Polish Translation

Bibliography of Dutch literature in Polish translation
In: "Widzę rzeki szerokie...: z dziejów literatury niderlandzkiej XIX i XX wieku. Tom 2" / red.: Jerzy Koch, Piotr Oczko. - Poznań : Zakład Studiów Niderlandzkich i Południowoafrykańskich, Wydział Anglistyki Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu, 2018. - (Biblioteka Werkwinkel). p. 589-628

Niniejsza publikacja zawiera:
• tłumaczenia 170 dokumentów polskich i niemieckich, w tym reprezentatywnych dokumentów metrykalnych, szkolnych, notarialnych, policyjnych, sądowych, pracowniczych, handlowych, księgowo-podatkowych i medycznych,
• tłumaczenia dokumentów nie tylko z Niemiec, ale także z Austrii i Szwajcarii,
• komentarze w przypisach do wyboru odmiennych wersji tłumaczenia,
• przekład skrótów najczęściej występujących w tekstach specjalistycznych,
• formalne i lingwistyczne zasady sporządzania tłumaczeń poświadczonych,
• informacje nt. pragmatyki wykonywania zawodu tłumacza przysięgłego,
• wykaz literatury przedmiotu niezbędnej w pracy każdego tłumacza specjalistycznego.

Publikacja adresowana jest do szerokiego grona osób zainteresowanych przekładem tekstów specjalistycznych, a więc uczestników seminariów translacyjnych, kandydatów zgłaszających się do egzaminu na tłumacza przysięgłego oraz czynnych tłumaczy, którzy chcieliby skonfrontować swoje tłumaczenia z propozycjami przekładów zamieszczonymi w książce.

Translators are a part of institutionalized translation literature together with organi‑ zations of translators, literary critics, publishing houses, and magazines. They played a very important role in The Polish People's Republic. The Polish Communist Party treated them as nest of oppositionists. The first organization of translators, Association of Polish Translators and Interpreters, was established after years of failed attempts in 1981, not accidentally at the time of the biggest popularity of Solidarity. Translation literature was a part of cultural contacts with abroad which were a part of the foreign policy of the state. This particular sphere was under control of the state. Political ideology was the most important factor which influenced cultural policy. Despite those extratextual constraints translators and the sphere of cultural contacts with abroad had a little bit more freedom than other cultural institutions because the political authority wanted to create a positive picture of the country, especially for the foreign receiver. The position of the translator in The Polish People's Republic was close to The Horace Model of translation. He had to negotiate between a patron (in our case state) and two languages and cultures.

The period between 1944 and 1989 is already a closed chapter of the history of Polish culture during which it was subject to numerous restrictions, among other, ideological ones. The leading theme of the very book is a small fragment of the PRL reality, the sphere of cultural contacts with Yugoslavia, or, more precisely, the Socialist Republic of Croatia, its part at that time. The period under investigation consists of several phases. All periodization borderlines, both internal and external ones, are determined by political facts. Politics, though, gave rhythm to cultural life, and was the most important factor shaping a social background of the cultural activity those days. Both the situation on the international stage, concerned with not as much bilateral Polish-Yugoslavian relationship, as the state of affairs between the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, and the internal one played an important role. The influence of external factors turned out to be more significant in the beginning. A political situation was becoming more important starting from the 1970s. Writers in the Polish People’s Republic period, forced by the party, became active participants of a political life that is why internal problems often made literary contacts abroad secondary as writers and their organizations were more busy with the current situation in their closest environment. Croatian-Polish cultural contacts covered literature, music, film, theatre, and plastic art (there was also a cooperation with museums, libraries, and architecture, but it is not the subject of consideration here). Cultural relationships with abroad were a part of the foreign policy in the country that was totally in charge of this sphere. Its institutions dealt with programming, realization and financing. The country formulated requirements and claimed the right to control cultural activity. As a result of decentralization (Decision on decentralization of a cultural-educational exchange with abroad from 01.01.1968 (Odluka o decentralizacji kulturno-prosvjetne razmjene s inozemstvom sa danom 01.01.1968.) taken by the Federal Executive Council at the meeting on June 13 1966, was most important  in terms of the cultural cooperation in Yugoslavia), the culture there was more pluralistic and scattered, but ideologically, more similar to the Polish model. Transferring responsibility for the cultural sphere into particular republics meant not only the privilege of planning and building cultural contacts by republic centres, but also the necessity to finance them. However, the most important subject of the cultural cooperation in both countries was the country as its exclusive patron. The difference between Warsaw and Belgrade consisted in multiplying decisive centres in the case of Yugoslavia. The contacts were made on the basis of contracts, programmes and agreements signed by the governments, institutions and organizations in both countries. The country authorities responsible for cultural cooperation (particular departments of central committees of both countries  and national administration), creative unions (among others ZLP (Union of Polish Writers) and ZLJ (Union of Yugoslavian Writers)) , the mass media, the press above all, and publishing houses took part in institutional transmitting the cultural products and shaping their image. The process of locating the Croatian literature in Poland, on the other hand, was above all popularized by translators and  researchers publishing their texts in the literary, as well as cultural-social press, as well as cultural journalists. These were the most significant indirect link. A decisive voice was given to the Warsaw circle. The image of the Croatian literature and culture was created by Alija Dukanović, Danuta Cirlić-Straszyńska, Grzegorz Łatuszyński, Edward Madany, Jan Wierzbicki and Zygmunt Stoberski. The magazines that published the greatest number of Craotian works, such as “Dialog”, “Literatura na Świecie”, “Poezja”, and “Twórczość” were also released in Warsaw. From other centres, Kraków competed with Warsaw, which was unequal, with the biggest success in terms of the research studies ( the most active institution in Poland was the PAN  Committee of Slavic studies, having its branch in Kraków). In Kraków, it was Julian Kornhauser, a poet, translator, literature researcher, literary and translation critic, as well as Włodzimierz Kot and Maria Dąbrowska-Partyka that were most outstanding figures. The strongest turned out theatrical and literary connections. 38 plays by Croatian authors (in 86 realisations), including 6 performances for children were staged in Polish theatres in the very period. The consolidation of literary activity was possible thanks to visits writers and translators paid in order to sign contracts between ZLJ and ZLP, to take part in conferences, literary events, conventions, and study visits, as well as translations. 59 translations of the literature altogether, (65 with Yugoslavian anthologies), including 10 publications of the literature for children and for the youth, while 4 of them were second editions. Hence, 55 new publications were released between 1944 and 1989. The magazines published several hundred translations of the Croatian literature, above all, poetry. In the case of book translations, on the other hand, there was a great disproportion in favour of prose, visible not only in the number of novels and stories published, but also their edition copies. Apart from novels, the biggest edition concerned literature for children and teenagers, and science fiction one, popular in the 1980s. Film contacts were most prestigious. Cinematography was considered to influence its audience most strongly, and be the most efficient means of propaganda. Music cooperation consisted in basically individual visits paid by people connected with music who came to participate in the vents organized in Poland, and performances of particular artists. The relations within plastic arts included organization of exhibitions. 17 Yugoslavian and 7 Croatian, including 5 group and 2 individual ones were prepared, all of which dated in the 1970s and 1980s, that is, the period of decentralizing the sphere of cultural cooperation abroad in Yugoslavia. What is more, the artists from Croatia took part in international events many a time, such as photographic exhibitions, International Exhibition of Ceramics in Sopot, Warsaw International Poster Biennale, and International Biennale of Graphic Art in Kraków, belonging to the circle of its winners.
The biggest recognition in the whole Croatian-Polish cultural cooperation  of the very period received sculpture of the world famous artist Ivan Meštrovic, naïve painting, Ivo Brešan’s play Przedstawienie “Hamleta” we wsi Głucha Dolna, Vladan Desnica’s novel Niespokojne wiosny, Ivo Pogorelić’s performances, in the 10th International Chopin Piano Competition. The most famous Croatian writer in the period under investigation was Miroslav Krežla.

There are two Polish translations of Andrić’s short story U musafirhani. First one by Maria Znatowicz-Szczepańska was published in 1937. Second one by Alija Dukanović, Bosnian who settled and lived in Poland, was published in 1966. The story presents two Bosnians communities: Catholics and Muslims. The analysis of these two translations shows that the Catholic community is stronger in the Polish translations than in the original text. This tendency is more clear in ZnatowiczSzczepańska’s work. On the one hand the position of Catholics is much better and on the other hand their dependence on Muslims is smaller, as it was in real and as it is shown in Andrić’s piece. In Dukanović’s translation there is a tendency to present Muslims in a better way as well. They are not so primitive, demanding and ruthless. Differences between translations correspond with the context they were written. In the period between two world wars there was an antiphaty for the Muslim part of Bosnia which was treated as a dangerous element, warlike and communistlike. After The Second World War, during Communist times, rules unitarist ideology and it wasn’t correct to emphasis civilizations, religious and national differences. It helps to understand both strategies of translations, why Marija Znatowicz-Szczepańska is very familiar with Catholics and very distanced from Muslims and at the same time why Alija Dukanović presents Muslims in a better way. ZnatowiczSzczepańska’s way of translation we can treat as domestication, Dukanović’s one as foreignization with strong element of the manipulation.