WWeesstteerrnn UUnniivveerrssiittyy SScchhoollaarrsshhiipp@@WWeesstteerrnn Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository 7-11-2014 12:00 AM TThhee MMooddaalliittiieess ooff RRoommaann TTrraannssllaattiioonn:: SSoouurrccee--rreepprreesseennttaattiivvee,, AAlllluussiivvee,, aanndd IInnddeeppeennddeenntt James Kruck, The University of Western Ontario Supervisor: Dr. Debra Nousek, The University of Western Ontario A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree in Classics © James Kruck 2014 Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd Part of the Classical Literature and Philology Commons RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn Kruck, James, "The Modalities of Roman Translation: Source-representative, Allusive, and Independent" (2014). Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository. 2167. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/2167 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Western. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Thesis and Dissertation Repository by an authorized administrator of Scholarship@Western. For more information, please contact [email protected]. i The Modalities of Roman Translation: Source-representative, Allusive, and Independent. A monograph by James Kruck Graduate Program in Classical Studies A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies The University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, Canada © James Kruck 2014 ii Abstract In my dissertation I argue that Roman translators promote themselves and their work by programmatic statements that indicate a relationship with a source author. Whereas the traditional understanding of translations has focused on ad uerbum and ad sensum translations, I deemphasize the binary division between ad uerbum and ad sensum translations since these terms are insufficient for appreciating the roles that translation can play in a literary system. By focusing on the statements of translators rather than the form of the translations, I elevate the translator as an agent who evaluates his socio-literary conditions and develops a response that capitalizes on those conditions. I argue that there are three different styles of promotion that the Roman translator uses: the source-representative, the allusive, and the independent. The source-representative translator associates himself closely with the source, establishing his translation as the primary avenue to an accurate representation of a foreign author. The allusive translator strengthens his own position as an artist and asserts his own creative ability by encouraging comparison with established writers before distinctively embedding his own original material into the translation. Finally, the independent translator rejects the authority of the source author and endorses himself as more knowledgeable than the source. My first chapter contextualizes the statements of Roman translators by examining similar statements from post-Classical translators who promote their own form of translation as the superior way in which to access the source author. In my second chapter I analyze source- representative translation in Livius Andronicus’ Odusia and Ennius’ Annales. Chapter 3 reviews source-representative translation in Roman comedy with a focus on how Terence uses his translations to displace the drama of Plautus. In my fourth chapter I address allusive translation by showing how Catullus symbolically rejects translation and how Horace advertises his poetry as Roman songs played on a Greek instrument. In my final chapter, which concentrates on independent translation, I discuss how Cicero advertises his role as a judicious translator whose translation enhances and even replaces the source work. In each chapter I identify the programmatic statements that the translator uses to encourage the acceptance of his translation. iii Keywords: Translation theory, Roman translation, Latin literature, Livius Andronicus, Ennius, Plautus, Terence, Catullus, Horace, Cicero iv Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents ............................................................................................................... iv List of Abbreviations ........................................................................................................ vii Acknowledgments............................................................................................................ viii 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 2 Translation as Promotion ............................................................................................. 16 2.1 Ad uerbum Translation in the Church ................................................................... 17 2.2 Ad sensum translation in the Church ..................................................................... 22 2.3 The judgment of the translator .............................................................................. 25 2.4 Imitation as a close relationship with the source .................................................. 28 2.5 Criticism of imitation and Service to the Source .................................................. 34 3 Source-representative, Epic.......................................................................................... 44 3.1 Situating source-representative translation ........................................................... 46 3.2 The socio-literary conditions of 3rd century Rome .............................................. 48 3.3 Livius Andronicus ................................................................................................. 52 3.4 Gnaeus Naevius .................................................................................................... 61 3.5 Quintus Ennius ...................................................................................................... 65 4 Source-Representative, Comedy .................................................................................. 76 4.1 Plautus’ prologues: uortit barbare ........................................................................ 79 4.2 The Greek scene .................................................................................................... 84 4.3 Language ............................................................................................................... 87 v 4.4 Characters ............................................................................................................. 92 4.5 Deconstruction ...................................................................................................... 95 4.6 Prologues of Terence: uerbum de uerbo expressum ........................................... 100 4.7 Language ............................................................................................................. 111 4.8 Characters ........................................................................................................... 114 4.9 Adelphoe ............................................................................................................. 115 4.10 The Eunuchus .................................................................................................... 123 4.11 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 129 5 Allusive Translation ................................................................................................... 133 5.1 Catullus ............................................................................................................... 133 5.2 Catullus, Poem 51 ............................................................................................... 134 5.3 Poem 66 .............................................................................................................. 142 5.4 Poem 68 .............................................................................................................. 144 5.5 Conclusion on Catullus ....................................................................................... 146 5.6 Horace ................................................................................................................. 148 5.7 Horace and his source: the Epodes ..................................................................... 152 5.8 Epode 11 ............................................................................................................. 153 5.9 Epode 12 ............................................................................................................. 157 5.10 Epode 15 ............................................................................................................ 160 5.11 The Odes ........................................................................................................... 163 5.12 Odes 1.9 ............................................................................................................. 166 5.13 Odes 1.37 ........................................................................................................... 169 5.14 Odes 1.12 ........................................................................................................... 173 5.15 Horace Conclusions........................................................................................... 176 5.16 Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 177 vi 6 Cicero and Independent Translation .......................................................................... 179 6.1 Critical Remarks ................................................................................................. 181 6.1.1 Philosophical Study ................................................................................ 184 6.1.2 Newfound freedom ................................................................................. 190 6.1.3 Defence of philosophy ............................................................................ 194 6.1.4 Critics of translation ................................................................................ 196 6.1.5 The language advantage .......................................................................... 200 6.1.6 Cicero’s qualifications ............................................................................ 205 6.2 Translating the Source ........................................................................................ 212 6.2.1 Greek words in Latin text ....................................................................... 218 6.2.2 Distinguishing Translator from Author .................................................. 222 6.3 Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 226 7 Conclusion ................................................................................................................. 229 Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 236 Curriculum Vitae ............................................................................................................ 254 vii List of Abbreviations ANRW Aufsteig und Niedergang der Römischen Welt. Berlin. Blänsdorf Blänsdorf, J. 2011. Fragmenta Poetarum Latinorum Epicorum et Lyricorum. Berlin. CAH Cambridge Ancient History. FGrHist Jacoby, F. Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. Berlin. PCG5 Kassel, R. and C. Austin, eds. 1986. Poeta Comici Graeci: Damoxenus – Magnes. Berlin. PCG6.2 ____ 1998 Poeta Comici Graeci:Menander.Berlin. Sandbach Sandbach, F.H. 1990 [1972]. Menandri reliquiae selectae. Oxford. SB Bailey, D.R.S. 1987. M. Tulli Ciceronis Epistulae ad Atticum Stuttgart. Sk. Skutsch, O. 1985. The Annals of Q. Ennius. Oxford. SVF Armin, H. 1903–1924. Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta. Stuttgart. R1 Ribbeck, O. 1962 [1871]. Scaenicae Romanorum Poesis Fragmenta: Tragicorum Romanorum Fragmenta. Hildesheim. R2 ____ 1962 [1873]. Scaenicae Romanorum Poesis Fragmenta. Comicorum Romanorum Fragmenta. Hildesheim. Voigt Voigt, E. 1971. Sappho et Alcaeus. Amsterdam. West West, M.L. 1989–1992 [1971–1972]. Iambi et elegi Graeci. Oxford. viii Acknowledgments I would like to offer my sincere thanks to my advisor Dr. Debra Nousek for all of the advice and encouragement she has provided during my time at Western, particularly during the writing of this thesis. Her supervision and ability to calm my concerns proved invaluable. I would also like to thank the other members of my thesis committee, Dr.Randall Pogorzelski and Dr. Christopher Brown, both of whom have given me a significant amount of guidance in the writing of the thesis and in other areas of my academic pursuits. I offer my gratitude to my board of examiners: Dr. Kelly Olson, Dr. Laurence de Looze, and Dr. Elaine Fantham. My thanks as well to Dr. Alex Meyer and Dr. Elizabeth Greene for offering me a position as a Research Assistant in the final year of my studies. In addition, I wish to thank all of the faculty and staff of the Department of Classical Studies for welcoming me to Western five years ago and for always showing kindness and an eagerness to help. Finally, I must thank my fellow graduate students for their unending support and friendship. I have presented portions of my research at the University of Western Ontario Research Seminar Series (March 2013) and the Annual Meeting of the Classical Association of Canada (May 2013, Winnipeg; May 2012, London). I was able to complete my research through funding from the Department of Classical Studies, the Faculty of Arts and Humanities, and the School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies. Additional support was received from Ontario Graduate Scholarship program. I am deeply indebted to my parents, Arnold and Carol Kruck, who have always supported and encouraged me in my academic pursuits. Sincere gratitude is owed to my wife, Lindsay Ferrier, ix whose patience, understanding, and inspiration has made this and every other achievement possible. Finally, I dedicate this work to my two sons, Parker and Finley, who constantly remind me to smile when any task seems difficult.