DISCUSSION

8.1. Translations' source material

Before discussing the observed tendencies, it is important to note that it is unknown (and practically impossible to research for purposes of the thesis due to inaccessibility

) whether the editions of the source language (English) versions of the novel used by the translators differed and if so, to what extent. Likewise, unknown is also the degree of conformity between the source language edition of the novel used as a reference for our analysis and the translators' sources. No editor's notes stating changes to the text over the course of its re-releases are present neither in our source edition nor the edition used by Podaný

(Manďák used the first edition). The thesis thus presumes that the occasional discrepancies found

in both translations (in comparison with the original) in the form of missing or shifted sentences and paragraphs is solely the result of the translators' inattentiveness or a deliberate decision motivated by reasons unknown (neither translator, however, acknowledged such fact in a translator's note).

8.2. Analysis results

Concerning the translation of individual lexical units, Manďák's translation has proven to contain more qualitative errors, particularly in the form of incorrect conversion of figures from the American measurement unit system to that used in the Czech Republic (given that the conversion rates have not changed over the course of the years between both translations). Podaný's evidently more effective research indicates his more active approach to the translation process and investment into the quality of the translation. In Mandák's translation, instances of an incorrect use of

10

results from two biggest Czech online market research engines: https://knihy.heureka.cz;

https://www.zbozi.cz

11

description on the publisher's website: http://books.wwnorton.com/books/Fight-Club/

12

see Appendix I (yellow colour indication)

46

Czech as a target language, which indicate to a lesser lingual competence, also occurred.

The translations were published 11 years apart from one another, 3 and 14 years after the original respectively. Although the time span between the two translations is not significant, a shift in the appropriateness of the translations of certain lexical units, can be observed. Manďák's choices appear rather unnatural and archaic at times. The general use of Standard Czech also seems overly sophisticated and not expressive enough in the presence of the relatively often used crude language. Podaný's applying the Czech language's rich possibilities to constitute the non-standard speech nature of the characters' utterances is deemed as appropriate, as the main trinity rather indisputably displays characteristics assigning them the membership to a social class for which the Czech non-standard speech is suitable.

Podaný's effort to capture the relevant-and-fresh-till-today-feel of the novel thus functions rather successfully. Whether those observations can be contributed to the over-time development of Czech

or rather to Podaný's general greater ability to choose apt expressions is impossible to determine with certainty. Neglected in this regard should not be the age difference of the translators, due to which Podaný, being one generation younger and closer to the age of the author than Manďák, may be more easily capable of selecting more aptly applied, contemporarily functioning expressions.

The analysis has also proven that in comparison, Podaný exceeds Manďák in the amount of creativity applied into the translation process, which results in the expressions being more apt. His skilful use of Czech language in translating the

13

The exponentially increasing pace of linguistic development over the last approx. 20 years

can be attributed to the technical progress of society, the spread of internet into mainstream use in

particular. While it undoubtedly influences all areas of human life, language is one of the areas being

affected the most.

47

author's original, often playful phrases requiring such creative approach is evaluated positively. Manďák's expressions sometimes suffer from a rather descriptive nature, prolixity or unnaturalness, which often appears to be the result of his complying to the language structures of the original instead of utilising the Czech langauge's abundant expressive possibilities.

8.2.1. Stylistic elements

These novel's stylistic characteristics of minimalism and dynamism and repetition are assessed simultaneously as they manifest themselves often in tandem (one is constituted by employing the other) and because the manner and motivation of the translators' approach to both appear to be similar. While the dynamic quality of the text was in both translations achieved to a satisfactory degree, the insufficiency of attention paid to the repetitive structures by both translators is rather surprising.

Manďák's success at preserving both the austerity of the passages and the more evident, closely located repetitions in his translation appears to be the result of conforming to the original's syntactic and composition structures in conformity with the literal translation style (as it ceases with the increasing distance of the repetitive occurrences, which require a more attentive reflection of the whole text). Podaný's translation treated some manifestations of the repetitive and clustered nature of passages and paragraphs (especially the non-variety of introductory verbs) as an undesirable characteristic in need to be reformulated with more variety in the register and syntactic relations.

The dissonant feel of the separate constituent sentence type was the author's

intention, both translators seemingly found the Czech equivalents to be almost

exclusively nonfunctional and neither found means of transferring this particular

meaning-enhancing stylistic device which would function universally.

48

The issue of the ambiguous reference of the personal pronoun you in relation to the novel's semantic complexes has been established. In view of the analysis' results, the conclusion is that Manďák's solution is more suitable, as it functions with the same ambiguity contained in one form as in the original without the need to alter it. The form chosen by Podaný may seem more suitable at first (as a plural form is typical for instructive manuals in Czech) but it fails to contain the semantic reference to Tyler (a reference constituted later in the novel). Moreover, Podaný's far more inconsistent treatment of the pronoun is of harmful consequence to the described semantic complex.

Podaný's greater tendency to apply creativity manifested itself also in his solution to translating the repetitive chorus structures of the narrator's moods.

Manďák's solution, once again complying to the original structure, appears to be more suitable in this case, which, along with the other stylistic elements of the novel, appears to function better after applying the non-variety and conformity of a more literal translation approach.

8.3. Translator's experience and familiarity

Podaný translated Fight Club over ten years after the original's publication. At the time, he was an objectively more experienced translator than Manďák, whose translation of Fight Club was one of his first literary translation practices. Podaný's more liberal approach could thus stem from the greater "courage" he had as an established translator.

In this regard, taken into account should be the translator's afterword Podaný included at the end of his translation. In it, Podaný comments on the nature of Palahniuk's literary work and deems him as "a modern author who does not wear"

and "a big author whose books will persist" (as opposed to most modernist authors,

49

according to him, as he favours the classics) (Palahniuk 2011, 194-196). He thereby demonstrates his familiarity with Palahniuk's style and its development in context of all his works, not Fight Club alone, a factor which was unavailable to Manďák at the time. Thus a possible reasoning of the observations that some creative solutions appear to add to the work rather than exist in the original itself and that he does not comply with the structure as strictly can be found in his assuming the style he gained familiarity with from translating Palahniuk's later, assumingly more stylistically refined works.

Thus, Podaný could have chosen to adapt the style for the sake of continuity

and stylistic coherence among all his translations of Palahniuk works. The changes

could be of an unconscious nature, though, as is indicated by his opinion on

improving the quality of the original. When asked about such approach, he stated: "I

would almost never do that. A translator can do improvements in microtext (factual

details or compensations for aspects irresolvably lost in the translation process), but

not beyond it, unless there is a damn good reason." (Bílek, 2014). This statement,

however, appears to be in contrast with some of the observed tendencies (e.g. the

variation of the introductory verbs). This issue has been commented on by Knittlová,

who pointed out that "some Czech translators, while utilizing the Czech plentiful

expressive abilities and their expertise in applying it, add to the text more than is

necessary" (Knittlová 1995, 128). She further notes one of the possible causes to be

cultural transposition, in which Czech readers require more expressivity than English

readers, causing the translators to attempt to meet their preference (ibid).

50