From Intersemiotic Translation to Intersemiotic Aspects of TranslationThe paper outlines a distinction between several allied notions related to intersemioticity, polysemioticity and translation, with examples pertaining to the indicated categories. It begins with an overview of how Roman Jakobson's concept of intersemiotic translation has been re-interpreted and broadened to account for more types of transformations and new modes of expression. Secondly, non-identity of referentiality and transmutation is indicated. Next, the notion of intersemiotic complementation is proposed for the instances that involve adding a new code to an existing work rather than changing its code. A distinction is also drawn between intersemiotic translation and intersemiotic aspects or contexts of interlingual translation (of a polysemiotic work or a verbal text which refers to non-discursive media). It is emphasized that it is this last category that deserves the attention of translation scholars, and some particular areas of interest are enumerated.

The paper focuses on the issue of translation of intertextual markers in literature, with a special emphasis on Polish poetry in English renditions. The material and perspective are chosen with a view to exploring source-culture references in the literatures less known internationally, which, it is argued, is a sphere of particular cultural resistance to translation. The aim is to survey the importance of the level of explicitness of intertextual links for the task of a translator, but also to investigate recognisability -the other crucial factor -as well the interrelation of the two. First some assumptions about the conditions conducive to a successful rendering of intertextuality are formulated and tested. Then, based on several poetry excerpts, it is shown how, on the one hand, the level of explicitness influences the translators' choices and, on the other, how explicitating or implicitating procedures in translation influence the interpretative potential of the texts. Some instances of overcoming the resistance thanks to creative efforts are indicated. One of the author's tenets is that even a not readily decipherable marker can serve as a signal of intertextual relations. Интертекстуальность как переводческая проблема: эксплицитность и узнаваемость при переводе из «литератур небольших народов» Марта КазьмерчакВаршавский университет Krakowskie Przedmieście 26/28, Варшава, 00-927, Польша Аннотация Статья посвящена вопросу передачи интертекстуальных сигналов в художественной литературе, а особенно при переводе польской поэзии на английский язык. Выбор материала обусловлен задачей изучения интертекстуальных текстов в литературах, которые не являются широко извест-Marta Kaźmierczak. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 2019, 23 (2), 362-382 TRANSLATION STUDIES TODAY AND TOMORROW 363 ными, что создает, по мнению автора, особые трудности при переводе. Цель данной статьиисследовать два фактора, влияющие на трудности перевода: уровень эксплицитности (явности) межтекстовой связи и узнаваемость архетекста, а также их взаимоотношение. В начале представлены именно эти условия, которые способствуют успешной передаче интертекстуальности. Данные установки затем подвергаются предварительной проверке. Затем на основе нескольких стихотворных отрывков и их переводов автор показывает, как уровень явности влияет на переводческие решения и как, в свою очередь, примененные в переводе процедуры эксплицитации и имплицитации влияют на интерпретационный потенциал текстов. Приведены также примеры успешного преодоления объективных трудностей при передаче интертекстов. Автор утверждает, что даже маркер, который в целевом контексте нелегко поддается интерпретации, может сработать как сигнал межтекстовой связи. Ключевые слова: перевод, интертекстуальность, культурные асимметрии, польская литература, переводческие стратегии Для цитирования: Kazḿierczak, Marta. Intertextuality as Translation Problem: Explicitness, Recognisability and the Case of "Literatures of Smaller Nations" // Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Лингвистика...

The aim of the present contribution is to discuss a specific phenomenon at the interface of intersemioticity and translation. Intersemiotic punning occurs when a relation of equivoque obtains not between two meanings encoded in the same semiotic layer, the verbal one, but between two different layers, e.g. verbal text and image. Such puns have been present in cultures since antiquity: Egyptian hieratic texts could flaunt their pictorial qualities to offer "an alternative visual reading" (Brotherston: 211-212). Intersemiotic puns, as heterogeneous complexes, are an object of enquiry of more than one discipline, as will be manifest in the way the discussion below is structured, with some examples pertaining to textual (literary) domain and some to visual arts. Translation studies, itself an interdiscipline, seems an ideal platform for examining the phenomenon. The aim of the paper is to exemplify and analyse in translational perspective verbal-visual equivoques (the material is restricted to puns involving text and image). I intend to diagnose translational implications of the presented examples, to indicate the level of translatability and possible solutions to the tasks. It will be shown that intersemiotic puns-grouped according to the semiotic composition and the priority of the respective layers within it-occur in a surprising variety of media, and a tentative algorithm for translation options will be formulated.

The 1959 paper "On Linguistic Aspects of Translation" (1959Translation" ( /2000, in which Roman Jakobson proposed a division into intralingual, interlingual and intersemiotic translation, proved seminal for the development of the study of translation and for bringing into it a semiotic perspective. However, in the Introduction to the 1998 Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, Mona Baker noticed that surprisingly little investigation had been conducted on the nature of intersemiotic translation, and that Jakobson's triadic division only "alert[s] us to the possibility of such things as intersemiotic and intralingual translation, but we do not make any genuine use of such classifications in our research" (1998: xvii). Later, Teresa Tomaszkiewicz restated the scarcity of studies of the nature of transmutation, despite the developments in the theorizing of new media and the new forms of translation connected to them (2006: 65-66).In recent years, among other enquiries into the subject, a comprehensive semiotic classification of translation was proposed by Henrik Gottlieb (2007). Nonetheless, terminological inconsistencies in the discipline are perceptible, which, in turn, can lead to misunderstandings and add to the difficulties in the research. For instance, Tomaszkiewicz cites an example of an intralingual translation being called intersemiotic (2006: 68), while Chiara Moriconi, when writing about the same work being rendered into a different language and into a painting, applies

On the peripheries of theory – third language in translation The paper substantiates the importance of the so-called third language (L3) as a translation issue – despite claims that it is straightforward (e.g. by Fyodorov) or, conversely, that it defies TS insight (Bellos). The research so far is summarized and in the empirical part a working typology of techniques applied in translating L3 material is offered, illustrated by extracts from Boris Akunin’s Russian historical detective novels and their Polish renditions. The author pays attention to such questions as the form of notation of L3 elements in the original (in the Cyrillic or Latin alphabet), paratextual strategies and the functions which the foreign interpolations perform in their contexts and macrotexts.