1

Michał Kluz

Aspects of untranslatability
on the basis of two Polish
translations of
Winnie-the-Pooh
by A. A. Milne

This project is presented in

part fulfilment of the
requirements for the degree of
Licentiate at the Jagiellonian
University, Kraków.
Written under the supervision
of mgr Renata Latko
Rzeszów 2001
 2

Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................ 2

Chapter 1: History and evolution of translation ..................................... 4

1.1 The insights into translation ..................................................................... 4

1.1.1 Ancient times ........................................................................................... 4
1.1.2 Translation in Europe .............................................................................. 5
1.1.3 Translation in Poland ............................................................................... 5
1.1.4 Translation in present times .................................................................... 6
1.2 The translator and his work ..................................................................... 7
1.2.1 The authority of a translator ..................................................................... 7
1.2.2 The choices of a translator ...................................................................... 8

Chapter 2: The notion of translation and its aspects .............................. 10

2.1 What makes translation possible ............................................................. 10

2.2 Attempts to define translation .................................................................. 11
2.3 Some fundamentals of literary translation ............................................... 12
2.4 The reasons for translation ...................................................................... 14
2.5 Types of translation ................................................................................. 16
2.5.1 Informative statements ............................................................................ 16
2.5.2 Adequate translations .............................................................................. 17
2.5.3 Translations of scientific and technical manner ....................................... 17
2.5.4 Translation of literature ............................................................................ 18
2.6 Perfection of translation ........................................................................... 19

Chapter 3: Untranslatability: the reasons ................................................... 21

3.1 Untranslatable matters ............................................................................ 21

3.2 The reasons for untranslatability ............................................................. 22
3.2.1 Differences in language structure ............................................................ 22
3.2.2 Impossibility to convey concepts ............................................................. 25

Chapter 4: The comparison of the original and the two translations ... 26

4.1 The profiles of the two translations .......................................................... 26

4.1.1 Kubuś Puchatek ...................................................................................... 26
4.1.2 Fredzia Phi Phi ........................................................................................ 27
4.2 The choices of Irena Tuwim and Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska ............ 28
4.2.1 Translation of proper names .................................................................... 28
4.2.2 Translation of the capitalised expressions and plays on words ............... 30
4.2.3 Translation of nursery rhymes................................................................. 31

Conclusions .......................................................................................................... 33

Bibliography ......................................................................................................... 35

Appendices ........................................................................................................... 36
 3

Introduction

The phenomenon of the existence of so many human languages has

engaged many generations of linguists. They have tried to explain why people
do not speak one language but hundreds of them. If there was only one natural
lingua franca, there would be no translations, translators, interpreters and
finally, the subject of this thesis would be completely different. Looking at this
fact from two viewpoints, it can be said that life would probably be considerably
easier if people spoke one language, especially these days. On the other hand,
human languages are a very rewarding subject to consider and they provide us
with innumerable surprises. In fact, languages change all the time, new ones
come into being, other languages become extinct, thus there is immense room
for the translator to display his talents.

Translation would not be necessary if there was only one universal

language. People have long tried to explain how it happened that so many
languages came into existence. The most known attempt is the story of the
Babel Tower found in The Bible in The Book of Genesis (11:1-11:9):

“And the whole earth had one language, and the same words. (...)

And they said, Come on, let us build ourselves a city and a tower, the top of which may
reach to the heavens; and let us make ourselves a name, lest we be scattered over the
face of the whole earth. (...)
And Jehovah said, Behold, the people is one, and have all one language; and this have
they begun to do. And now will they be hindered in nothing that they meditate doing.
(...)
Come, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not
understand one another's speech.
And Jehovah scattered them thence over the face of the whole earth. And they left off
building the city.

Therefore was its name called Babel; because Jehovah there confounded the
language of the whole earth. And Jehovah scattered them thence over the face of the
whole earth.”
 4

Nowadays, it has been proven, that human languages, as well as the art of
translation, have a much longer history. My concern in this work will be the
untranslatability of certain words, expressions, etc. that every translator faces in
his work. As an example I will use two translations of Milne's Winnie-the-Pooh:
Kubuś Puchatek by Irena Tuwim and Fredzia Phi-Phi by Monika Adamczyk-
Garbowska. The first translation was made almost a century ago and managed
to melt into the Polish culture. The second, is relatively new and casts new light
on this famous book. The authors set different aims of their work before they
started translating: Tuwim brought the book nearer to the young reader,
Adamczyk-Garbowska kept as close to the original as possible. The focus of my
work will be to attempt to explain their choices when facing difficult or
impossible to translate words, expressions, plays on words and cultural
nuances.

Firstly, I will outline the long history and the evolution of the art of translation
and the way it went through before it came to Poland, which eventually made
the translation of Winnie-the-Pooh into Polish possible. Secondly, I will
foreshadow the silhouette of a translator and list the skills that a good translator
possesses. Thirdly, I will approach the notion of translation, its properties and
types. Later in my work, I will move to the notion of untranslatability, the reasons
for it and I will list the untranslatable matters. Finally, before making
conclusions, the examples of the choices made by the two translators of
Winnie-the-Pooh will be presented and discussed.
 5

Chapter 1:
History and evolution of translation

1.1 The insights into translation

Centuries ago when people were scattered around the earth in small clusters
and frequently did not know about each other’s existence, the notion of
translation did not even flicker in the minds of the boldest visionaries. There was
simply no demand for this. When literacy appeared, one reason for translation
coming into existence arose. Still, people lived in small clusters and knew only
one language – the one they used. Another very important factor that
contributed to the engenderment of translation was an increase in mobility, and
what follows, first encounters with other cultures. At that time, a kind of primitive
interpreting began to be used. It served as an important device facilitating the
contacts between the peoples speaking unfamiliar languages.

1.1 .1 Ancient times

This undeniably beneficial ability evolved circa 5,000 BC or earlier, but

developed in the Ancient East around 4,000 BC. Soon, the importance of
translation began to grow. First translations were made for pragmatic reasons
and their authors’ only task was to remove the barrier, placed by a difference in
languages, between the writer and the reader. The translators were far from
being ‘perfect translators’, that is masters of input and output languages, having
knowledge of realities, historical background, the ideology of the original, etc.
Yet, there were exceptions to the rule. Olgierd Wojtasiewicz (1996:7) claims
that the translation of the epos Gilgamesh from Sumerian into Akkadian, which
was achieved 6000 years ago, should be considered as the first sound
translation.
 6

1.1.2 Translation in Europe

The European adventure with the art of translation began much later. The
first translation from this part of the world comes from 240 BC. That year the
Odyssey was put into Latin by the Greek Livius Andronicus. From then on,
translations were made more frequently, mainly by early Latin poets who made
the works of Greek poets available to Romans. The translation from Greek into
Latin and vice versa continued until there was nothing more to translate. Then
this art lost much of its significance. Nonetheless, that period laid the robust
foundations of the study. Several centuries later, around the eighth century,
developed Arabian learning based on that of Greece. The works of Aristotle,
Plato and Hippocrates were converted into Arabic by a group of Syrian
scholars. Baghdad at that time became the site of what Theodore Savory
(1957:38) defines as ‘almost a school of translation’.

When the Arabic learning declined, it was succeeded by the Spanish school
of translators, the centre of which was Toledo. Here, until the original texts in
Greek began to reach Spain, the study was based on Arabic texts. By that time,
the art of translation reached its peak. It was then, that the study became a fine
art. Most translators at that time happened to be sagacious, learned men, who
spent most of their lives in libraries, studying the works of their predecessors.
The purely pragmatic reasons for translating were replaced by men’s desire to
associate themselves with the beauty of the written word. Works of Greek and
Latin authors began to return in ravishing translations, which were the pride of
their authors. Those authors were not preoccupied with translations alone. They
were educated in many disciplines, yet became famous mainly because of their
perfection in putting the spoken word on paper. The silhouette of a translator
being a man of letters will be dealt with later in the paper.

1.1.3 Translation in Poland

Translation into and from Polish, which is the main point of interest of this
work, became popular when Latin, the lingua franca of the Middle Ages, gave
way to the reviving of mother tongues. In sixteenth century Poland, translations
 7

were made for pragmatic, rather than artistic purposes. The translations were
supposed to create a culture consistent with the one of the Mediterranean, that
arose immediately from the antiquity. With time, however, this drive towards the
Roman culture was stopped by an emerging sense of the integrity and the
originality of Polish culture. Then, the way translations were made slightly
diverted towards adjusting the original to the Polish morals, the Polish outlook
and to other chunks of Polish reality. A. Nowicka-Jeżowa and D. Knysz
Tomaszewska (1997:8) claim that translators at that time ‘zabiegali o
komunikatywność i nośność perswazyjną przekładu, o zrozumiałość i łatwą
percepcję tekstu’. This situation continued until the eighteenth and the
nineteenth centuries when the activity of translation entered the domain of
literature, free from any cultural bias. This state continues until now.

1.1.4 Translation in present times

The former century brought an increasing number of translations for both

pragmatic and artistic reasons. This art entered almost all aspects of life. In the
age of high technology, which facilitates the efforts of translators, the art
flourishes and evolves into a better one. Nowadays, people can read the works
of writers from the whole world, with short delays for translating. It is the
technological progress that made the art of translation so accessible and
widespread as never before.

Translation has a long and meandering history. It was developed by several

generations of translators and influenced by almost all cultures inhabiting the
Old World. A reader may not know or may not be interested in whom to thank
for this ‘invention’. For him the only thing he is occupied with is the ability to
enjoy a fine translation of, for example: Milne’s Winnie-the-Pooh.
 8

1.2 The translator and his work

We live in the era of translation. Both translators and interpreters have

become important figures. Translators, after years of living in the shade, are
now beginning to emerge. Yet, most ordinary people do not know who
translators are and what their work consists in. Those who know little or nothing
about the matter, tend to believe that everyone knowing a foreign language can
be a translator. It is partially true, but his attempts will usually be of poor quality.
That is why, this chapter deals with the qualities of a good translator and the
obstacles he faces in his work.

1.2.1 The authority of a translator

A translator is a channel between different languages and cultures. Any

person knowing two languages is able to deliver a translation, yet its quality
may be very disappointing. To do this activity successfully, one must possess,
apart from inborn skills, the knowledge of the realities from among a given
culture, a feeling for language and he must be flexible in his work.

Basic requirements

Every translation is judged by the accuracy and faithfulness in relation to the

original. Accurate translation cannot be confused with word-for-word translation
because the faithfulness of a translation does not exclude introducing changes
to the original. That is why a translator is expected to know well both the output
and the target languages. He also should possess the knowledge of the realities
and know adequately the subject of translation.

The skills of a good translator

A translator, apart from the above characteristics, must possess a genuine

gift for translating, especially when the translation of prose and poetry are
 9

concerned. This gift is described by Lipiński (2000:181) as ‘specyficzna

kompetencja translatoryczna’. The knowledge of both languages does not make
a good translator. The translation must contain all the elements of the original
and express the atmosphere and terminology. A translator cannot excuse
himself for the ignorance and distortion of the original’s realities. The task of the
translator is considerably more difficult than that of the author because clumsy
translation of the original affects the image of the latter. A good translator
should understand the author’s trail of thought and avoid word-for-word
translation.

Flexibility of a translator

Translation is not ruled by strict principles with established order and logical
associations. Dedecius (1974:146) describes translation as ‘królestwo bezładu,
nawet swawoli i wyraźnej amatorszczyzny’. An experienced translator does not
follow strict rules because they will not aid him and may even disturb him.
Comments, advice and hints of experts in this domain may sometimes be
helpful for a translator but they should not be decisive. A translator, while
choosing the manner of translating, frequently proceeds against his own
experience.

1.2.2 The choices of a translator

Translation is a broad process and does not involve a sheer word for word
replacement. If this was true, translations would be successfully done by
computers. Apart from obvious differences between languages, there are many
more problems every translator faces in his work.

Selection of vocabulary

As far as vocabulary is concerned, the dictionaries of different languages

offer a wide range of vocabulary. Everyone who has at least once used a
dictionary knows that one word of a given language is explained by two or more
 10

words in another language. Here, the translator must choose between them and
even having chosen one of them, he knows that in most cases the word does
not fully explain the meaning of the word from the original. For example, a
simple Polish word czysty is explained by four English words: clean, clear, pure
and sheer. Most foreign English speakers will be able to explain the differences
in meaning of these words, but there are hundreds of much more ambiguous
words, with which translators must cope. In the opinion of experienced
translators the translator before choosing the nearest equivalent of a given word
must take into account the thoughts of the author, his reader’s, the readers of
the translation and the period of history in which the author lived.

Selection of style and register

The translator serves as a bridge between the author of the original work
and the reader of a foreign language. Translation should reflect the author’s
thoughts as closely as possible. Differences between languages make this task
very demanding and usually some changes are inevitable. Yet, the style and
register found in the original must be retained in translation. Any disrespect for
this principle may cause misunderstandings.

The simplification of style and register is inexcusable as it affects the

author’s technique and position. The reader of a translation who does not know
the original assumes that the translation is an exact copy of the work translated.
That is why the translator’s task is very demanding. Every mistake and allusion
of the translator affects not only him but also the author of the work who suffers
even harder as his reputation may be ruined among the speakers of the
translation’s language.

Any distortion of the original’s style or its message may destroy the
significance of a given work. This leads to severe consequences as the most
outstanding author may be rejected due to the incompetence of the translator.
The work may also speak to a different kind of reader than the author expects.
This situation is unacceptable. To transmit the full contents of a given book is
not an option, but the translator’s duty.
 11

Chapter 2:
The notion of translation and its aspects.

To understand better the notion of untranslatability, a few words must be

said about translation, its aspects, properties and peculiarities. Translation is a
vast subject as it is perceived differently by the experts in this domain. Many
questions arise when this issue is considered. This chapter deals with various
issues connected with the broad notion of translation. First of all, what are the
conditions that make this process possible. Secondly, it presents the attempts
of specialists in this subject to define translation. There is not one definition of
this process and probably such a definition will never emerge Thirdly, what are
the fundamentals of translation and reasons for its existence. Later on in this
chapter, the types of translation are enumerated together with their unique
properties. Finally, the last issue considered is the question of whether a perfect
translation is possible or not.

2.1 What makes translation possible

Language, unlike translation, is no longer described as the sole achievement

of humans. People constitute one species and this is a phenomenon that they
may not understand one another’s speech. This situation is not found among
any other known life forms. Linguists have always exercised a fascination for
this phenomenon and struggled to overcome the apparent barrier that it
imposes on interpersonal communication. Generally, the communication, also in
the form of translation, between people speaking different languages is possible
because of ‘the equivalence of thought that lies behind its different verbal
expressions. (. . .) This equivalence is traceable to the fact that men of all
nations belong to the same species. When an Englishman is thinking of the
woman whom he describes my mother, another will be thinking of (. . .) meine
Mutter or mi madre, and among normal people their thoughts will be very similar
 12

and will recall the same memories of tenderness, loving care and maternal
pride.’ (Savory 1953:13).

2.2 Attempts to define translation

Concluding a definition of translation is extremely difficult or impossible.

Dozens of fine translators have tried to provide us with one good definition. Yet,
they either failed or fulfilled their resolutions only partially. The reason is that
language is not as strict as the sciences and any conclusion, if not undermined
by others, is only a compromise. Every author of a translation has his own idea
about what the theory of translation is or should be, depending on his
educational background and his own experience. This situation often creates
the impression that every specialist in a given field of knowledge has something
to add to the theory of translation. That is why, theoretical works on translation
are written by linguists of different theoretical orientations, teachers of foreign
languages, translators, specialists in cultural studies and comparative literature
and many other specialists. Not surprisingly, if there are so many contradicting
ideas about what translation theory is and what it should do, there is an equal
number of statements about translation and translating. Every translator trying
to define his activity tackles this task differently. Any definition of translation is
like all translations themselves: there are no two exact translations, nor two
exact definitions of translation. Below are some examples of how experts in the
matter define translation:

Translation is a craft consisting in the attempt to replace a written message and/or

statement in one language by the same message and/or statement in another
language. Each exercise involves some kind of meaning due to a number of factors. It
provokes a continuous tension, a dialectic, an argument based on the claims of each
language. The basic loss is continuum between overtranslation (increased detail) and
undertranslation (increased generalisation).
Peter Newmark (1982:7)
 13

Translation can do everything except mark the linguistic difference inscribed in the
language, this difference of language systems inscribed in a single tongue. At best it
can get everything across except this: the fact that there are, in one linguistic system,
perhaps several languages or tongues.
J. Derrida (1985:100)

Translation is an activity, both spiritual and practical, related to the activity of

communicating. Consequently, it shares in all the characteristic features of the
category of activity in its broadest sense. Translation is not a productive but a
reproductive activity, not a primary but a secondary activity.
M. Brandes [in:] Zlateva (1993:77)

Having analysed the above theoretical positions, it cannot be stated that one
of these definitions is better, more accurate and more objective. It all depends
on how one looks at the problem of translation. Still, everyone would like to
know which definition is better than others. The answer to this question is not
direct and not true for everyone. Depending on one’s own needs, one definition
can be chosen, yet not on the basis of the above characteristics, but taking into
account the definition’s usefulness when solving a particular problem.

2.3 Some fundamentals of literary translation

To state that there are well defined principles of translation would be untrue,
because there are no widely accepted principles of translation. People qualified
to form such principles have never been unanimous in how they should be
described. What is more, they often contradicted one another and this presents
their descendants with plenty of confused thought. Savory (1953:50) presents a
list of these instructions:

1. A translation must give the words of the original

2. A translation must give the ideas of the original
3. A translation should read like an original work
4. A translation should read like a translation
 14

5. A translation should reflect the style of the original

6. A translation should possess the style of the translator
7. A translation should read as a contemporary of the original
8. A translation should read as a contemporary of the translator
9. A translation may add to or omit from the original
10. A translation may never add to or omit from the original
11. A translation of verse should be in prose
12. A translation of verse should be in verse

The first two items lead to the distinction between faithful translation and the
free translation. To paraphrase the first principle, it is the duty of a translator to
be faithful to the original. Surely it does not mean a primitive word-for-word
translation. Apart from the fact that such translation is impossible it must be
remembered that a translator should remain a translator. He is a channel
between the author and the target audience. On the other hand, literal
translation is a very difficult task and this means that many translators turn
towards the so called free translation, which involves certain departures from
the original’s style and content.

The next two pairs of the items from the list present the translator with a
difficult decision whether the translation should read like the original or like a
translation and what style should reflect it. A statement that a translation must
read like an original may be supported by reason. From the translation alone
the reader should not be able to determine from which language it was
translated. On the other hand, a translation is equally the result of original
thought and considerable work by the translator and frequently his style and
personality influence his work. There is no agreement whether the translator,
having achieved a translation, is entitled to place a piece of his technique in it.
Yet, the general tendency is that the translator’s freedom limits him to the
nature of his language. The freedom may be sufficient to make the translation
an example of the translator’s language correct in idiom, expression and
structure, but it should not exceed this border.

There is another question concerning the works that were written in past
times. Should a translator retain the style of the age in which the author lived, or
 15

should he adopt it to the style of his epoch? A reader contemporary to the

translator expects to find the kind of language he uses. If translation is to
produce the same emotions as those produced by the original the answer is
clear. Obsolete language will not be able to do this. That is why, the translator
should use the contemporary language. Yet, when the original author is read
more for his manner than his matter, the situation changes. No connoisseur of
Shakespeare would like to hear Hamlet speaking the contemporary language,
however rich and correct.

Lastly, there are two contradictory opinions concerning adding to or omitting

parts of the original and changing or not verse into prose. This depends on the
kind of reader. They have different tastes and preferences. Some incline
towards literal translations, others towards free translations. A reader who does
not know the language of the original may not be interested in the accuracy of
the translation. He may still find it pleasing because his curiosity will be satisfied
and he will grasp the general impression. However, a reader who knows the
language of the original will not be satisfied with the differences introduced by
the translator. For him any omission or addition of words or changing the
manner of writing may be inexcusable.

2.4 The reasons for translation

There are several reasons why literary translations began to appear, despite
the limitations imposed by a definite number of literary works to be translated.
First of all, there may be more than one translation of a given work. There are
hundreds of fine translators, who consider translation of their preferred works as
the point of their honour. Such are, the two translations of Milne’s Winnie-the-
Pooh by Irena Tuwim and Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska. They both
approached the same book, but the results of their work are noticeably different.
The latter translator casts a new light on the famous book and has brought the
book nearer to a contemporary young reader.
 16

Secondly, another reason for translations to appear is the fact that all
translations age and after long periods of time they do not speak to younger
readers. All languages are unstable and change very rapidly. Works from, for
example the Middle Ages or even from the Enlightenment period are hardly
intelligible in the twenty-first century. A translation, which is 100 years old
contains vocabulary that today sounds antiquated. For example, the word fuzja,
meaning strzelba, found in Kubuś Puchatek sounds odd not only to a younger
reader.

The fact that there are several translations of the same works is very
beneficial to the a reader. Every translator has his own idea how to translate a
given work. In this way there are no two exact translations and although they
deal with the same work, they may be completely different. These translations
can be treated as separate and independent works of art presenting the artistry
of their authors. A reader , to his delight, is sometimes presented with a very
wide range of translations and it depends on him which translation he chooses.
Savory (1953:59) states that ‘two translations are four times as good as one,
and in the broad span of literary adventure there is welcome place for them all’.
This is another reason why new translations are done. Readers have various
tastes, thus the wider the range of translations is, the more the audience will be
satisfied.

There may also be a problem with understanding a given work written in an

unfamiliar language. A perfect translation is the transfer of the original into the
target language in such a way that the translation carries all the associations
and nuances of the latter. Yet, sometimes translators cross the border between
translation and adaptation or a paraphrase. That is why, in some cases one
translation may not be sufficient to communicate the whole content of the book.
The existence of many translations of one work aids the reader to experience
the whole beauty of the original.

Another reason is that every epoch is governed by different tastes and

literary habits. What satisfied readers in the Renaissance or the Enlightenment
will not necessarily satisfy a contemporary reader. Unless he is an enthusiast or
 17

an expert on a given epoch he may reject a translation due to its obsolete

vocabulary, style and queer connotations. A reader expects to find the kind of
his mother tongue that he is accustomed to use. The function of translation is to
produce in the minds of its readers the same emotions as those produced by
the original in the minds of its readers. When he cannot identify with the
language he may not experience the translation appropriately.

Translation is also invaluable when all the works of Greek and Roman
writers are concerned. Knowledge of these obsolete languages is falling
drastically even among people with higher education and soon it may be
reserved for a handful of enthusiasts. Nonetheless the translations of the works
such as Iliad or Odyssey are widely read. Many of them would fall into oblivion
together with the speakers of the languages. Many historical facts would also
have been lost if works such as Hellenica by Xenophon, describing the history
of Ancient Greece, had not been translated.

2.5 Types of translation

Although many difficulties which translators face are common in all types of
translation, there are several differences between them. Taking into account the
notion of translation one usually thinks of an unspecified type of translation that
one accidentally encountered in life. To an amateur it is not important what type
of translation he reads, but to a translator it is crucial and can aid him in
selecting the appropriate strategy of translating. Savory (1953:20) divides
translation into four types: purely informative statements, adequate translations
made for the general reader, translations of scientific and/ or of technical matter
and the translation of literature.

2.5.1 Informative statements

These include statements of purely informative character, such as are

encountered by travellers or used in advertisements. They contain advice of
identical meaning despite the fact that they are not identically phrased. This
 18

type of translation is important for two reasons. One is that they are one of the
most numerous translations, and the second reason, even more important than
the former, is that many of them could be described as perfect translations.
Savory (1953:21) claims that ‘the perfection of the translation is a result of the
nature of the original message. It is direct and unemotional and it is made in
plain words to which no very intense associations are attached’. In other words,
such plain and purely informative texts need not to be stylistically rich. They
must be functional and this makes the work of a translator less complicated.

2.5.2 Adequate translations

To this category fall all the translations, including the translations of prose,
done for a ‘general’ or an ‘undemanding’ reader. These translations are
adequate but deprived of fine style and the qualities for which the connoisseurs
read them. An average translator may have changed or omitted whole
sentences, distorted the meaning, selected improper vocabulary and
impoverished the content of the book, but the reader will still be satisfied, as for
him the matter may be more important than the manner.

2.5.3 Translations of scientific and technical manner

This type of translation may seem to be similar to the adequate translations as

here the matter is the most important. Yet, any distortion of meaning is
absolutely impossible. Fine style can be neglected, but the content must
converge with the original and evoke the same impression. This means, that the
translators of technical and scientific texts must possess at the least basic
knowledge of the matter translated. Incomprehension and brief acquaintance
with the matter may lead to misunderstandings.
 19

2.5.4 Translation of literature

Literary translation is considered by many linguists as the only type of

translation deserving this name. H. Dzierżanowska (1977:6) claims that
‘tłumaczenie tekstów nieliterackich nie jest dziełem sztuki’. Many theoreticians
support this view. This is due to the fact that when translation is described as art
it does include other than literary texts. Many who do not know much about the
matter associate translation solely with the first-quality translations of the
literature of Greece and Rome and other translations of the works by the most
eminent men of letters.

One of the most conspicuous differences between literary and non-literary

translation is the significance of the translator and his attitude to the author of
the original. Non-literary translations are impersonal. Translations of literature
contain the spirit of its author and according to Pieńkos (1993:77) ‘ten niejako
nowy wymiar tekstu oryginalnego (ma) swe odzwierciedlenie w przekładzie’.
One could have the wrong impression that this type of translation is somehow
privileged over the other types and needs not to follow the general rules
governing this art. But there are many factors that distinguish it from non-literary
translation. In the view of Popovic, as cited in Pieńkos (1993:77), ‘a literary
translation is not a mere communication of a neutral semantic substance: it is at
the same time a transposition of the total artistic value of the original text’. While
approaching a literary work, a translator crossing the border of translation
enters the artistic creation. As far as writing is concerned, the translation is an
art, if one wants to expose the reader to the same feelings as if he was reading
the original.

Translation of a literary work is invariably a kind of reconstruction and involves

changes in many aspects of the original. It is often unavoidable that translation
of a literary work involves several changes of the components of the original.
These may sometimes be so deep that it is no longer a translation but an
adaptation, a paraphrase of the original or an utterly new work. Generally,
translation involves transposing a given meaning expressed in one language as
 20

to be understood by a speaker of the target language. Literary translation does

not merely concern its communicative function because in this case words are
as much important. Words carry the aesthetic function and a substantial load of
associations. That is why, a translator must reconstruct the whole process of
writing, otherwise no literary work will function in another language. This
depends mainly on the translator’s skills. The translator gives a new life to an
existing work, but in a different linguistic, social and historical environment. The
genuine art of translation as a cultural phenomenon clashes with its essence
because the aim of translation is to transpose a given work existing in one
language to another language, maintaining all the features of the original. If the
translation is not accepted it will certainly not be considered as a work of art. On
the other hand, if the work does not retain the property of the people speaking
the language in which it was written, it will not be considered as translation.

It would be a great mistake to examine the possibilities and impossibilities of

a literary translation using solely linguistic methods. To build or not to build a
separate theory for literary translation is not as important. The most important
thing is not to forget about the specificity of this kind of translation and the fact
that the rights ruling the literary translation belong to the sphere of art.

2.6 Perfection of translation

Perfection can be attributed to a translation that has not been criticised and
is accepted by the majority of readers. As it has been mentioned in this chapter
the two types of translation that can be labelled as perfect are: purely
informative statements such as Mind the step!, Uwaga stopień! and technical or
scientific works, in which the matter is more important than the manner. Their
authors remain anonymous and their spirit is hardly, if ever, to be found. In
literary translation many more problems arise.

To admit that a perfect literary translation cannot be achieved without any

consideration would be unjust. It is true that in every translation one can find a
 21

flaw but this issue must be examined more thoroughly before delivering the
verdict. As many experts claim, perfect translation conveys the spirit of the
original author by choosing the words which the author of the original would use
if the language of the translation were his own. The finding of these words must
take into account the style of the author, which depends on his personality and
also on the time and circumstances in which the work came into being. This is
frequently impossible because of the language differences. A translator should
concern himself with the words used by the author of the original, which
sufficiently characterise the author. It is important what he wrote, how he did it is
of less importance. Nevertheless, language is often symbolic or informative and
these subtle nuances can be most easily noticed by translators being
acquainted with the same literary genre. In these circumstances perfection in
translation is easier to achieve.

Taking into account the above, we may find the answer to why it is claimed
that poetry should be translated by poets and prose by prose writers. This is
especially true in case of poetry. If a translation of prose becomes longer due to
e.g.: language differences, as in the case of Polish translations of English
works, consequences are not very important. However, in poetry, where the
number of words is part of the poem’s nature, the importance is far greater.
That is why achieving a perfect translation of poetry is rarely unattainable or as
Lipiński (2000:171) claims ‘poezja jest absolutnie nieprzetłumaczalna’.
Translations of prose are more likely to be named so, yet there will always be
an unsatisfied reader that will refuse to recognise the perfection of the
translation.
 22

Chapter 3:
Untranslatability: the reasons

Most foreign languages that people encounter in well developed countries

belong to the family of Indo-European languages. The communities speaking
these languages are organised alike and adhere to similar cultural and social
patterns. However, even among the languages of this cultural circle, the use of
similar grammatical and semantic constructions is often impossible. As Eva
Hoffman (1991:43) in her work states: ‘In order to translate a language, or a
text, without changing its meaning, one would have to transport its audience
as well’. One could ask about the purpose of approaching the impossible. G.
Steiner (1975:249) answers this question: ‘there are texts which we cannot yet
translate but which may through linguistic changes, (...) refinement of
interpretative means (...) (and) shifts in receptive sensibility, become
translatable in future’. This chapter deals with the notion of and the reasons for
untranslatability in the case of English-Polish translation.

3.1 Untranslatable matters

As it was mentioned earlier in this work, translations other than literary are to
some extent easier to achieve. This also applies to the notion of
untranslatability. Translation of literature is considered to contain many issues
impossible to translate. The question of whether untranslatability can be
scientifically explained had its answer in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which
assumed that human languages determine the structure of the real world as
perceived by human beings, rather than vice versa, and that this structure is
different and incommensurable from one language to another. Even though this
hypothesis collapsed due to its imperfections, some linguists claim that it still
explains the reason why literary translation is in many cases untranslatable.
 23

Amateurs interested in the problem of untranslatability think that the main

problem with translation are the difficulties resulting from the difference in the
structures of the output and the target languages. But, Korzeniowska &
Kuhiwczak (1998:83) claim that ‘wyraźnie najliczniejszymi przyczynami
nieprzekładalności są terminy oraz aluzje erudycyjne (i.e. allusions that, to be
understood, require the reader to possess vast knowledge of realities) należące
do sfery tradycji kulturowych, a nie struktury języka’. Catford (1965:93) is of the
same opinion that limited translatability is caused mainly by cultural
untranslatability which emerges when: ‘a situational feature, functionally
relevant for the source language text, is completely absent from the culture of
which target language is a part’.

3.2 The reasons for untranslatability

Untranslatability cannot be treated as a rule stating that it is impossible to

create a text in the target language in the form of a text previously written in the
source language. Untranslatability concerns some special cases that can be
interpreted as the exceptions to the general rule of translating from one
language to another. Untranslatability arises due to the differences in the
structures of languages. The differences can generally be of two kinds. The
first results from the fact that the target language does not contain certain
structures existing in the source language. The second obstacle is the fact that
it is impossible to express in the target language some concepts that can be
expressed in the source language. These two reasons can be divided into many
elements, which will be described below. Obviously, the following reasons for
untranslatability do not constitute the whole problem. They are useful examples
as far as the two translations of Winnie-the-Pooh by Milne are concerned.

3.2.1 Differences in language structure

The problem stems from the fact that translation of certain structural features
of a language is not a formal operation i.e. does not influence the contents of a
 24

given text. The problem of impossibility to translate entire contents of a text, due
to the differences of structure, exists in many languages and this applies also to
English-Polish translation. A good example supporting the assumption that the
differences in structure affect the contents of the target language is given by
Korzeniowska & Kuhiwczak (1998:25): Let us assume that there are two
versions (English and Polish) of a given short story. The sentence in English
reads Astrid spoke first, whereas Polish counterpart reads as Astrid odezwała
się pierwsza (Astrid is a Scandinavian female name, but let us assume that the
readers do not know it). Both sentences are correct and seem to be well
translated as well. Yet, in the case of the Polish language, the structure gives
more information about the character. The structure ‘odezwała się’ means that
Astrid is a female. The English version ‘spoke’ does not give this information.
This does not cause any difficulties to a translator as long as the sex of the
character is not the key information. If not revealing this information was the
author’s intention and the changes made by the translator do not work, then this
is the case of untranslatability caused by the differences in structure of the
output and input languages. The differences in morphology belong to this
category.

Differences in morphology

Complex morphology, especially the existence of grammatical gender, in

languages such as Polish, allows Polish speakers to build long and complex
sentences with the main sentence constituting the core. Those structural
features indicate to the reader which sentence elements he should join. In
languages of poor morphology, such as English, the existence of these
sentences is almost impossible because the longer the sentence is, the more
incomprehensible it becomes. Long sentences are common in Polish whereas
in English they sound clumsy. With short sentences the situation is reversed. As
long as the length of sentences does not affect the structure and style of the
original, it is not a nuisance. If it does affect the structure, however, it is an
example of untranslatability resulting from the differences in morphology of the
languages of the original and of the translation.
 25

Another aspect of the differences in morphology is English articles. Their

functions are diverse and difficult to specify. Generally, the definite article
placed before a noun in singular, indicates that the speaker has in mind one
particular object. Added to a noun in plural, the article indicates that the speaker
has in mind either the objects mentioned before or all objects of a given group.
The indefinite article indicates an unspecified element of a given class. Thus,
the articles function as complementary modifiers added to a noun or nouns.
Everyone who had at least basic contact with English understands what
difficulties the articles cause. To express the full meaning of English
constructions with articles is impossible in the languages devoid of them. To
some extent, the contents of the English original can be expressed, but the
translation becomes a mere interpretation of the original.

The group of language aspects impossible to translate includes also verb

forms. Languages differ as far as forms of expressing time are concerned. In
the case of English-Polish translation, English continuous tenses cause most
trouble. Both English sentences like: He is working in the shop and He works in
the shop can be translated as On pracuje w warsztacie, yet the first sentence
indicates temporary activity, whereas the second sentence informs the reader
about habitual action. This case of untranslatability is not very problematic as
similar sentences are usually presented in context. Nevertheless, lack of
appropriate structure in the target language makes the original in English more
accurate and more concise. Present Perfect does not inflict as much trouble
because the sentence: I have been working in the shop for a year can be easily
rendered by the present tense in Polish: Pracuję w warsztacie od roku.
Although the above cases of untranslatability are not very problematic, one
must remember that ‘każda interpretacja w przekładzie dokonana przy pomocy
innych niż w oryginale środków (. . .) oznacza poważne ryzyko zniekształcenia
lub zbytniego zwężenia sensu oryginału (. . .) (co) grozi bardzo dalekim
odbiegnięciem od oryginału’. (Korzeniowska & Kuhiwczak 1998:33)
 26

3.2.2 Impossibility to convey concepts

Another group of untranslatable matters is situations when associations

connected with a given word or set of words from the original, do not arise
among the target language readers. To this group belong some units of
measure, excluding metric system, that are of local character such as yard or
feet. Obviously, these units are not inconceivable and can be easily converted
into the units of the target language, yet the proper names of the units are
untranslatable. They can only be explained by conversing them. The above
units have Polish equivalents jard and stopa, but they hardly mean anything to a
Polish reader not knowing the Anglo-Saxon realities.

Allusions also contribute to the problem of untranslatability. Basically they

rely on the author’s appeal to the reader’s experience in order to evoke certain
associations. The reader must possess at least a basic knowledge of the
realities to understand the author’s allusions. This procedure assures the author
that his work will be understood solely by the group of people to whom he
directs it. In the case of translation the probability of incomprehension of the
allusions rises significantly because the translator may not possess enough
understanding of the realities from among the original’s language speakers.
That is why, the translator may explain the meaning of a given allusion, but he
is not able to translate it, as, in the mind of the target language reader, it will
not evoke appropriate associations or impressions.

The last aspect of untranslatability of concepts are proper names invented

by the original’s author. Most of them can be translated because they have
either appropriate counterparts in the target language or functional
counterparts, for example a mongrel dog in English is frequently called doggy,
the Polish functional counterpart is burek, or ciapek. Yet, in some cases proper
names cannot be translated, which often impoverishes the translation.
 27

Chapter 4:
The comparison of the original and the two translations

There are no two exact translations. Although they may be similar, an

average reader, who does not know the original, will be able to state that the
translations differ substantially after reading the initial pages of the books. What
is interesting for translators or linguists is the strategies of translation adopted
by the translators. The strategies and, what follows, the choices of translators
condition the form of a given translation. The purpose of this chapter is to
attempt to present the choices of Irena Tuwim and Monika Adamczyk-
Garbowska while translating A. A. Milne’s Winnie-the-Pooh. In the first part of
this chapter, the two translations will be outlined in order to emphasise the
translators’ choices presented later. Eventually, the examples of the translators’
choices will be presented and discussed.

4.1 The profiles of the two translations

Although Kubuś Puchatek and Fredzia Phi-Phi are translations of the same
book, they differ substantially. What differs them is the style and, to some
extent, the content. The translators faced the same tasks, yet they approached
them in different ways. Tuwim’s translation is considered by experts as an
adaptation, whereas Adamczyk-Garbowska’s translation is thought to be an
attempt to create a faithful translation.

4.1.1 Kubuś Puchatek

Winnie-the-Pooh was first translated into Polish by Irean Tuwim in 1954. Her
translation, even though controversial, is generally believed to match the
original in literary greatness and is largely responsible for the rapid and fine
 28

blending of the main character into the Polish consciousness. Tuwim gave
Winnie-the-Pooh a very Polish name Kubuś Puchatek, which is a nice male
teddy bear. Presumably because of this, a male voice dubbed the main
character’s voice when the Kubuś Puchatek cartoon appeared on the Polish
Television. But what Tuwim is mainly praised for is her ability to render the
neologisms and sayings of the characters. Her translation has become an
integral part of Polish culture and many readers do not realise that this story is
of English origin. The negative reviews stated that Kubuś Puchatek is more an
adaptation than a faithful translation. Yet, Korzeniowska (1998:59) is of the
opinion that ‘the omissions or additions introduced by Tuwim are of no
significance whatsoever to the overall story’. Although Tuwim’s translation is
not faithful in the full meaning of the word, she managed to render the
atmosphere of the original.

4.1.2 Fredzia Phi-Phi

This translation is relatively young and, as it was achieved in the 1980s. Since
its publication it has triggered spontaneous reactions expressing both approval
and rejection. The very title Fredzia Phi-Phi is controversial for many readers. It
is claimed that the name Fredzia, which is a female name, is unsuitable for a
bear. This is partially true because in the Polish tradition a teddy bear is always
a male and indeed this combination sounds queer. However, in the original the
bear is called Winnie, which is a diminutive of Winnifred – a female name. The
translator claims that the title was intended to evoke consternation in the
reader. The remaining part of the main character’s name is an analogy. English
word pooh is an exclamation of disdain, contempt, or disgust. Polish phi seems
to be the nearest equivalent. Joining Fredzia with phi results in the Polish name
of the character. This attention to detail uncovers the true nature of Adamczyk-
Garbowska’s translation. Her intention was to produce a translation that would
be as faithful to the original as possible. As she wrote in the preface to Fredzia
Phi-Phi:
 29

‘This book is an attempt to deliver to the Polish reader a faithful translation, if it is at all possible
being full of linguistic experiments, plays on words and neologisms that can be translated in
various ways. Working on the original I attempted to appeal to both young and adult readers
(though this book is destined mainly for the former). I wanted the adult to have fun reading the
book with their children (...).

I tried to be as faithful to the original as possible, yet avoiding philological literalness, which may
harm the original more than a free translation. There are many fragments in the book that may
seem clumsy. These are the endeavours to present the extraordinary language of the original,
which comprises infantile language and a parody of the language spoken by adults.

Both in the practice and theory of artistic translation there is a tendency to either bring the
original closer to the reader or bring the reader closer the original. Although I inclined to the
latter, I attempted to reach a compromise.

(A translation from Polish, see Appendices p. 16)

4.2 The choices of Irena Tuwim and Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska

The art of translation is very flexible. It can be said that there are as many
different translations as many translators. This is also true in case of
transposing the same text. Irena Tuwim and Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska
strove to overcome the obstacles imposed by untranslatability.

4.2.1 Translation of proper names

Most translators face the issue of translating or not the proper names.
Sometimes this is conditioned on tradition. Some names are polonised, others
are retained in their original version. Presented characters, situations or
problems are often used as symbols or models. There are polonised names of
cartoon characters such as: Sknerus or Pszczółka Maja, but there are also:
Toady, Tom, Jerry or Tweety. Why does it not happen that some names are not
translated? Obviously, some of them are names that do not carry any meaning
and leaving them in the original version does not impoverish the translation.
Yet, in some cases when they do carry a meaning, their original version will not
transfer appropriate allusions or connotations. For example, for an Englishman
the name Toady, belonging to a character from the Gummibears cartoon is a
sufficient source of information about the character’s nature. However, this
 30

name does not mean anything to an average Pole. If it was translated as, for
instance, Lizus the situation would be completely different.

Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska and Irena Tuwim approached the task of

translating proper names differently. The former invented Polish counterparts of
the English names. Tuwim adapted the names in order to be better received by
young readers. The choice of the name of the main character has been
explained earlier, but still there are other names that must be considered. The
closest friend of Winnie in the original version is called Christopher Robin.
Tuwim regarded this name as very serious, which did not fit her adaptation.
That is why, she translated his name as Krzyś, which indeed sounds more
appropriate if the target audience are mainly young readers. Adamczyk-
Garbowska was consistent with her strategy of producing a faithful translation
and named the boy Krzysztof Robin. The place where the plot unfolds, the
Hundred Acre Wood in Kubuś Puchatek is called Stumilowy Las, whereas in
Fredzia Phi-Phi the name is Stuakrowy Las. Both names are incomprehensible
for children, but stumilowy as in Stumilowe Buty stronger influences the
children’s imagination and belongs to the canon of Polish fables.

Another category comprises neologisms such as Heffalump, Woozle, Wizzle,

Eeyore, Kanga and Baby Roo. These names of the characters were invented by
Milne to resemble an elephant, a weasel, a donkey and a kangaroo. The first
three names are similar in sound, the fourth is a kind of an onomatopoeic word
presenting the sound made by a donkey. The last two names origin from
bisecting the word kangaroo. Irena Tuwim gave the characters names, which ,
are either descriptive or children-like. That is why, in Kubuś Puchatek they are
called respectively Słoń, łasica, lis, Kłapouchy, Kangurzyca and Maleństwo.
Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska invented names, which are both fairly faithful
and children-like. Fredzia Phi-Phi houses Soń, Łesica, Łysica, Iijaa, Mama
Kanga and Mały Gurek. There were not any difficulties with the translation of
the names that are regular English words. That is why, Piglet, Rabbit, Owl or
the Six Pine Trees were translated by both translators as Prosiaczek, Królik,
Sowa and Sześć Sosen.
 31

Although the names invented by Tuwim have melted into the Polish realities,
from the viewpoint of translation, the choices of Adamczyk-Garbowska appear
to be more accurate and more correct. Here, the probable reason that the
names invented by the latter were not so widely accepted is the fact that
Tuwim’s translation was achieved earlier and people tend to respond positively
to things they already know and are quite suspicious of the new. The same text
was dealt with in various ways, which confirms the assumption that there are
not two exact translations and that the art of translation is not governed by strict
rules, thus the art itself cannot be expressed in a single definition.

4.2.2 Translation of the capitalised expressions and plays on words

Winnie-the-Pooh by Milne is considered to be written in a very original

language. The book is full of capitalised expressions and puns. They became
an integral part of Winnie-the-Pooh. Everyone who has read the book admits
that the expressions and plays on words contribute to its uniqueness. Both
Irena Tuwim and Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska approached them differently.
The former did not capitalise all the expressions, whereas Adamczyk-
Garbowska capitalised them all. It is likely that Tuwim did not capitalise all the
expressions because she regarded some of them as unnecessary departures
from the canons of the Polish language. However, she maintained some of
them to render the style of the original. Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska following
the strategy of faithful translation capitalised all the respective words and
expressions.

This book is relatively easy to translate, yet it contains a few plays on words
that inconvenienced both translators. The difficulties stem mainly from the
differences between English and Polish languages. Puns are similar to idiomatic
expressions and they are the most difficult to translate due to the fact that the
target language usually lacks appropriate vocabulary. For example, the fantasy
animal inhabiting the Hundred Acre Wood was named Heffalump. In the story,
Piglet and Pooh went hunting Heffalumps. Milne invented a verb to heffalump
 32

which was intended to imitate sounds of a Heffalump. Tuwim called the animal
simply Słoń and to render the neologism to heffalump she used the expression
słoniowe pomruki. Adamczyk-Garbowska coined sonić się from Soń.

Another difficulty in translating Winnie-the-Pooh was the play on the word

pole. In English it may mean both a stick and one of the antipodal points where
the earth's axis of rotation meets the earth's surface. In the adventure when the
characters from the book went for an expedition to the North Pole, Pooh
discovered the Pole (found a stick). In Polish, there is a lack of words that could
render the meaning of the original. Both translators used the homonym biegun,
meaning the (North) Pole (Biegun Północny) or a part of the rocking horse (koń
na biegunach). However, Tuwim added new facts to the story as an introduction
to the play on the word biegun. The pun ambush gorse-bush was also
translated differently by the translators. In Kubuś Puchatek the twisted English
word gorse-bush (ambush) was replaced with posadzka (rhyming with
zasadzka) and in Fredzia Phi-Phi readers find zasadzka – zakąska. Again,
Tuwim added to the book the story, in which Pooh falls on the floor (posadzka).
Adamczyk-Garbowska kept to the original and appealed to the earlier adventure
from the book, when Pooh eats too much (and gets stuck in the Rabbit’s
burrow). Similarly, in Winnie-the-Pooh the characters go for and expotition not
expedition, in Kubuś Puchatek they go for a przyprawa (not wyprawa) and in
Fredzia Phi-Phi the word ekspertycja (ekspedycja) was used.

4.2.3 Translation of nursery rhymes

The last group of untranslatable matters is nursery rhymes. Although nursery

rhymes cannot be compared to poetry, there are some similarities between the
two. The main similarity is that in most cases poems, as well as nursery rhymes
are written in rhyme. Due to the differences between the source and target
languages, it is impossible to translate faithfully the content of the original.
Winnie-the-Pooh abounds in rhymes. Below is one of them:
 33

Winnie-the-Pooh Kubuś Puchatek Fredzia Phi-Phi

They all went off to discover
the Pole,
Owl and Piglet and Rabbit and
all;
It’s a Thing you Discover, as
I’ve been told
By Owl and Piglet and Rabbit
and all.
Eeyore, Christopher Robin
and Pooh
And Rabbit’s relations all went
too—
And where the Pole was none
of them knew...
Sing Hey! For Owl and Rabbit
and all.
Wszyscy w długim szli
szeregu,
By Północny odkryć Biegun.
Więc na przedzie kroczył
Krzyś,
Za nim Królik, potem Miś.
A za Misiem szedł Prosiaczek,
Co wełniany wziął serdaczek.
Gardząc wręcz
niebezpieczeństwem
Kangurzyca szła z
Maleństwem.
Osioł, Sowa Przemądrzała,
Wykształcona i bywała,
A na końcu – cała klika
Krewnych-i-znajomych Królika.
Ruszyli wszyscy, by odkryć
Biegun,
Sowa, Prosiaczek i reszta w
szeregu.
To coś do odkrycia, ten cały
Biegun,
Wiem od Królika i innych w
szeregu.
Iijaa, Krzysztof Robin i Fredzia
Phi-Phi,
I krewni Królika tez z nami szli.
A gdzie jest ten Biegun, nie
wiedzieli.
Hej ho, na Biegun idziemy w
szeregu!

Obviously, the rhymes differ both in structure and content. However, in this
case the matter is more important than the manner. A translation close to a
faithful translation would be possible, yet presumably it would be clumsy and it
would sound artificial. It must not be forgotten that rhymes of this kind are
designed for children. That is why the language should imitate the funny and full
of neologisms and diminutives child-like language. Adamczyk-Garbowska’s
rhyme seems to be more faithful in the content to Winnie-the-Pooh. Tuwim
resigned from mere linguistic faithfulness and adapted her rhyme to the canons
of the language spoken by children.
 34

Conclusions

In this work I have explained Irena Tuwim’s and Monika Adamczyk-

Garbowska’s ways of overcoming untranslatability while translating Milne’s
book. The ways differ substantially. Apart from the differences resulting from the
unique abilities of both translators, another important aspect is the strategies of
translation, which they have adopted in approaching Winnie-the-Pooh. Tuwim’s
translation is considered by some linguists to be more of an adaptation than a
translation. On the other hand, Adamczyk-Garbowska’s translation appears to
be an attempt to deliver a faithful translation. The examples presented in the
last chapter of this work prove the assumption that although Adamczyk-
Garbowska was more precise as far as the faithfulness is concerned, Tuwim
managed to render the atmosphere of the original more successfully, though
her translation is less faithful.

Untranslatability turned to be conditioned by various factors. One obvious

factor is that the target and source languages differ in structure. This applies
also to English-Polish translation. The languages differ mainly in morphology.
The grammatical gender exists in the Polish language, whereas English lost it
completely. In addition, the structure of sentences differs between the two
languages. Long sentences are common in Polish, but in case of English long
sentences are almost impossible because the longer the sentence in English is,
the more incomprehensible it becomes. What is more, another aspect of
untranslatability is English articles. Polish lacks their counterparts and that is
why faithful translation is impossible when expressions with articles are
concerned. The last reason of untranslatability dealt with in this thesis is the
verb forms. Although most English expressions in the Present Simple and
Present Continuous tenses can be rendered by appropriate expressions in
Polish, the meaning will never be identical. The above statements portray the
matters that are impossible to translate faithfully.
 35

The main, and the most difficult to tackle, reason of untranslatability is the
cultural differences, which make the translation of certain events, allusions and
nuances characteristic of one cultural circle impossible to render in the words of
the language spoken by the target audience. Let me quote Eva Hoffman again
who said that ‘in order to translate a language or a text, without changing its
meaning, one would have to transport its audience as well’. This is the true
nature of the notion of untranslatability that has been my concern in this work.
Finally, to add some optimism, G. Steiner must be cited who said that ‘the texts
which we cannot yet translate (...) may (...) become translatable in future’.
 36

Bibliography:
Adamczyk-Garbowska, Monika. (1990). Fredzia Phi-Phi. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Lubelskie.
(a translation from English)

Brandes, M. Comprehension, style, translation and their interaction. [in:] Translation As Social
Action. Zlateva, Palma. (ed.) (1993). London: Routledge.

Catford, J. C. (1965). A linguistic theory of translation. London: Oxford University Press.

Dedecius, Kari. (1974). Notatnik tłumacza. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie. (a translation from
German)

Dzierżanowska, Halina. (1998). Przekład tekstów nieliterackich na przykładzie języka angielskiego.

Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

Hoffman, Eva. (1995). Lost in translation. A life in a new language. London: Aneks Publishers.

Korzeniowska, Aniela. (1998). Explorations in Polish-English mistranslation problems. Warszawa:

Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.

Korzeniowska, Aniela. & Kuhiwczak, Piotr. (1994). Successful Polish-English translation.

Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

Lipiński, Krzysztof. (2000). Vademecum tłumacza. Kraków: Wydawnictwo IDEA.

Milne, A. A. (1994). Winnie-the-Pooh. London: Penguin.

Newmark, Peter. (1982). Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Nowicka-Jeżowa, A. & Knysz-Tomaszewska, D. (1997). Przekład literacki. Teoria Historia

Współczesność. Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

Pieńkos, Jerzy. (1993). Przekład i tłumacz we współczesnym świecie. Warszawa: Polskie

Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

Savory, Theodore. (1968). The art of translation. London: Jonathan Cape Ltd.

Steiner, George. (1975). After Babel. Aspects of language and translation. London: Oxford
University Press.

Tuwim, Irena. (1982). Kubuś Puchatek. Warszawa: Nasza Ksiegarnia. (a translation from English)

Wojtasiewicz, Olgierd. (1957). Wstęp do teorii tłumaczenia. Wrocław: Zakład im. Ossolińskich.
 37

Appendices:

1
A. The breakdown of proper names, capitalised expressions,
neologisms and rhymes ............................................................ 2

B. Foreword to Kubuś Puchatek in Tuwim’s translation ............ 14

d B..Foreword to Fredzia Phi-Phi in Adamczyk-Garbowska’s

translation .............................................................................. 15

D. From the author of Fredzia Phi-Phi ....................................... 16

 38

1. The breakdown of proper names, capitalised

expressions, neologisms and rhymes, taken from Winnie-the-
Pooh, Kubuś Puchatek and Fredzia Phi Phi, listed as they
appear in the text.

Winnie-the- Kubuś Puchatek Fredzia Phi Phi

Pooh

Chapter 1

Christopher Robin Krzyś Krzysztof Robin

Sanders Woreczko Sanders
Complaining Żałosna Piosenka Użalanka
Song
Piglet Prosiaczek Prosiaczek
Rabbit Królik Królik
twenty feet pół łokcia dziesięć stóp
Silly Old Bear! Głupi, poczciwy Miś Stary, głupi Misiek
Suspicious zwąchać Podejrzewać
Cloud Song Piosenka Chmurek Chmurkowa Piosenka
gun fuzja strzelba
Heffalump Słoń Soń
Isn’t it funny How a Dziwny jest niedźwiedzi ród, Takie misie są,
bear likes honey? Buzz! Że tak bardzo lubi miód, Że do miodu lgną.
Buzz! Buzz! I wonder Bzyk-bzyk-bzyk, ram-pam- Bzzy, bzzy, bzzy,
why he does? pam, Dlaczego właśnie my?
Co to znaczy? Nie wiem sam.
It’s a very funny Gdyby Pszczołami były Gdyby niedźwiedzie były
thought that, if Bears Niedźwiadki, Pszczołami,
were Bees,/ They’d Nisko na ziemi miałyby chatki, Gniazda swe miałyby pod
build their nests at the A że tak nie jest, oto drzewami.
bottom of trees./ And przyczyna, A gdyby tak było (Pszczoły
that being so (if the Że się musimy na drzewa
Bees were Bears),/ We wspinać. – Misiami)
shouldn’t have to climb Nie musiałbym wspinać się
up all these stairs. tymi schodami.
 39

How sweet to be a Jak to miło Chmurką być, Takie chmurki są,

Niebem płynąć jak po wodzie. Że w głos śpiewać chcą.
cloud Mała Chmurka na dzień dobry
Floating in the Blue! Taką piosenkę śpiewa co „Miło być Chmurką tą,
Every little cloud dzień: Co po Niebie pływa!”
Always sings aloud. - Jak to miło Chmurką być, Dumny jest ten, kto
„How sweet to be a Niebem płynąć jak po wodzie Dziś jest Chmurką tą.
Cloud I od rana na dzień dobry
Floating in the Blue!” Taką piosenkę śpiewać co
It makes him very dzień:
proud - Jak to miło Chmurką być...
To be a little cloud.

Chapter 2

Edward Bear Miś Niedźwiedź Pluszowy

Stoutness ćwiczenia gimnastyczne na Ćwiczenia Wyszczuplające
schudnięcie
Exercises
Forest Las Las
Company Towarzystwo Towarzystwo
Listening-to-Me- słuchanie Mruczanki Słuchanie Mojej Mruczanki
Humming
Honey or condensed Miód, czy marmoladę do Do chleba miód, czy mleko
milk with your bread? chleba? skondensowane?
a little something małe Conieco coś niecoś
Sustaining Book książka kucharska Pokrzepiająca Książka
Wedged Bear in biedny miś w wielkim Niedźwiedź Uwięziony w
Great Tightness potrzasku? Wielkiej Ciasnocie
Tra-la-la, tra-la-la, Tra-la-la, tra-la-la Tra-la-la, tra-la-la,
Tra-la-la, tra-la-la, Tra-la-la, tra-la-la, Tra-la-la, tra-la-la,
Rum-tum-tiddle-um- Rum-tum-tum, tra-la-bum. Ram-tam-trili-lam-tam.
tum. Rum-tum-tum, tra-la-bum. Trili-lili, trili-lili,
Tiddle-iddle, tiddle- Trili-lili, trili-lili,
iddle, Ram-tam-tam-trili-lam.
Tiddle-iddle, tiddle-
iddle,
Rum-tum-tum-tiddle-
um.

Chapter 3

Woozle łasica Łysica

Trespassers W WSTĘP BRON(EK) PRZEJŚCIE W(ICEK)
Trespassers Wstęp Bronisław Przejście Wincenty
Will(iam)
 40

Hostile Animals Nieprzyjacielskie Zwierzęta Wrogie Zwierzęta

Remove Stiffness tropił zwierzynę Pozbyć się Zesztywnienia
after Tracking po Tropieniu
Wizzle lis Łesica
Hostile Intent Wrogie Zamiary Wrogie Zamiary
Out of all Danger poza wszelkim Poza Wszelkim
niebezpieczeństwem Niebezpieczeństwem
Foolish and Deluded (strasznie głupia) gapa Byłem Głupi i dałem się
Nabrać
I am a Bear of No Jestem Miś o Bardzo jestem Niedźwiedziem w
Brain at all Małym Rozumku ogóle bez Rozumu
Luncheon Time pora obiadu Pora Obiadu

Chapter 4

Eeyore Kłapouchy Iijaa

Good Deal zupełnie jasne Tłumaczy Bardzo Wiele
How Like Them I jak tu mieć dla nich serce To Do nich Podobne
the Hundred Acre Stumilowy Las Stuakrowy Las
Wood
Owl Sowa Przemądrzała Sowa
The Chestnuts Kasztany „Pod Kasztanami”
PLES RING IF AN PRO SZE ZWONIDŹ PROSZEM ZWODIDŹ JEŹLI
RNSER IS REQIRD JEŹLIKTO HCE PO RADY KTO POTSZEBUJE
OTPOWIEDŹI
PLEZ CNOKE IF AN PROSZĘ PÓKADŹ JEŹLIKTO PROSZ PÓKACI JEŚLI KTO
RNSR IS NOT NIEHCEPO RADY NIE POTSZEBÓJE
REQIRD OTPOWIEĆ
WOL (Owl) --- OWSA
MEASLES and obwarzanek lub jakkolwiek RÓŻYCZKA czy GRZANKI Z
BUTTEREDTOAST bądź MASŁEM
Terrible and Sad okropne i smutne Okropnie i Smutno
customary procedure najczęściej praktykowane Zwyczajowa Procedura Æ
Æ Crustimoney postępowanie Æ najgęściej Trzydżemowa Prosiękura
Proceedcake polukrowane postękiwanie
Bear of Very Little Miś o Bardzo Małym Niedźwiedź o Bardzo
Brain Rozumku Małym Rozumku
(First) Issue a wyznaczenie Wyznaczyć Nagrodę
Reward wynagrodzenia
 41

Who found the Kto znalazł ogon? Kto znalazł ogon?

Ja – rzekł Puchatek -Ja – czyli Phi
Tail? O trzy na drugą -Po drugiej trzy
„I” said Pooh, W rzeczywistości było to (Tak naprawdę to trzy po
„At a quarter to two kwadrans po jedenestej)
jedenastej)
(Only it was quarter Dzisiaj, we czwartek
Phi znalazł ogon!
to eleven really),
I found the Tail!”

Chapter 5

the Hundred Acre Stuakrowy Las Stumilowy Las

Wood
the Six Pine Trees Sześć Sosen Sześć Sosen
a Cunning Trap Bardzo Pomysłowa Pułapka Chytra Pułapka
a Very Deep Pit Strasznie Głęboki Dół Bardzo Głęboki Dół
a Very Clever Brain Bardzo Mądry Rozum Bardzo Mądra Głowa
a Jar of Honey garnek miodu Garnek Miodu
acorns – Haycorns żołędzie Łożędzie
HUNNY MJUT MJUT
It’s very, very funny, To po prostu niebywałe, Co się stało? Co za dziwy?
‘Cos I know I had Pełen garnek miodu miałem, W garnku tym był miód
some honey: A na garnku tak jak drut prawdziwy,
‘Cos it had a label on, Napisane było MJUT. Było na nim napisane,
Saying HUNNY, Garnek śliczny był, nowiutki, Że to właśnie MJUT.
A goloptious full-up pot Kolorowe miał obwódki, Pełen garnek, miód
too, Wiec ogromnie wspaniały
And I don’t know To mnie Nie rozumiem, co się stało,
where it’s got to, Smuci, Co za licho go porwało?
No, I don’t know where Że mój garnek się zarzucił. Gdzie się podział miód?
it’s gone—
Well, it’s funny.
Counting Sheep liczyć owce Liczyć Owce
Counting Heffalumps, liczyć Słonie; 587-my liczyć Sonie; 587-my
587th
Fond of Pigs czy lubi prosiaczki? Lubi Świnki
Fierce with Pigs groźny dla prosiaczków (obchodzi się) Gwałtownie
ze Świnkami
Very Fierce with Pigs Bardzo Groźne dla (Sonie obchodzą się)
and Bears prosiaczków i misiów Bardzo Gwałtownie i ze
Świnkami, i z
Niedźwiedziami
a Clever Idea Mądra Myśl Świetny Pomysł
„(...) because he „(...) bo usłyszał jego „(...) bo usłyszał, że (Soń)
could hear it słoniowe pomruki bardzo soni się po pułapce jak nie
heffalumping about it wyraźnie.” wiadomo co.”
like anything.”
 42

Sadness and Despair (jęk) Smutku i Rozpaczy zaryczał głosem pełnym

Smutku i Rozpaczy
Horrible Heffalump; Słoniowy Strach! Słoniocy! Saszny Stroń! Strotunku
Help, help, a Herrible Słoniocy!; Strachowy Stromocy! Paszny Stoń!
Hoffalump!; Hoff, Pom!; Pomocny Strach! Satunku Somocy! Raszny
hoff, a Herrible Słoniocy! Poń!
Horralump!; Holl,
holl, a Hoffable
Hellerump!
a Foolish Piglet Głupi Prosiaczek Głupi Prosiaczek

Chapter 6

twenty yards --- dwadzieścia jardów

„(Gaiety. Song-and- „(Szaleństwo. Śpiew i „(Wesołość. Taniec i
Dance.) Here we go taniec) Ot, przechadzamy Śpiew.) Mało nas, mało nas
round the mullberry się teraz wśród do pieczenia chleba”
bush” (...) (Pooh) morwowych krzewów... (Puchatek zapytał)
asked: What (Puchatek:) “A co to znaczy „Jakiego chleba?”
mulberry bush is wśród morwowych - Bonomi ciągnął ponurym
that? krzewów? – O święta głosem Iijaa. „Francuskie
- bon-hommy went naiwności! – westchnął słowo, które znaczy
on Eeyore gloomily Kłapouchy. “Naiwność jest bonomi”
„French word to wyraz oznaczający
meaning bonhommy” dobrotliwą niewinność –
wyjaśnił”
Cottleston Pie Sroczka-Skoczka Bumbalala
Cottleston, Cottleston, Co to, Sroczko gadatliwa: Bumbala, bumbala, bumbala
Cottleston Pie. Kiedy brzęczy, to nie śpiewa, la,
A fly can’t bird, but a Powiedz, jak się to nazywa, Śpiewak nie szpaczy, choć
bird can fly. Sroczko-Skoczko gadatliwa? śpiewa szpak.
Ask me a riddle and I Dajcie zagadkę, odpowiem
reply: Co to, Sroczko gadatliwa: raz-dwa:
„Cottleston, Cottleston, Kiedy łazi, to nie pływa, „Bumbala, bumbala, bumbala
Cottleston Pie.” Powiedz, co to zwykle bywa, la”.
Sroczko-Skoczko gadatliwa?
Cottleston, Cottleston, Bumbala, bumbala, bumbala
Cottleston Pie, Co to, Sroczko gadatliwa: la,
A fish can’t whistle and Kiedy chodzi, to się kiwa, Ryba nie gwiżdże, nie
neither can I. Powiedz, co się za tym gwiżdżę i ja.
Ask me a riddle and I skrywa, Dajcie zagadkę, odpowiem
reply: Sroczko-Skoczko gadatliwa? raz-dwa:
„Cottleston, Cottleston, „Bumbala, bumbala, bumbala
Cottleston Pie.” la”.

Cottleston, Cottleston, Bumbala, bumbala, bumbala

Cottleston Pie, la,
Why does a chicken, I Dlaczego kurczak, któż
don’t know why. wiedzieć ma.
 43

Ask me a riddle and I Dajcie zagadkę, odpowiem

reply: raz-dwa:
„Cottleston, Cottleston, „Bumbala, bumbala, bumbala
Cottleston Pie.” la”.
Umty-tiddly, umty- Jumpa – jumpa – jumpa- Umpa, umpa, umpa, pa.
too. Here we go pa. Oto idziemy zbierajac Stoi różyczka w czerwonym
gathering Nuts and orzeszki i ciesząc się wieńcu.
May majem
a Very Sad Condition jest bardzo Smutny Bardzo Smutny Nastrój
„It’s just what Eeyore „To jest właśnie to, co „Tego właśnie potrzeba
wants to cheer him Kłapouchemu sprawi Iijaa, by go podnieść na
up. Nobody can be prawdziwą radość. Bo kogo duchu. Nie można się nie
uncheered with a nie ucieszyłby balonik?” podnieść z balonem”.
balloon”.
„Because my spelling „Bo ja piszę dobrze, tylko „Bo moja ortografia jest
is Wobbly” Koślawo” Chwiejna”
Useful Pot to Keep Praktyczna Baryłeczka do Użyteczny Garnek do
Things In Przechowywania Różnych Przechowywania Rzeczy
Różności
HIPY PAPY Z PĄWIĄSZĄWANIEM SPO POPO
BTHUTHDTH URORURODZIURODZIN SOPOPOPOSOPO WAWA
THUTHDA AWAWANJEM ROURO
BTHUTHDY ROURODZIZIN
(Balloon) „One of „Wielki kolorowy „Jedna z tych dużych
those big coloured przedmiot, który fruwa w kolorowych rzeczy do
things you blow up? powietrzu?. Szaleństwo, nadmuchiwania? Wesołość,
Gaiety, song-and- śpiew i taniec? Hopsasa? taniec i śpiew, Zielony
dance, here we are Walczyk, raz, dwa, trzy?”
and there we are?”
I burst the balloon! Prosiaczek: „...Ja go „balon pękł!”
(balonik) pękłem!”

Chapter 7

Kanga Kangurzyca Mama Kanga

Baby Roo Maleństwo Mały Gurek
Usual Way „...całkiem po prostu...” Zwyczajny Sposób
Strange Animal Dziwne Zwierzę Obce Zwierzę
Generally Regarded (Kangury) Są powszechnie Powszechnie Uchodzi za
as One of the Fiercer znane jako jedne z Jedno z Gwałtowniejszych
Animals Najdzikszych Zwierząt Zwierząt
General Remarks Uwagi ogólne Uwagi ogólne
More General Uwagi bardziej ogólne Uwagi bardziej ogólne
Remarks
Long Start (musimy uzyskać) Znaczną Ostro Wystartować
Przewagę
Thought/ Another Uwaga/ Innauwaga Myśl/ Druga myśl
 44

Thought
Discover the (nie) spostrzegłaby różnicy (Kanga) Zauważy Różnicę
Difference?
Aha! „akuku!” Aha!
Splendid Now Doskonale Doskonale
LINES WRITTEN BY A STROFY NAPISANE PRZEZ STROFY NAPISANE PRZEZ
BEAR OF VERY LITTLE MISIA O BARDZO MAŁYM NIEDŹWIEDZIA O BARDZO
BRAIN ROZUMKU MAŁYM ROZUMKU
On Monday, when the W poniedziałek, w chmurny Co poniedziałek przy
sun is hot dzień, pogodzie
I wonder to myself a Rozmyślałem idąc lasem: Myśl taka zawsze mnie
lot; „Czemu tym jest ważne ten, nachodzi:
„Now is it true, or is it A ów owym – tylko czasem?” Czy prawda to, czy może nie,
not,” A we wtorek myślę tak Że tamci to, a tamto te?
„That what is which (Było ciepło i słonecznie):
and which is what?” „To na pewno, tak czy siak, We wtorek, kiedy strasznie
Ale tamto – niekoniecznie”. pada,
On Tuesday, when it Znów we środę padał deszcz, Uczucie dziwne mnie napada.
hails and snows, Więc rozważam z No bo czy każdy o tym wie,
The feeling on me niepokojem: Że któryś tak, a któreś nie?
grows and grows „Wasi naszym mogą też,
That hardly anybody Lecz nie mogą twoje moim”. W środę, gdy w górze błękit
knows W czwartek znów był mróz i nieba,
If those are these or szron... I nic takiego robić nie trzeba,
these are those. Pomyślałem: „Coś tu będzie... Rozmyślam sobie, czy prawda
Bo choć tutaj dzisiaj on, to,
On Wednesday, when Ale oni zawsze wszędzie”. Że cośtam ktoś, a ktośtam
the sky is blue, W piątek... co?
And I have nothing
else to do, W czwartek, gdy zimno, że
I sometimes wonder it ojej,
it’s true A szron na drzewach skrzy, że
That who is what and hej,
what is who. Każdy z ochotą przyzna, że
Któryś tam coś, a któreś nie.
On Thursday, when it
starts to freeze W piątek
And hoar-frost twinkles
on the trees,
How very readily one
sees
That these are
whose – but whose
are these?

On Friday--
(Piglet) made a Roo- (Prosiaczek) wydał (Prosiaczek) wydał
noise piskliwy, cienki głosik gurkopodobny pisk
Terrifying Journey Straszliwa Podróż Przerażająca Podróż
 45

(Kanga was washing (...)gąbka (...) gąbka

Piglet with a) lathery
flannel (myjka)
(maybe it’s Pooh’s (Może to jakiś krewny (Może to jakiś krewny
relative?) Pootel, Puchatka?) Phi?) Phitek, Henryk
Henry Pootel Nieboraczek, Tomasz Phitek
Nieboraczek
hundred yards sto kroków sto jardów

Chapter 8

Expotition – Wyprawa – przyprawa; to Ekspedycja – Ekspertycja;

Expedition; it’s got się zaczyna na W; Przy... przez długie ‘j’; Eksper --
„x” in it; Expo—what
a simple meal of po prostu trochę skromny posiłek składający
marmelade spread marmolady lekko się z marmolady
lightly over a rozsmarowanej na plastrze rozsmarowanej cienko na
honeycomb or two czy dwóch miodu jednym czy dwóch
(plaster miodu) plastrach miodu
„Sing Ho! For the life „Hejże ha! Niech Kubuś „Hej ho niech żyją Misie
of a Bear.” żyje!” nam!
Sing Ho! For the life of Hejże ha! Niech Kubuś żyje! Hej ho, niech żyją Misie
a Bear! Niechaj tyje, je i pije! nam!Hej ho, niech żyją Misie
Sing Ho! For the life of Czy przy środzie, czy przy nam!
a Bear! wtorku Deszcz ani śnieg mnie nie
I don’t much mind if it On w miodowym jest obchodzi,
rains or snows, humorku. Bo mam na nosie pyszny
‘Cos I’ve got a lot of I niewiele o co dba, miodzik!
honey on my nice new Gdy na nosie miodek ma! Wszystko mi jedno, czy
nose! Więc śpiewajcie wszyscy deszcz czy chlapa,
I don’t much care if it dzisiaj Bo dużo miodu mam na
snows or thaws, Hymn na cześć Puchatka- łapach!
‘Cos I’ve got a lot of Misia, Hej ho, Niedźwiedzie!
honey on my nice Który swe Conieco zje Niech żyją Phi!
clean paws! Za godzine lub za dwie! Zjem sobie małe coś niecoś
Sing Ho! for a Bear! za godzinę lub trzy!
Sing Ho! for a Pooh!
Big Boots wysokie buty Wielkie Buty
Adventure Wyprawa Przygoda
Ready for Anything przygotowany na wszystko Gotowy na Wszystko
Provisions; Pro- Prowianty; Pro-reczy Pro-rzeczy
things
Pole, Mole Biegun czy coś takiego Biegun, Piegun
They all went off to Wszyscy w długim szli Ruszyli wszyscy, by odkryc
discover the Pole, szeregu, Biegun,
Owl and Piglet and By Północny odkryć Biegun. Sowa, Prosiaczek i reszta w
Rabbit and all; Więc na przedzie kroczył szeregu.
It’s a Thing you Krzyś,
To coś do odkrycia, ten
Discover as I’ve been
 46

Discover, as I’ve been

Za nim Królik, potem Miś. cały Biegun,
tole A za Misiem szedł Prosiaczek, Wiem od Królika i innych w
By Owl and Piglet and
Co wełniany wziął serdaczek. szeregu.
Rabbit and all. Gardząc wręcz Iijaa, Krzysztof Robin i
Eeyore, Christopher
niebezpieczeństwem
Fredzia Phi-Phi,
Robin and Pooh Kangurzyca szła z
I krewni Królika tez z nami
Maleństwem.
And Rabbit’s relations
all went too— Osioł, Sowa Przemądrzała, szli.
Wykształcona i bywała,
And where the Pole A gdzie jest ten Biegun, nie
A na końcu – cała klika wiedzie-li.
was none of them Krewnych-i-znajomych Hej ho, na Biegun idziemy
knew... Królika. w szeregu!
Sing Hey! For Owl and
Rabbit and all.
Dangerous Place Niebezpieczne Miejsce Niebezpieczne Miejsce
Alexander Beetle Alojzy Chrząszcz Aleksander Chrząszcz
Ambush Zasadzka Zasadzka
ambush (sometimes) Zasadzka – Posadzka Zasadzka – Za-co? Zakąska
gorse-bush
*1 „Pooh, who now *1 „Puchatek, który teraz *1 „Phi, który teraz już
knew what an wiedział już, czym jest wiedział, co to jest
Ambush was, said Zasadzka, powiedział, że zasadzka, stwierdził, że
that a gorse-bush kiedyś, kiedy spadł z Zakąska też go kiedyś
had sprung at him krzesełka, posadzka nagle zaskoczyła znienacka, gdy
suddenly one day wyskoczyła na niego i po jej zjedzeniu w domu
when he fell off a potem przez całe sześć dni Królika musiał potem przez
tree, and he had miał pełno siniaków” * tydzień służyć Królikowi za
taken six days to get - Nikt tutaj nie mówi o wieszak na ręczniki”.
all the prickles out of posadzkach – rzekła
himself” * Sowa...”
- „We are not talking
about gorse-bushes
said Owl...” *

*1 Garbowska translating the play on words ambush- gorse-bush came up with

Zasadzka-Zakąska that is, she recalled the earlier adventure of the main
character; Tuwim invented Zasadzka-Posadzka

Consideration, a little (miejcie trochę) Względów, Odrobina Zastanowienia,

Thought for Others trochę Troski o Innych trochę Troski o innych
*2 (Christopher Robin *2 Królik: „Najważniejsza *2 Królik: „Sądzę, że to po
& Rabbit – odeszli od rzecz to wiedzieć, gdzie to prostu jakis biegun
pozostałych bo CH.R. sterczy” zgubiony przez konia (...)
nie wiedział co to bo nazywa się biegun, a
North Pole): Rabbit: jeśli to biegun, to moim
„I suppose it’s just a zdaniem zgubił go jakiś
pole stuck in the koń, no bo kto inny mógłby
 47

ground? (...) because go zgubić? (...) Pytanie

calling it a pole, and tylko – gdzie on go zgubił?”
if it’s a pole, well, I
should think it would
be sticking in the
ground, shouldn’t
you, because there’d
be nowhere else to
stick it (...) the only
thing – where is it
sticking?”

*2 In Polish, the play on the word pole Æ the North Pole and a stick is
impossible to convey. That is why, Adamczyk-Garbowska made use of biegun
in koń na biegunach. Tuwim used the word as well, but later in the book.

Interesting Anecdote ciekawa Anegdotka pełna Zajmująca Anegdotka,

full of long words like słów jak Encyklopedia i pełną długich słów, takich
Encyciopedia and Rododendron jak Encyklopedia i
Rhododendron Rododendron
Sudden and Nagłe i Chwilowe Nagłe i Czasowe
Temporary Zanurzenie Zanurzenie
Immersion
Important Thing (...) Ważna Rzecz to Ważną Sprawą jest
to keep the Head Trzymanie Głowy Ponad Trzymanie Głowy Ponad
Above Water Wodą Wodą
*3 Pole – pole *3 biegun – Biegun *3 biegun – Biegun
Północny Północny

*3 Milne used the homonym pole, which cannot be translated into Polish. Irena
Tuwim added to Kubuś Puchatek a fragment about ‘Umówionej Kryjówce (she
capitalised it to maintain the style of the book) w gęstych zaroślach wikliny, o
której wiedzieli tylko Puchatek i Krzyś, gdzie przechowywali swoje stare
zabawki: drewnianego konia z odłamaną nogą, blaszany samochód, wózek
drabiniasty i dużo innych rzeczy, którymi bawić się już nie można, a z którymi
rozstać się ciężko’. In this case the translator used the word biegun ‘odłamany
od konia na biegunach’ – Biegun Północny.
Adamczyk-Garbowska used the word as well but she did not add anything to
the book. Phi ‘po prostu go znalazł’.

it’s just a Little Bit Mały dodatkowy Dodatkowy Kawałek z tyłu

Extra at the back Kawałeczek przyczepiony z
tyłu
NorTH PoLE BIEGUN PÓŁNOCNY BieGUN PUŁnocny OtkryTY
DICSovERED By ODKRYTY PRZEZ przes Phi Phi zNaLAZ GO
PooH PUCHATKA
PooH FouND IT PUCHATEK GO ZNALAZŁ
 48

little something Conieco małe coś niecoś

Chapter 9

bed korytko łóżeczko

Very Small Animal Bardzo Małe Zwierzątko Bardzo Małe Zwierzątko
Entirely Surrounded Zewsząd Otoczone Wodą Całkowicie Otoczone przez
by Water Wodę
Making a Loud Noise Wydawanie Dzikiego Ryku Rycząc Głośno Dopóki nie
Until Rescued aż nadeszłaby jakaś Pomoc Zostanie Uratowany
Right Thing To Do Wiedziałaby co zrobić, gdy Właściwa Rzecz do
When Surrounded by jest się zewsząd otoczonym Zrobienia w Razie
Water wodą Otoczenia przez Wodę
Learnt in Books Uczył się z Książek Nie Uczył się z Książek
Think of a Clever coś Mądrego Wymyślić obmyślić jakiś Mądry Plan
Plan
a Good Thing to Do zrobiłaby co należy zrobiłaby To, Co Należy
Zrobić
HELP! POMOCY! POMOCY
PIGLIT (ME); IT’S ME PROSIACEK (JA) PROŚACZEK (JA)
PIGLIT, HELP HELP! TO JA PROSIACEK. POMOCY, TO JA PROŚACZEK POMOCY
POMOCY! POMOCY!
Wild Woozles Dzikie Łasiczki Dzikie Łysice
Missage wiadomość Zawiadomość
Clever Readers Uczeni Mądrzy Czytacze
„The Floating Bear” „Pływający Miś” „Pływający Niedźwiedź”
Rescue is Coming Ratunek Nadchodzi Pomoc Nadchodzi
„An then This Bear, „Wówczas miły „A wtedy ten Niedźwiedź,
Pooh Bear, Winnie- Niedźwiadek, dzielny Miś, Misio Phi, Fredzia Phi-Phi,
the-Pooh, F.O.P. Kubuś Puchatek, nasz P.P. P.P. (Przyjaciel Prosiaczka),
(Friend of Piglet’s), (Przyjaciel Prosiaczka), K.K. (Kumpel Królika), O.B.
R.C. (Rabbit’s sympatyczny T.K. (Odkrywca Bieguna), P.I. i
Companion), P.D. (Towarzysz Królika), Z.O. (Pocieszyciel Iijaa i
(Pole Discoverer), poczciwy P.K. i Z.O. Znalazca Ogona) czyli Phi
E.C. and T.F. (Pocieszyciel Kłapouchego i we własnej osobie”
(Eeyore’s Comforter Znalazca Ogona), słowem
and Tail-finder) in Puchatek we własnej
fact, the Pooh osobie”
himself”
„The Brain of Pooh”„Rozumek Puchatka” „Rozum Phi-Phi”
Very Great Danger Bardzo Wielkie Bardzo Wielkie
Niebezpieczeństwo Niebezpieczeństwo
the Terrible Flood Straszliwa Powódź Straszliwa Powódź

Chapter 10
„the scent of may”
„will there be those
little cake things...?”
ANXIOUS POOH SONG:
3 Cheers for Pooh
(For Who?)
For Pooh—
(Why what did he do?)
I thought you knew;
He saved his friend from a
wetting!
3 Cheers for Bear!
For Bear—
He couldn’t swim,
But he rescued him!
(He rescued who?)
Oh, listen, do!
I am talking of Pooh?
(Of who?)
Of Pooh!
(I’m sorry I keep forgetting).
Well. Pooh was a Bear of
Enormous Brain—
(Just say it again!)
Of enormous brain—
(Of enormous what?)
Well, he ate a lot,
And I don’t know if he could
swim or not,
But he managed to float
On a sort of boat
(On a sort of what?)
Well, a sort of pot—
So now let’s give him three
hearty cheers
(So now let’s give him three
hearty whitches?)
And hope he’ll be with us for
years and years,
And grow in health and
wisdom and riches!
3 Cheers for Bear
(For where?)
For Bear—
3 Cheers for the wonderful
Winnie-the-Pooh!
(Just tell me, somebody –
WHAT DID HE DO?)
49
„majowe wonie” „zapach głogu”
„A czy będą tam takie małe „Czy będą tam takie małe
słodkie przedmiociki...?” ciasteczka...?”
PIOSENKA ZATROSKANEGO PIOSENKA ZANIEPOKOJONEGO PHI
PUCHATKA: Niech żyje Phi!
(Kto taki? Kto?)
Hejże Ha! Niech żyje Miś! No Phi...
(Kto? Kto taki? Co za Miś?) (Czemu? Czy zrobił co?)
Miś Puchatek, chyba wiecie. Tyle że ho!
Kubuś znany w całym Przyjaciela ocalił od zmoknięcia!
Niech żyje Miś!
świecie. (Że co? Że dziś?)
(Kubuś? Znany? Co to No Miś...
znaczy?) Choć sam nie pływa
Owszem, znany. Nie inaczej. Z pomocą przybywa!
(Z czego?) (Z pomocą? Kto?)
Słuchajżeż no!
Zaraz wytłumaczę. Mówię o Phi...
Więc ten Kubuś, jak to bywa, (O kim?)
Choć nie umiał wcale pływać Phi!
I choć nie miał żadnej łodzi, (Wybacz, ucieka mi z pamięci).
Uratował od powodzi Phi ma Rozumek Niezmiernie Duży...
Serdecznego przyjaciela. (Możesz powtórzyć?)
To nie żadna bagatela... Niezmiernie duży...
(Jak to zrobił ten Puchatek?) (Niezmiernie co?)
Więc wynalazł taki statek, No, je że ho ho!
Pływa, czy nie – nieważne to.
Nie łodzisko jakieś marne,
Ale mu się udało
Lecz wspaniały okręt-garnek. Zbudować łódź wspaniałą.
No i właśnie tym zabłysnął, (Wspaniałe co?)
Że po prostu nim popłynął.
No, słoik był to...
(O kim mowa?) Niech żyje! Sto lat! Dawajcie tu go!
O Puchatku. O Kubusiu. O (Niech żyje! Sto lat! Dawajcie cp,
niedźwiadku. który?)
O tym Misiu, mężnym, (Niech żyje z nami, nie wiem jak
znanym, długo,
Co miał Rozum Niesłychany, Zdrowia, madrości i miodu góry!
O tym, co jak głosi wieść, Niech żyje Phi!
(Kto taki? Kto?)
Ponad wszystko lubił jeść
I był gruby jak baryłka. No Phi...
(Czy to czasem nie pomyłka? Niech żyje Miś!
(Że co? Że dziś?)
Czy na pewno to ten sam?)
No Miś...
Przecież ja go dobrze znam! Niech żyje nam Fredzia wspaniały lat
Tak, to Kubuś, Miś Puchatek, sto!
Wielki mędrzec i bohater, (CO TAKIEGO ZROBIŁ? CO?)
A więc, panie i panowie,
Pijmy teraz jego zdrowie!
 50

Kind and dziękuje za Łaskawą Uprzejmość i Troskliwość

Pamięć
Thoughtful
all Rabbit’s friends wszyscy krewni-i- krewni i znajomi Królika
and relations znajomi Królika
Loud Sounds głośne dźwięki Głośne Odgłosy
H-hup! Hep! Yp!
„I might have known „No, cóż? Wiedziałem o „Mogłem się tego
said Eeyore. After all, tym z góry – westchnął spodziewać – powiedział
one can’t complain. I Kłapouchy. – Oto są Iijaa – Ale mimo wszystko
have my friends. przyjaciele... Różnie bywa nie można narzekać. Mam
Somebody spoke to na tym świecie.” swoich znajomych. Nie
me only yesterday. dalej jak wczoraj ktoś się
And was it last week do mnie odezwał. A w
or the week before ubiegłym tygodniu, a może
that Rabbit bumped to było dwa tygodnie temu,
into me and said Królik wpadł na mnie i
‘Bother!’ The Social powiedział „Do licha!” Krąg
Round. Always Towarzyski. Stale coś się
something going on.” dzieje.”
a Special Pencil Case skrzyneczka kolorowych Specjalny Piórnik
ołówków
*4 B for Bear; HB for *4 M.R. tzn. dla Misia *4 B jak Bohater; HB jak
Helping Bear; BB for Ratownika; D.M. tzn. dla Hurra Bohater!; BB jak
Brave Bear Dzielnego Misia Brawo Bohater!

*4 Milne invented the meaning of the HB, BB abbreviations representing the

hardness of pencils; Irena Tuwim changed the abbreviations completely in
order to translate the content of the original faithfully; Adamczyk-Garbowska
retained the original abbreviations, yet being unable to produce words similar
in meaning, she used the words that slightly change the content.

„...to know how „...i podziałka, żeby można „...zaznaczone były cale,
many inches było wszystko zmierzyć...” na wypadek gdyby chciało
anything was...” się wiedzieć ile coś ma
cali...”
Blue Pencils and Red Niebieskie Ołówki, i Niebieskie Ołówki, i
Pencils and Green Czerwone Ołówki, i Zielone Czerwone, i Zielone
Pencils Ołówki
 51

2. Preface to Kubuś Puchatek in Tuwim’s translation

Oprócz tej książki była jeszcze inna książka o Krzysiu i ten, kto ją czytał,
przypomni sobie, że Krzyś miał kiedyś swojego łabędzia (a może to łabędź
miał swojego Krzysia? - nie wiem na pewno, jak tam było), a ponieważ
łabędź był pokryty białym puchem, Krzyś nazwał go Puchatkiem. Było to
bardzo dawno temu i kiedy pożegnaliśmy się ze sobą, po prostu wzięliśmy
sobie to imię, bośmy nie myśleli, aby się ono mogło jeszcze kiedyś w życiu
łabędziowi przydać. Więc kiedy Krzyś dostał misia i miś powiedział, że
chciałby mieć jakieś niezwykłe imię, Krzyś powiedział od razu, ze będzie się
nazywał Kubuś Puchatek. I tak się też stało. Więc kiedy już wam
wytłumaczyłem, skąd wzięło się imię Puchatek, wytłumaczę wam, skąd wziął
się Kubuś. Każdy, kto przyjedzie do naszego miasta, musi koniecznie pójść
do Zoologicznego Ogrodu. Są ludzie, którzy, zaczynają zwiedzanie ogrodu
od początku zwanego WEJŚCIE i strasznie prędko idą od klatki do klatki i
zanim się kto obejrzy, już są przy bramie, na której napisane jest WYJŚCIE.
Ale są inni, bardzo mili ludzie, którzy idą prosto do zwierzęcia, które lubią
najbardziej, i tam się zatrzymują. Więc kiedy Krzyś przychodzi do
Zoologicznego, Ogrodu, idzie od razu do klatki, w której są niedźwiedzie,
mówi coś po cichutku trzeciemu dozorcy z lewej strony, drzwi otwierają się i
przechodzimy przez ciemne korytarzyki, a potem po stromych schodach
idziemy do pewnej klatki, która się otwiera i wyłazi z niej coś brunatnego i
kosmatego, i Krzyś z okrzykiem: „Ach, Misiu!" rzuca mu się w ramiona. Otóż
ten niedźwiedź nazywa się Kubuś. To imię bardzo do niego pasuje, co
świadczy o tym, ze jest to świetne imię dla misiów. Ale najzabawniejsze jest
to, że nie możemy sobie przypomnieć, czy Kubuś dostał imię po Puchatku,
czy Puchatek po Kubusiu. Kiedyś wiedzieliśmy, aleśmy o tym już
zapomnieli... Tyle wiośnie napisałem, gdy Prosiaczek spojrzał na mnie i
powiedział swoim piskliwym głosikiem: „A o mnie nic?" „Drogi Prosiaczku —
odpowiedziałem — cała książka jest o tobie". „O mnie? — zapiszczał. —
Widzę, że jest także p Puchatku". Więc muszę wam wytłumaczyć, o co
chodzi. Prosiaczek jest zazdrosny, bo myśli, że cała Wielka Przedmowa
będzie poświęcona Puchatkowi. Puchatek, oczywiście, jest główną i
ulubioną postacią w tej książeczce, ale w wielu miejscach zjawia się
Prosiaczek, tam gdzie o Puchatku wcale nie może być mowy. Bo nie
możecie na przykład wziąć z sobą Puchatka do szkoły, tak żeby nikt o tym
nie wiedział. A Prosiaczek jest tak malutki, że świetnie mieści się w kieszeni,
gdzie jest bardzo przyjemnie wyczuwać go wtedy, kiedy się nie wie na
pewno, czy dwa razy siedem jest dwanaście, czy dwadzieścia dwa.
Prosiaczek lubi czasem wysunąć się z kieszeni i wtedy ma okazję zajrzeć do
kałamarza. Dzięki temu jest bardziej wykształcony od Puchatka. Ale, prawdę
mówiąc, Puchatek nie dba o to. „Są tacy, co mają rozum — powiada — a są
tacy, co go nie mają, i już". A teraz wszystkie inne zwierzęta pytają: „A czy o
nas też coś będzie?" Więc może zrobię najlepiej, jeśli skończę pisanie
Przedmowy i zacznę pisać samą książkę.
Autor
 52

3. Preface to Fredzia Phi Phi in Adamczyk-Garbowska’s

translation

Jeśli zdarzyło wam się czytać inną książkę o Krzysztofie Robinie,

pamiętacie może, że miał on kiedyś łabędzia (czy też łabędź miał
Krzysztofa Robina — nie wiem kto kogo) i że nazywał tego łabędzia Phi.
Było to dawno temu, ale gdy rozstawaliśmy się, zabraliśmy to imię ze
sobą, bo nie sądziliśmy, że łabędź będzie je kiedyś jeszcze potrzebował.
No, a kiedy Niedźwiedź Pluszowy powiedział, że chciałby dostać jakieś
niezwykłe imię tylko i wyłącznie dla siebie, Krzysztof Robin z miejsca
odparł, nie namyślając się ani przez chwilę, że będzie to Fredzia Phi-Phi.
I tak już zostało. Skoro więc wyjaśniłem już część dotyczącą Phi, kolej
teraz na wyjaśnienie reszty imienia. Nie sposób przebywać przez dłuższy
czas w Londynie i nie odwiedzić Ogrodu Zoologicznego. Niektórzy ludzie
zaczynają zwiedzanie Zoo od początku zwanego WEJŚCIEM,
przechodzą szybko, jak tylko mogą, obok wszystkich klatek, aż dochodzą
do miejsca, które nazywa się WYJŚCIE. Lecz najmilsi ludzie kierują się
prosto do zwierzęcia, które lubią najbardziej, i tam się zatrzymują. Kiedy
więc Krzysztof Robin idzie do Zoo, zmierza wprost do miejsca, gdzie
znajdują się Niedźwiedzie Polarne, szepce coś do ucha trzeciemu
dozorcy z lewej strony, drzwi się otwierają, przechodzimy przez ciemne
przejścia, [g wspinamy się po stromych schodach, aż w końcu
dochodzimy do pewnej wyjątkowej klatki, klatka się otwiera i wybiega z
niej coś brunatnego i puszystego, a Krzysztof Robin z radosnym
okrzykiem „Och, Misiu!" pada mu w ramiona. No więc ten niedźwiedź
nazywa się Frędzla, co świadczy o tym, jak świetne jest to imię dla
niedźwiedzi, zabawne tylko, że nie możemy sobie przypomnieć, czy
Fredzia otrzymał imię po Phi, czy Phi po Fredzi. Kiedyś wiedzieliśmy, ale
zapomnieliśmy... Dopisałem do tego miejsca, gdy Prosiaczek spojrzał na
mnie i spytał piskliwym głosem: A Ja? — Kochany Prosiaczku —
odparłem — cała książka jest o tobie. — O Phi też — zapiszczał. Widzicie
więc — Prosiaczek jest zazdrosny, bo sądzi, że cały Wspaniały Wstęp
będzie poświęcony tylko i wyłącznie Phi. Phi jest — rzecz jasna —
ulubieńcem, nie ma co temu zaprzeczać, ale za to Prosiaczka spotyka
masa rzeczy, które omijają Phi. Bo przecież nie sposób zabrać ze sobą
Phi do szkoły, żeby zaraz wszyscy o tym nie wiedzieli. Prosiaczek zaś
jest tak mały, że bez trudu wślizguje się do kieszeni i jego obecność
działa bardzo kojąco, kiedy nie jest się całkiem pewnym, czy dwa razy
siedem jest dwanaście czy dwadzieścia dwa. Czasem wyślizguje się z
kieszeni i zagląda do kałamarza, dzięki czemu jest bardziej wykształcony
niż Phi, ale Phi to nie przeszkadza. — Niektórzy mają rozum — mówi —
a niektórzy nie mają i już. A teraz wszyscy pozostali pytają: — A My? —
Może więc najlepiej będzie, jeśli przestanę już pisać te Wstępy, a
przystąpię do książki.
 53

4. From the author of Fredzia Phi-Phi

Mam ogromną tremę, oddając Frędzlę Phi-Phi w ręce Czytelników. Jest to

bowiem nowy przekład Winnie-the-Pooh, książki znanej w Polsce jako Kubuś
Puchatek. Kubuś Puchatek w tłumaczeniu Ireny Tuwim podbił serca kilku
pokoleń Czytelników, stał się jednym z ulubionych utworów dla dzieci i do te-go
stopnia wrósł w naszą świadomość, że niektóre z powiedzonek bohaterów
książki weszły do potocznego języka, nie mówiąc już o tym, że Miś patronuje
jednej z ulic w Warszawie. Po cóż więc wprowadzać zamęt nowym
przekładem?
Otóż Kubuś Puchatek różni się znacznie od swego angielskie-go pierwowzoru.
Irena Tuwim, pragnąc przybliżyć polskiemu Czytelnikowi tekst oryginału,
dostosowała go do kanonów obowiązujących w polskiej literaturze dziecięcej.
Zmieniona została warstwa stylistyczna utworu. W polskim tekście pełno jest
spieszczeń i zdrobnień, które nie występują w oryginale, bohaterowie
przemawiają językiem dziecinnym, pewne fragmenty zostały pominięte, inne
dopisane, a wiele dwuznaczności uzyskało jednoznaczną interpretację. A
przecież Winnie-the-Pooh Milne'a to książka adresowana nie tylko do dzieci, ale
również do dorosłych. W sumie Kubusia Puchatka należałoby raczej u-znać za
adaptację, bardzo zresztą udaną, a nie przekład w pełnym sensie tego słowa.
Frędzla Phi-Phi jest próbą dostarczenia polskiemu Czytelnikowi wiernego
przekładu, o ile w ogóle wierny przekład tej książki jest możliwy - roi się w niej
bowiem od eksperymentów językowych, gier słów i neologizmów, z których
każdy może być tłumaczony na wiele sposobów.
Już sam tytuł stanowiący imię głównego bohatera stwarza takie możliwości.
Winnie-the-Pooh, który jest przecież płci męskiej, nosi dziewczęce imię, bo
Winnie to nic innego jak zdrobnienie od Winifredy. Winnie to również imię
pewnego niedźwiedzia czy też niedźwiedzicy w londyńskim Zoo, którego
Christopher Robin często odwiedza. Pooh natomiast zostało odziedziczone
przez Misia po łabędziu, który został tak nazwany dlatego, że - jak wyjaśnia
autor - ,,kiedy się na niego za-woła, a łabędź zlekceważy nas i nie podpłynie,
można zawsze udać, że wcale nam na nim nie zależy i powiedzieć "Pooh!" Ale
przecież Winnie-the-Pooh nie jest dziewczynką i nikogo nie lekceważy. Sprawa
imienia jest więc do końca niejasna, zwłaszcza że ma ono też i inne konotacje.
Imię tytułowego bohatera jest więc kluczem do całej książki - wprowadza nas w
inne absurdy, kalambury i paradoksy.
Chciałam, aby polskie imię opierało się na podobnej zasadzie co imię
angielskie. "Pooh" zastąpiłam polskim "Phi", które to słowo wydaje się być
znaczeniowo bliskie i podobne w brzmieniu do oryginału angielskiego. Więcej
kłopotów sprawiło znalezienie odpowiednika Winnie. Zgodnie z zasadą
dochowania jak największej wierności oryginałowi należało znaleźć zdrobnienie
od Winifredy. Dwa najbardziej nasuwające się na myśl imiona to Winia i
Frędzla. Za Winią przemawiało podobieństwo dźwiękowe do oryginału
angielskiego. Fredzia wydała mi się jednak zabawniejsza i bardziej wyrazista.
Zapewne wielu czytelników zdziwi się, a nawet oburzy: ,,Fredzia? Jak można
na-zwać pluszowego niedźwiadka Fredzia!" I będzie to reakcja, jakiej oczekiwał
autor oryginału. Bo imię to właśnie ma dziwić i intrygować.
Wielbiciele Kubusia Puchatka nie spotkają tu również Krzysia, Kłapouchego,
Kangurzycy i Maleństwa. Ich miejsce zajęli Krzysztof Robin, lijaa, Kanga i
Gurek. Pozostał natomiast Prosiaczek, Królik i Sowa. Fredzia Phi-Phi tropi
 54

Łysicę i Łesicę, a nie łasiczkę i lisa jak Kubuś Puchatek, poluje na Sonia, a nie
na Słonia, wyrusza na Ekspertycję, a nie na Przyprawę, a zarówno on, jak i jego
przyjaciele przemawiają trochę bardziej "dorosłym" i - jako że przekłady starzeją
się szybciej niż utwory oryginalne - bardziej współczesnym językiem.
Pracując nad tym przekładem, pragnęłam uczynić go takim, aby sprostał
zarówno oczekiwaniom dzieci, jak i dorosłych [choć przede wszystkim do tych
ostatnich skierowana jest niniejsza przedmowa). Chciałabym, aby dorośli bawili
się dobrze, czytając wspólnie z dziećmi tę książkę, a dzieci wracały do niej
chętnie, gdy dorosną.
Starałam się trzymać możliwie najściślej oryginału, nie popadając jednak w
filologiczną dosłowność, która może wyrządzić oryginałowi więcej szkody niż
wolne tłumaczenie. Jest wiele fragmentów w tej książce, które mogą się wydać
dziwne i nie-zgrabnie przełożone. Są to zazwyczaj zabiegi mające na celu
oddanie niezwykłego języka oryginału, który w niepowtarzalny sposób łączy
cechy specyficzne dla mowy dziecka z elementami stanowiącymi parodię
języka używanego przez niektórych do-rosłych.
W praktyce i teorii przekładu artystycznego mówi się często o dwóch skrajnych
tendencjach - przybliżaniu oryginału do Czytelnika i przybliżaniu Czytelnika do
oryginału. Nie trzyma-łam się niewolniczo żadnej z tych zasad, próbując pójść
na rozsądny kompromis, choć muszę przyznać, że skłaniam się bar-dziej ku tej
drugiej tendencji. Jest to z pewnością widoczne w tłumaczeniu mruczanek i
wierszyków, gdzie starałam się przy-stosować język polski do rytmu, prostoty i
celowej nieporadności oryginału, łamiąc przy tym nierzadko konwencje
obowiązujące w polskiej poezji dla dzieci. Ale przecież także w języku
angielskim Winnie-the-Pooh jest utworem wyjątkowym i nowatorskim, nie
wyrastającym bezpośrednio i naturalnie z tradycji angielskiej literatury
dziecięcej. Chciałabym, aby podobne wrażenie odebrał polski Czytelnik.
Na zakończenie pragnę podkreślić, że nie jest moim zamiarem kwestionowanie
niewątpliwych zalet Kubusia Puchatka. Frędzla Phi-Phi i Kubuś Puchatek to
dwie różne postacie. I nie wiadomo, do kogo wolałby przyznać się Winnie-the-
Pooh. Możliwe, że do kogoś jeszcze innego.

Monika Adamczyk-Garbowska