterature)

evidently demonstrates this radical change in gures of memory, proving

2 See the analysis of the paratext in the following part and also the primary data in the tran-

scribed versions presented in the appendix. I use the term paratext as reinterpreted by ehnazTahir-Gralar with reference to Gerard Genettes concept of paratext to be the presentationalelements accompanying translated texts and meta-discourse formed around translations (Ta-

hir-Gralar 2002).


8/30

22


the reconstruction of the new identity in connection with the ideological,

political and cultural climate of the Turkish nation-building. It is crucial tonote that the genitive our is also present in the republican representation

of the recent past.

In this framework, I think that each work belonging to the Ottoman trans-lation tradition can have an innate potential to violate the cultural memory

shaped by the republican discourse on translation. The paratextual analysisof Mntehabatbelow will reveal that there is a different basis by looking

at translation and modernization --even a possible continuity is observed

in connection with the westernization of translation between the past andpresent political bodies.

2. An Analysis of the Paratextual Data

i. The cover page

Mntehabatis about 117 pages. It was published in 1307 (Julien calendar)(approximately 1891/92 in the Gregorian calender)3by Arakel TozluyanEfendi, also known as Kitap Arakel, one of the Armenian publishers whohad contributed a lot to the Ottoman cultural and literary development sincethe 1870s.

The title page attracts attention since it includes data concerning the

norms that the editors, brahim Fehim and smail Hakk, would follow. Thename of the editors are emphasized as they are the graduates ofMekteb-iMlkiye-i ahane(Imperial School for Civil Service), a famous school

opened in 1859 for the education of the Ottoman civil servants.

3 In Ottoman literature, it is generally a problem to identify the publication date of a work sincedifferent calendars were used. On the cover page, the publication date is given just as 1307. But thedates including day and month in both Saids and the editors prefaces remind us that the writerstended to use the Julien calendar, and also wrote the preface a year before the publication date. Forcalendar conversion, please see the website at http://193.255.138.2/takvim.asp visited on 29April 2013.


9/30

23


At the top, the title is highlight-

ed with an ornamented calligraphyand a special emphasis is put on the

expression teracim-i meahir (fa-mous translations) and adorned with

a big and bold Arabic font just afterthe expression Mntehabat- (Thecollection of). A brief note under themain title declares that the collection

proudly offers its readers not only

famous translations by the famousnames of Ottoman literature, butalso provides an assessment (mta-

laaname) on translation written by

the editors.4On the title page, theselection of the most demanded

translations is highly emphasizedas it targets Ottoman readers.

Another special emphasis is puton the presentation of translations

together with their French originals

on each page, indicating on the title page: this book includes not only thedemanded translations by the great Ottoman writers/translators whose worksare the best contributions, but also includes French originals, providing an

assessment on translation [Tercme hakknda bir mtalaa ile sar- kalemi-yeleri ziver-i mdevvinat- Osmaniye olan zevat- kiramn sar- mergube-imtercemelerini Franszca asllar ile beraber havidir].5Kemal Paazade

Saids epithet is also seen in a striking quote. The epithet indicates certaindifculties in selecting works for any collection: Yazmak bir fikre muhtaise tercme etmek iki fikre ve hsn-i intihab fikre muhtatr denilebilir

[It can be considered that writing needs one idea, translating two, but a good

compilation needs three]

4 See the transliteration of this assessment in the appendix.5 The transcribed version and the English translations of the quotations from Ottoman Turkishare mine unless otherwise stated.


10/30

24


ii. Prefaces

a.Kemal Paazade Sadspreface

As articulated by the editors to be the head of the Council of State, Ke-mal Paazade Sads preface is illuminating. His discourse helps us to seethe idea about translating from Europe and its decidedly formative roles on

Ottoman cultural and literary life at that time. Said dated his preface as 15May 1306 (i.e. 27 May 1890).

As a well-known translator, member of the Council of State, lecturer at

Mekteb-i Sultani andMekteb-i Mlkiyeand writer of the newspaper Vakit,

Kemal Paazade Sad considers translation in its relation to cultural contextand its innovative roles in the Ottomans socio-cultural progress from theTanzimatperiod onwards. He thinks of translation as an instrument con-veying and facilitating (nakl ve isal) western progress. For him, translation

does not only provide know-how for the development of the OttomanArmy, but it also brings improvement to education, serving the progress

of Ottoman civilization at that time. It is clearly seen in his discourse thattranslation offers information about the latest innovations and helps the

Ottomans to reorganize several bodies of the state by bringing new visionsto the bureaucracy. Sad states that ninety percent of the news and data inthe newspapers are provided by means of translations, making the Ottomanpeople interested in political, scientic and technical issues.


11/30

25


It is clear that Sads account sheds a light on how translation plays a

role in Ottoman society, how it serves Ottoman modernization and howthe Ottomans fullled their needs through the import of new ideas fromthe West. His discourse demonstrates that newspapers and journals haveemerged as promoting means for translation, hence playing pivotal roles not

only in providing the Ottomans with reading materials, but also in makingEuropean science and culture known to society. It is obvious that translationis closely associated with the idea of progress without having any connection

to nationalism. His discourse reminds us that the position of translationsfrom the West was of primary interest during the 1890s.

b. The editors preface

The editors preface consists of two parts: fade (foreword) and Med-hal (introduction). In the rst part, fade, the editors bring to the foreagain, that the collection includes both the most demanded translations of the

famous literary works in French and also the translations of some scienticand political texts. It is worth mentioning that each translation is presented asparallel to its French original on each page. The editors introduce themselvesas the supporters of the Translation Chamber at the Sublime Port (BabaliTercme Odas), opened in 1833. This fact can be regarded as an indicationof the shaping power of the Translation Chamber as an inuential school onOttoman translation practices at the turn of the 20thcentury. Giving creditto Kemal Paazade Sads appreciation of this collection, the editors alsogive special thanks to Arakel Tozluyan Efendi, an Armenian publisher, forhis great support in publishing this Collection, also reminding the readers of

his contribution to the development of the Ottoman publishing sector. In thesecond part, titled Medhal, the editors start with describing translation at

that time. They see translation as a transfer of the idea of the original fromone language to another with some change, and they consider a translated

text both as transferred and changed.

The editors also declare that in the former practices of translation in the

Ottoman culture, translation was usually seen as converting the language of awork from one to another and also it was regarded as an easy task compared to

writing an original work. It is apparent that the editors are critical of such earlierperceptions of Ottoman translation practices with an emphasis on translation as


12/30

26


a difcult task. According to them, a successful translation must have certain

characteristics: i. to be faithful to the original, ii. to use an adequate literarylanguage, iii. to have deep and consistent background information. The editorsthink of the task of the translator as rst examining, then discovering (tedkik vekef), the authors point of view (cihet-i nazar) that was adopted by the authorthrough the writing process of the original, and then conveying and converting

(nakl ve tebdil) it by being faithful to his/her discovery in a literal(aynen)and entireway (tamamen). In their discourse, that kind of procedure bringsto the surface an essential difference between the author and the translator in

processing a text. But for the editors, a successful translation must also have

the translators expertise on a particular eld and his or her familiarity with thelinguistic features of the original. Additionally, the editors point out that thetranslator should also have a good command of rhetoric in the target language

in order to best transmit what s/he grasps from the original. The editors alsodraw attention to both technical translation and the requirements for being a

technical translator. They expect a technical translator to be a professional,even a scholar, in that particular eld. Their discourse puts a strong emphasison expertise if many benets are expected from technical translations. Forthem, the translation of literary texts is also a necessity.

iii. On the content

The content page (fihrist) is placed at the end of the main body giving a

quick reference to the idea of the composition. We see rst that the numberof verse translations, i.e., 14, is higher than prose translations, i.e. 10. Thiscould be an indication that verse still has priority over prose writing with

regard to the expectations of the target reader. Thats why the famous andcanonical French authors/poets seem to have been chosen, not surprisinglyfrom the romantic and the Parnassus school. This could also indicate thegeneral tendency of the Ottoman literature of that time. The editors selec-tion, even if it includes partial translations of prose, reects that they havea tendency to publish the most typical examples of European culture and

literature which was in great demand by Ottoman readers.6Below, Table 1,demonstrates the distribution of source authors or poets.

6 Please see the tables in the appendix for the source texts the editors selected for translation.


13/30

27


Table 1: List of the authors and poets of the source texts selected for

translation

Source Authors (Prose) Source Poets ( Poetry)

Alexandre Dumas Alfred de Musset

Franois-Ren de Chateaubriand Alphonse de Lamartine

Franois Fnelon C. Hubert Millevoye

Jean Jacques Rousseau Jean de La Fontaine

Xavier de Maistre Mlle Sasserno de Turin

Sully Prudhomme

Victor Hugo

Xavier de Maistre

As translators, well-known names appear having played signicant

roles in introducing new literary models to Ottoman prose and verse. Thelist includes twelve names, ve of which are quite known as the promi-nent bureaucrats supporting Ottoman modernization such as Mnif Pasha,Pertev Pasha, Yusuf Kamil Pasha, Ahmed Vek Pasha and Sadullah Pasha.The names of two translators are not given but from the context it can be

deduced that they may be editors.


14/30

28


One of the texts whose translator is unknown is a French translation ofthe letter sent to a German convert by the Sheykul-Islam replying the con-verts specic questions about Islam. Another text translated into French isan imperial decree sent to an Ottoman commander, Bali Bey, in the mid-16th

century. The reasons behind the selection of these texts for French transla-tion could rst be an Ottoman attitude to correct religious misrepresentationof Islam, and secondly a need for remembering the Ottomans power inEurope, especially at the time of Ottoman decadence that would continueduring the 19thcentury.

Apart from the so-called Ottoman bureaucrats engaged mostly in literarytranslation from French, there are also other translators not a part of the Ot-toman bureaucracy, but active in the production of western-based Ottoman


15/30

29


literature. Table 2 shows the distribution of all of the translators classied,

based on the genre they translated:

Table 2: List of the translators

Translators (Prose) Translators ( Poetry)

Ahmed Midhat Ali Kemal

Ahmed Vek Pasha Nigr binti Osman

Ebzziya Tevk Muallim Naci

brahim Fehim, smail Hakk (eds.) Pertev Pasha

Kemal Paazade Said Recaizade Ekrem

Mnif Pasha Sadullah Pasha

Pertev Pasha Sami Paazade Sezai

Recaizade Ekrem

Yusuf Kamil Pasha

In addition to male writers/translators, Nigr Hanm has a special placein literature as a famous Ottoman woman poet/translator. Her visibility canbe considered to some extent as a contradiction to the conventions of Ot-toman cultural and literary tradition of that time. In the Ottoman tradition,literature was regarded as a mans craft, and, therefore, women were notexpected to write a novel or translate a literary work. A good example is thecase of Fatma Aliye Hanm, who is regarded as the rst woman novelist inmodern Turkish literary discourse. Fatma Aliye rebels against the secondaryand invisible role Ottoman women writers/translators played, especially inher preface to the translation of Georges Ohness Volont, translated underthe title Meramin 1889 (see Gentrk-Demirciolu 2010: 105). Therefore,the editors seem to have promoted Nigr Hanm to be a Muslim woman

poet-translator, making her voice visible in the literary circle, and conse-

quently reecting a kind of disapproval of the Ottoman literary discoursetraditionally constructed by men.


16/30

30


Including texts translated from French, the collection also contains texts

translated into French. One of them is an interesting case related to theFrench translation of a letter sent from Sheykul-Islam to a Christian Ger-man-convert asking for his approval to become Muslim in a letter dated 4September 1876. The language of the original letter that was sent formerlyto the Sheykul-Islam is not mentioned. In his reply, the Sheykul-Islamcongratulates the convert, describing the basic principles of Islam in an in-

formative dialogue with the convert. The subtext of the letters tone carriesa critical look at the European perception of Islam, assuming that Europeans

have inaccurate information about Islamic rules and principles. This letter

can also be seen in the chain of continuing replies to the Europeans aboutIslam. The rst of such attempts is seen in Namk Kemals response in his

Renan Mdafanamesi(Replies to Ernest Renan), then followed by AhmedMidhats interesting discussion in hisNiza- lm Din(The conict betweenscience and religion). All of them indicate a strong defence against the in-accurate perception of Islam in the Western world. Another text translatedinto French is an imperial decree sent from the Sultan, Sleyman the Mag-nicent, to Bali Bey, the governor of Semendre (Sanjak of Albania), afterthe Ottoman conquest of Belgrade in 1521.

The number of translations per translator also seems to be interesting.Recaizade Ekrem is given more space with his 8 translations in comparisonwith the others. An important situation is also present in the case of AhmedMidhat Efendi who was the novelist, translator, publisher, journalist andthe owner of the newspaper Tercman- Hakikat(Interpreter of Truth). Inmodern Turkish literary discourse, Ahmed Midhat Efendi is generally ac-

cepted not as a canonical writer but as a pen of Ottoman popular literature.The editors published his partial translation ofLa Dame aux camelliasby

Alexandre Dumas. This indicates that he was well read and his translationofLa Dame aux camelliaswas regarded as one of the famous and mostly

demanded translations of his time. Table 3 shows the list of translators andthe number of the translations published in the collection:


17/30

31


Table 3: List of translations per translator

Translators (Prose)Nr of

translationsTranslators

( Poetry)Nr of

translations

Ahmed Midhat 1 Ali Kemal 1

Ahmed Vek Pasha 1 Nigr binti Osman 1

Ebzziya Tevk 1 Muallim Naci 2

brahim Fehim,smail Hakk (eds.)

2 Pertev Pasha 1

Kemal Paazade Said 1 Recaizade Ekrem 6

Mnif Pasha 1 Sadullah Pasha 1

Pertev Pasha 1 Sami Paazade Sezai 2

Recaizade Ekrem 1

Yusuf Kamil Pasha 1

It is also signicant that the editors proposed two Turkish translationsof the same source poem: La chute des feuilles by C. Hubert Millevoye.The titles of two versions indicate that Sami Paazade Sezais version,Yapraklar Derken (when the leaves fall), uses a plain Turkish in com-parison with Ali Kemals version, Sukut- Evrak (The fall of the leaves),which is a version including many Arabic and Persian words. Additionally,Recaizade Ekrems translation of Alfred de Mussets poem Rappelle-toi(Remember me) appears as a response poem or emulation (nazire) as itstitle indicates: Ekrem Beyefendinin nazireleri (Ekrem Beys emulation

of). This information indicates that the original, the translation, and theemulation were all published together. It is interesting to note that writingemulation to a poem is received as a translation related practice as the edi-

tors emphasize that Ekrem Bey was the great master enhancing the literaryvalue of the original poem with his emulation.

In the Collection, collocations used for describing the act of translation

are also remarkable. Here are some examples:


18/30

32


Collocations related to

translation act

suret-i dil-pezir ile tercmebuyurmulardr ki (p.16)

to translate in an acceptable way

tarz- belagat-perverisiyletercme buyurmulardr ki (p.18)

to translate with an ornamented

sytle

tarz- vicdan-rba ile tercmebuyurmulardr ki (p.21)

to translate conscientiously

suret-i dil-nianede tercmebuyurmak (p.88)

to translate with an impressivepoint on language

kymet-i edebiyesi itibariyletercmenin aslna rchan ol[mak](p.18)

to translate keeping the original

texts literary value

vech-i dilarasyla tercmebuyurmak (p.59)

to translate with an ornamented

sytle

3. Concluding remarks

A brief look at Mntehabatthrough its paratext broadens our views not

only of our understanding the degree of Ottoman literary westernizationin the late 19thcentury but also, it opens doors to see the shaping of anewcollective memory deeply anchored in the European culture. The discourseof Kemal Paazade Said and of the editors indicates strong intellectual effortsfortifying a westernized identity with the help of the texts translated from

the European sources.Mntehabatemerges as a history-writing, and hencea rewrite, reconstructing the old and the recent past within a contemporaryframe of reference. Especially, the Ottoman conception of translation in

paratexts gives important clues about the diverging and converging aspects

between the past and the present in the Turkish tradition at the turn of the

20thcentury.

Mntehabatalso reveals that translation history in the Turkish context

emerges as a multi-dimensional eld of research, enabling us to recover the


19/30

33


hidden or erased past of the act of translation. As the case of Mntehabat

shows, small scale excavations on translation/s offer a potentiality of newperspectives when considered from the view point of cultural memory,

especially from the dynamics of remembering versus forgetting. Such aperspective will make us aware of the importance of further studies in ex-

amining the validity of historical narratives of our culture by way of trans-

lation; it will also direct us towards an appreciation of historical studies byway of primary sources that may help to reconstruct the past and provide

compelling bases for our cultural background.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ADAMO, Sergia (2006) Microhistory of Translation , Charting theFuture of Translation History, Current Discourses and Methodology, Georg-es L. Bastin, Paul F. Bandia (eds.), Canada: University of Ottawa Press,pp.81-100.

ASSMANN, J. (1995) Collective Memory and Cultural IdentityNewGerman Critique65 (Spring/Summer), pp.125-133.

DHULST, Lieven (2001) Why and How to Write Translation Histo-ries?, in: Crop6, Special Edition Emerging Views on Translation Historyin Brazil, ed. by John Milton, pp.21-32.

DEMRCOLU, Cemal (2009) Osmanl eviri Tarihi AratrmalarAsndan Terceme ve eviri Kavramlarn Yeniden Dnmek,Journalof Turkish Studies(Trklk Bilgisi Aratrmalar), Cem Dilin Armaan,

Say 33, Cilt I , Harvard University Department of Near Eastern Languagesand Civilizations, pp.159-177.

EVEN-ZOHAR, Itamar (2002) The Making of Culture Repertoire andthe Role of Transfer in Translations: (re)shaping of literature and culture,Saliha Paker (ed.), Istanbul: Boazii University Press, pp.166-174.

GENTRK-DEMRCOLU, Tlay (2010) Hayattan Kurmacaya:Fatma Aliye Hanmn Drt Romannda Metinleraras likiler Uluslararas


20/30

34


Sosyal Aratrmalar Dergisi(The Journal of International Social Research),

Volume 3, Issue 13, pp.104-109. Also available at http://www.sosyalara-stirmalar.com/cilt3/sayi13kadinsayisipdf/gencturkdemircioglu_tulay.pdf(visited 18.05.2013)

HALBWACHS, Maurice (1992) On Collective Memory, Translated andedited by Lewis A. Coser, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

HUYSSEN, Andreas (2003)Present Pasts: Urban Palimpsests and thePolitics of Memory, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

brahim Fehim ve smail Hakk (muharrir ve mrettibler) (1889/90)Mntehabat- Teracim-i Meahir, Nairi Kitap Arakel, stanbul: ArtinAsaduryan irket-i Mrettibiye Matbaas.

LACHMANN, Renate (2004) Cultural memory and the role of litera-tureEuropean Review, Volume 12, Issue 02, pp.165-178.

LEFEVERE, Andr (1990) Translation: Its Genealogy in the Westin Translation History and Culture, Bassnett and Lefevere (eds), London:Cassell, pp.14-28.

PAKER, Saliha (2004) Trkiye Odakl eviri Tarihi Aratrmalar,Kltrel Hafza, Unutu ve Hatrlay likileri inJournal of Turkish Studies(Trklk Bilgisi Aratrmalar), Kaf Dann tesine Varmak, Gnay KutArmaan, vol. 28/III, inasi Tekin, Gnl Alpay Tekin (ed.), Zehra Toska(guest ed.), Harvard University, pp.275-284.

PAKER, Saliha (2007) Inuence-Imitation-Translation OR Transla-tion-Imitation-Inuence? A Problematic Interrelationship in Mehmed FuadKprls Literary-Historical Discourse, (Yunanca evirisiyle birlikte)Language, Society, History: The Balkans, (ed.) A. P. Christidis, Thessaloniki,Greece: Centre for Greek Language.

PAKER, Saliha and Zehra TOSKA (1997) A call for descriptive Trans-lation studies on the Turkish tradition of rewrites in Translation as Inter-

cultural Communication, Mary Snell-Hornby, Zuzana Jettmarov and KlausKaindl (eds.). Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 79-88.


21/30


22/30

36


Appendix 1: The description of translations in terms of text types:

TEXT TYPE: PROSE

From French into Ottoman Turkish

Source TextAuthor

Source Text Target Text Translator/s

J.J. RousseauNouvelle Hlose

Nuvel Heluiz Mnif Pasha

Nuvel Heluizdan

bir mektup: Milordun

Jan Jak Rusoyacevapnamesi

Pertev Pasha

Nuvel Heluizn

MukaddimesiEbzziya Tevk

Not given [cf. J.J.Rousseau]

Not givenFezail-i Ahlakiyenin

Dibacesi

Not given [cf. KemalPaazade Said]

FnelonLes Aventures de

TlmaqueTelemak

Yusuf Kamil PashaAhmed Vek Pasha

Chateaubriand Voyage en Amrique Amerikada BirGece

Recaizade EkremBey

Alexandre Dumas La Dame aux camelias

La Dam o kamelya

namyle tercme

ettikleri romandan bir

para

Ahmed Midhat

From Ottoman Turkish into French

Not given [possibly

the ehyl-islam]Suret-i mektub-fetvapenahi

Not givenNot given [possibly

the editors]

Suleyman The

MagnicentSuret-i hatt- Hmayun Not given

Not given [possibly

the editors]


23/30

37


TEXT TYPE: VERSE

From French into Ottoman Turkish

Source TextAuthor

Source Text Target Text Translator/s

Alphonse de

Lamartine

Prire de lenfant sonrveil

Bir ocuunHal-i SahvndakiMnacat

Recaizade Ekrem Bey

Le Lac Gl Sadullah Pasha

Mlle Sasserno deTurin

Lenfant aveugle Bir Ama ocuunTahassr

Recaizade Ekrem Bey

Xavier de Maistre Le ciel toil Sema-i Mekevkeb Recaizade Ekrem Bey

La FontaineLe Chne et le Roseau Mee ile Saz Recaizade Ekrem Bey

La mort et le buchron lm ile Oduncu Recaizade Ekrem Bey

Alfred de Musset

Rappelle-toi Tahattr Et Nigr binti Osman

A response poem to

Rappelle-toi Recaizade Ekrem Bey

C. HubertMillevoye

Le retour AvdetSami Paazade Sezai

La chute des feuillesYapraklar Derken

Sukut- Evrak Ali Kemal Bey

Victor Hugo

Sur le tombeau dunpetit enfant

Bir ocuunMezarnda Muharrer

Muallim Naci

Le sommeil de lenfant Nenni Pertev Pasha

Sully Prudhomme Les yeux Gzler Muallim Naci


24/30

38


Appendix 2: Content Page (Fihrist)

Sait Beyefendi Hazretlerinin mtalaanameleri 3

fade 6

Medhal 3

Mnif Paa Hazretlerinin Nuvel Heluizdentercme buyurduklar birinci mektup9

Ekrem Beyefendinin Bir ocuun hal-i sahvndaki mnacat namyla Lamartindentercme eyledikleri manzume16

Pertev Paann Victor Hugodan tercme ettikleri T- nim [Nenni] namndakimanzume18

Fezail-i Ahlakiyenin dibacesi21

Suret-i mektub- fetva-penahi ve Franszca suret-i mtercemesi30

Suret-i hatt- hmayun ve Fransz lisanna nakl olunan sureti46

Yusuf Kamil Paa - Ahmed Vek Paa Telemak tercmeleri 51

Pertev Paann Nuvel Heluizden tercme ettikleri bir mektup60

Sadullah Paann Lamartinden tercme buyurduklar Gl manzumesi75

Ekrem Bey

Amerikada bir gece79

Bir Ama ocuun Tahassr82

Sema-i Mekevkeb83 Mee ile Saz84

lm ile Oduncu86

Nigr Hanmefendinin Alfred d Musseden tercme ettikleri Tahattr Etmanzumesi88

Ekrem Beyefendinin nazireleri89

Ahmed Midhat Efendinin La dam o kamelya romanndan tercme ettikleri birmektup92

Ebuzziya Tevk Beyin tercme ettikleri Nuvel Heluiz mukaddimesi107

Sami BeyAvdet111

Yapraklar Derken111

Ali Kemal Beyin tercmesi113

Muallim Naci Efendi

Bir ocuun Mezarnda Muharrer115

Gzler115


25/30

39


Appendix 3:Kemal Paazade Sadspreface

(3)7ura-y Devlet Bidayet Mahkemesi Reisi fezail-iar stad- muhterem vembeccelemiz saadetl Said Beyefendi Hazretlerinin kitabmz hakknda tesvid

buyurduklar mtalaanamenin suretidir

Nur- aynm efendilerim,Saye-i maarifvaye-i cenab- padiahide nev-be-nev saha-ara-y zuhur olan asar- cedidemeyannda ihraz- mevki-i imtiyaz etmek zere cem ve teline himmet buyurduunuzmecmua-i tercmeden birinci defterin msveddesini irsal eylemi olduunuzdan kemal-imemnuniyetle mtalaa ve tedkik eyledim.

yle bir gzel himmete takdir-han olmak vezaif-i vatanperveriden olmakla evvel-be-evvel arz- takdir ederim.

Suver-i gunagun ile arz- cemal-i kemal edegelen terakkiyat- garbiyeyi bize nakl ve isaleden ey tercmedir.

Darbe-i iyd-i stunlar bir zamanlar cihan lerzenak eyleyen bahadran- asakirimizimaarif-i cedide-i askeriye ile arayiyab- celal eden ey tercmedir.

Tarik-i maarifperveride tay-y mesafat ettirerek yevmen--yevmen esbab- temeddn-mz istikmal eden ey tercmedir.

Zuhurat- yevmiyeden halkmz klliyevmin haberdar eyleyen, telgraar lisanmza

nakl ile umuma malumat istihsal eden ey tercmedir.Ulum ve fnun- hazrann vesait-i tatbikiyesini mlkmze tamim ile ubat- umur-devlet ve memlekette slah- ahval eden ey tercmedir.

Gazetelerin havadis ve mebahisi yzde doksan nisbetinde mahsul- himem-i mterciminolup halkmz siyasiyat ve ilmiyat ve fenniyata meyyal eden ey tercmedir.

(4) Fransz lisan garbdan arka nakl- miyah- maarif ve terakki iin bir mizab hkmndeolduundan lisan- ecnebi denilince Fransz lisan mtebadir-i hatr olduu gibi (mutlakzikrolunan ey kemaline masruf olmak) kaidesince (tercme) denildii halde Franszca-dan Trkeye tercme manas tahattur klnmak tabiidir.

Kalemlerini tercmeye vakfeden mustaidan, heyet-i hazra-i edebiyemizi tekil eden ze-vat olup mene-i edebiyat- hazra Tercme Odasdr.

Kaffe-i erbab- kalemimiz ya oradan yetien veyahud oradan yetienlere akirdlik eden-lerdir. Lakin her memlekette heyet-i erbab- kalem (mtekaddimin) ve (mteahhirin) na-myla iki snfa tefrik edilmek iktiza eder.

Mtercimlerimizi dahi bu vechile ikiye taksim mmkn olur ise eski Tercme Odas vetabir-i kadim zere Bab- Ali Akademiyas mahsl olanlara (mtekaddimin) nam ver-ilmek lazm gelir. Nice zamandan beri usul- tahririmizde ve imlalarmzda alabildiine

7 Page numbers in the original text are given in parenthesis.


26/30

40


tagayyrat grld gibi bu tagayyrat tercmelere dahi sirayet etmi ve yeni mtercim-lerin asaryla, (mtekaddimin) tesmiye ettiim snfn asar arasndaki fark gstermekmecmuanz gibi her nev tercme asarn cami kitaplarla mmkn olacandan eser-i ali -nizin bu yzden husule getirecei fevaid, kymetini dbala etmeye msaid bulunmutur.

Vaka tagayyrat ve tebeddlat ve imla ve ina ve tahavvlat usul- ifade ve enbann birksm terakkiyat- umumiyenin icabatndan olan tecedddattan olduu derkar ve bu te-cedddattan dolay tercmelere isabet eden hisse-i tagayyr fenalk olmak yle dursunbilakis teekkrlere sezaver ise de her teceddd terakki addeden ve bazar- itihare vazedecek kala-y iktidarlar olmamakla ekal ve elvan- gayr- menusa irae ederek sai-i celb-i(5) enzar- hurde-fran rzgar gibi meydan- neriyatta rehpeyma olan nev-hevesan-zamann ettikleri tagyirat- imla ve inadan tercmelerimizin teessrat tagyirat- saireye

gayr- makis ve nk oluk ocuk makulesi adamlarn yazdklar eylerdeki ehemmi -yetsizlik onlar tarafndan edilen tagyirat- imlaiye ve inaiyenin teessratn bittabi tah-did ettiinden o tagyirat ileride bir (Encmen-i Dani) tekili zamannda are-i ilmi venazarisine baklmak zere etfale arz olmu bir hastalk hkmnde tutulacak eyler oluptercmelerin bu halattan ettii teessrat ise maarif ve edebiyat- garbiyenin mlkmzdehsn tevess ve intiar maddesine sedd-i mmanaat ekmek ve asar- garbiyeyi irkinirkin tasvir ve tahrir ile vatandalarmz indinde istihfafa duar eylemek muhatratncami olduktan baka terakkiyat- garbiye vesatetiyle mazhar- terakkiyat olmaya sayedenlere itbadan erbab- ebab men iin damen-i bemiyan- cidd ikdam olan kudema-perestane sermaye-i teyisdir.

Her neyse eser-i aliniz gzel tercmelerdeki letafeti ve bizaa-i ifade ve istifadeleri ol-mad halde kalem-bedest tercme olanlarn eserlerindeki glzat irae iin bir mirat vederece derece ihraz- iktidar etmek arzusunda bulunan mtercimlere bir mirkat halinegetirilmek iktiza edeceinden bu netice-i maksudeye tevcih-i veche-i ihtimam etmenizmtehattim-i zimmet-i himmetimizdir.

Layk- mtalaa ve ayeste-i mukayese asar- mterceme intihab her mntehibin kr veher ahbaz- evc-i maarin ikar olmadndan bu eserin hsn-i nerine ve maksad- asli-ye tamamen hizmetine muvaffak olur iseniz kendinizi bihakkn bahtiyar addedebilirsiniz.

Yazmak bir kre muhta ise tercme etmek iki kre ve hsn-i intihab kre muhtatrdenilebilir.

15 Mays sene 1306cazabadSaid


27/30

41


Appendix 4: The editors prefaces

i. Forewordfade(6)

Takrirat- mevvikanelerine daima mtak olduumuz marifetperveran- ebna-y vata-na ilk mahsul- gayret olmak zere u Mntehabat- Teracim-i Meahiri arz ve ihta ilekesb-i mefharet eyler ve birinci defa olarak huzur- muhakemesine ktmz mahkeme-iefkar- umumiyenin hakkmzda bir hkm-i msaid-i mevvikane star etmesi temennisi-ni piraye-i zeban- emir ederiz.Sertac- efazl- Osmaniyan olduu iin akirdlii bais-i kemal-i mbahat olan saadetlSaid Beyefendi Hazretleri tarafndan dahi dermiyan buyurulduu gibi hsn-i intihab evc-i

kre muhta olduundan eserimizin tertib ve intihabnda grlecek adem-i isabet ve kusuracz-i kemteranemize balanarak intikadat- ayb-cuyaneye kalklmayacan ve terc-meye mteallik asar ile baz mtalaat muhtevi olan bu kitabamzn vaktiyle hidemat-fevkalade-i kalemiyesi sebebiyle esami-i eslaf- mntesibin-i kiram hala vatandaanm-zn elsine-i krannda mtedair bulunan Bab- li Tercme Kaleminin bugnk ahlaf-mdavimini namna dediye yani hediye edilmesi pek mnasib olacan tahmin eyleriz.Kitabmz pigah- istifadeye alacak zevat- kiram iin medar- suhulet olmak zere inti-hab eylediimiz asarn Franszca asllar ile suret-i tercmeleri kar kar yazlarak iktizaeden nukat satr ba ittihaz klnm ve gerek bu babda ve gerekse kitabn hsn-i tab hu -susunda nerettii asarn fevaid ve kymeti herkesce maruf olan kitapc Arakel Efendininhimmet-i vakasna kar dahi alenen beyan- teekkr etmek mnasib grlmtr.

Kitabmzn i bu ksm iki bab amil olup bab- evvel tercme namna yazlm bir mtala-anameden ve bab- sanisi de baz teracim-i edebiyeden ibarettir ki erbab- mtalaann rehin-irabet-i aliyeleri oldukta siyasiyat ve fenniyata mteallik baz asar- mtercemeyi havi olanksm- sanisinin dahi ayrca tertib ve neri mtesavvirat- kemteranemiz dahilindedir.

16 mays sene 1306

Mekteb-i Mlkiye-i ahane mezunlarndan

smail Hakk, brahim Fehim

ii.Introduction

Medhal(7)Bir lisan ile yazlm bir kri aher bir lisan zre ifade iin nakl ve tebdil eylemeye terc-me ve nakl ve tebdil olunan asara dahi asar- mterceme denilmektedir.

Vehle-i lada tercme mevcut bir eserin adiyen lisan- beyann tebdil eylemekten ibaretgrld iin telife nazaran nihayetsiz derecede asan zannolunur. Halbuki tercmenin


28/30

42


mkemmeliyeti aslna tamam mutabakat, hakiki bir ehliyet-i edebiye ile malumat- vasi-aya lisan-inaslktan ve isabet-i kirden mnbais bir dikkat-i nazara muhta olduundantelife nazaran sehl addolunmaktan ise daha ziyade suubetli grlse revadr.

Bir mellif mvacehe-i krine den bir hakikati kendi tavr- tetkiki dahilinde istediigibi ifade eder. Bir air hissiyat- kalbiyesiyle tasavvurat- hayalperveranesini tefhim iinkendi selikasndan baka bir rehber kabul edemez.

Mtemayiz bir mahiyet-i kriye ile mbeccel olan bir mellif her ne tarafa imale-i nazar-hikmet eylese yazlacak, grlecek binlerce cevahir-i hakayka tesadf eder. Mehasini-ialiye-i tabiata ezeli bir meftuniyet-i mutlaka ile merbut bir air dahi hangi cihet-i derpi-iteessr ve hayal eylese -yalnz suret-i naksa da- nakl-i ifadeleri bazan mstaidbka olangzleri jaledar ve bazan da areste-i hsn-i hayal olan zihinleri sermest ve bikarar edecekyine binlerce levayih-i dilrba grr.

Nfuz- nazara malik bir mellin nnde talar topraklar prmaani hele ecar ve hay-vanat mcessem birer hutbe-i maalidir. Bir girye-i tahassr bir gan- strar aire okeyler syler. Latif bir ehreye pek espan den semai iki gzn veyahut agu- ibtisam-bahar iinde bym bir iki iein mirat- hayal-i airanedeki aks-i hsnleri pek zibave dilara olur.

Vsat-i kr, rikkat-i his, revnak- hayal gibi mevahib-i kudret-i ilahiyenin en celil vealalarndan olan birok kabiliyat- aliye ile mbeccel bir airin veya mellin ishar-mahsul- tetkikat ve nakl-i havatr ve hissiyat eylemesi bizim gibi ezhan- sathiye erbab -

na hayret-res olsa bile kendilerince mkil grlecek eylerden deildir.

Halbuki byle kudretli mellier veyahut teessrperver airler tarafndan bir etaret-i ali-mane ve bir vecd-i air-pesendane ile yazlp da vcuda getirilen sahaif-i bedayi-nmaymertebe-i (8) meziyet-i hakikiyesine halel getirmemek artyla tercme edebilmek okkereler iktiham mmkn olamayan mesail-i mkileden olur.

nk bir mtercim velev mahsud- mellifn olacak bir kabiliyet-i sahiheye malikolsun- hsn-i tercme iin evvela mellin tertib-i eserdeki cihet-i nazarn tetkik vekefeylemek ve saniyen medda-i eseri ibu tetkikata tevken aher bir lisana aynen vetamamen nakl ve tebdil eylemek vezaif-i asliyesiyle mkellef olduundan hibir zaman

mellif gibi tlak- inan- hame edemez.

Lisan-inaslkla beraber bir dikkat-i amikaya muhta olan ve kendi mlahazat- zihniyeve malumat- mktesebesine ve hissiyat- vicdaniyesiyle mbdeat- hayaliyesine bedelaher bir zatn mahsul-i irfann saha-i tetkik ittihaz etmekten ibaret olan mtercimliinsuubeti dahi ite bu sebeblerden mtevellid olmaktadr.

Bir de bir eserin hsn-i tercmesine muvaffak olabilmek iin yalnz o eserin yazlmolduu lisann kavaid-i fesahatine ve lehe-i beyanna vukuf ka deildir. Asar- terc -meleri zinetdemdevvinat olabilmek ve eserleri bais-i istifade olmak iin mtercimlerintercmesine himmet buyurduklar eserin muhteviyat- ilmiye ve mezaya-y edebiyesine


29/30

43


vakf bulunmalar ve anladklarn hsn-i tebli iin dahi kendi lisanlarnca vayedar-mezaya-y belagat olmalar iktiza eder.

Yoksa Frenkane bir eda ile fesahat- nainasane bir surette yaplm asar- mtercemedenhusul- faideye bedel ziyan terettp eyleyecei bi-itibahtr. Bundan baka mellifat-ilmiye tercmesinde mtercimin lhakika alim olmas da vcub-i kati tahtndadr. Bina-enaleyh derece-i matlubede tetkikat- ilmiyesi olmayan zevat marifetiyle trkeletirilenktb-i fenniyeden suret-i zahihada istifade olunamayaca gibi edebiyata rtbe-i ala-kalar mekuk veyahut pek zayf bulunan mtercimler tarafndan tercme klnan asar-edebiyeden dahi ber vech-i shhat-i hissedar- feyz ve edeb olmak mmkn olamaz.

te tercmenin tadat olunan mkilatna ve pekok asar- mtrcemenin ekseriyetleerait-i hsn-i tercmeyi cami olamamasna mebni merhum Fuad Paa bir eserin aslnkanavienin yzne ve tercmesini tersine tebih eylemek istemilerdir.

Merhum marnileyhin ibu tebihi ekser-i ahvalde mukarin-i shhat ise de deba-i Os-maniye arasnda temyiz-i kemteranemize nazaran- aslna rek-efza-y fesahat olabilecekasar- mterceme husule getirmi zevat bulunduu cihetle tebihin umuma umul iddiaolunamaz.


30/30

Müntehabat ı Teracim i Meşahir

Documents

Transcript of Müntehabat ı Teracim i Meşahir