Next, I will discuss the shortcomings of the method as well as address the ethical questions of the study. Since this study is qualitative and it focuses on the translations of one novel, it can be discussed to which extent it is possible to make generalizations based on the material and the results. Thus, the results apply to this particular study, but they can be discussed and com-pared with the results of other studies on retranslated children’s literature.
Since the material of this study consists of final products, the published tions and the source text, it is not possible to make assumptions about the process, the transla-tor’s or publishers’ views and the reasons behind the choices made. For instance, Oittinen (1997:10) has consulted two translators, Kirsi Kunnas and Alice Martin, about their work for her study on the Finnish translation of Carroll’s Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland and received information that is not available in the published literary texts.
None of the Finnish translations studied include a publisher’s or translator’s fore-word. However, it needs to be remembered that information about the translation strategies and the arguments supporting the choices made, which are presented in forewords, usually need to be read with criticism as they may reveal something about the translation discourse and the ways translations and translation strategies are discussed or presented. In addition, it could be argued that the lack of an introduction may indicate that there is no clear need to defend, for instance, the selected translation strategy of offensive or inappropriate content. On the other hand, the existence of an introduction explaining the choices made might in some cases mean that the translation may in some respects be controversial.
As Venuti (2005:34) reminds, translations are connected to their historical mo-ments because they reflect the culture and its values. Similarly, Pesonen (2013:65) argues that children’s literature mirrors the society and its ideologies, and children’s books can therefore be studied as products of their cultural and social surroundings. This study is also product-oriented, which means that the material is studied as what it is rather than how and why it became, as the material does not contain information related to the translation process. How-ever, the contextualization of the translations is superficial in this study, since it is not possible, considering the scope of this study, to comprehensively investigate the context of each transla-tion. A thorough research of a literary text, such as a translation, as a representative of the norms or values of its time, requires extensive research of the languages in question, translation prac-tices, publication practices and so forth.
63
Admittedly, this study, which is conducted in 2018 and 2019, is to some extent anachronistic, and the researcher is deemed to interpret many aspects from the perspective of her own cultural and historical context. This needs not be only a hindrance since it can be argued that a certain distance allows paying attention to aspects that may not have been topical at the time the translations were published. This, in its turn, means that the study takes part in the discussion of what has and has not been considered appropriate in translated children’s litera-ture at a certain time in comparison to the present. It is not impossible that some parts that the researcher in 2019 considers neutral are controversial in the future or in another cultural context, and therefore this study is inevitably tied to its time and place.
Since this study focuses on analyzing the work of the translators as well as the author of the source text, it needs to be stressed that this research is not evaluative but rather descriptive and explanatory. Moreover, the purpose of this study is not to criticize or to make evaluations about the work of the translators, despite the fact that the passages of the texts are referred to by using the translators’ names. Not referring to the translators could also mean that their work is not recognized.
64
6 Results
Next, I will present the analysis of my thesis. I will first discuss the racist elements in the source text and the translations. After that, I will move on to the translation of violence and the expres-sions of disability. Finally, I will present a summary of the analysis.
Before moving on to the detailed analysis, it needs to be stressed again that the passages of the text are selected by me and the material is qualitative. Any information pointing to number of items merely supports and illustrates the qualitative material.
The comparative analysis of the passages of the source text as well as the Finnish translations is in some cases accompanied by literary analysis because, in my opinion, this helps to place the passages that are analyzed into their context. Since the focus of the analysis is on semantic elements of expressions of racism, violence and disability in the (re)translations, de-tailed and analytical attention is not paid to grammatical or syntactical aspects. When translated items and parts of the source text are discussed on a grammatical and structural level, the clas-sifications presented in Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English by Biber, Conrad and Leech (2002) are used to describe the English grammar. Finnish is described by using the classifications of the online version of Iso suomen kielioppi, VISK by Hakulinen et al.
(2004).
I have provided translations of the passages of the Finnish translations into Eng-lish. Regardless of the fact that I did this as accurately as I was able, it needs to be stressed that the analysis is based on the Finnish expressions, and that the English translations do not often entirely capture the meanings of the Finnish expression, especially when it comes to idiomatic expressions. The English translations of the Finnish passages thus function as a prop. The presentation in which a passage from the source text is followed by the Finnish translations as well as their English translations diminish readability but is also required to illustrate the points made in the analysis.
For the purposes of this study, representative examples have been chosen to ac-company the argumentation of the analysis, since discussing all the units of the material is not relevant or possible in a master’s thesis.
I use the following abbreviations in the analysis: ST refers to the source text by Burnett, TT1 refers to Toini Swan’s translation from 1920 (10th edition from 1994), TT2 refers
65
to Sari Karhulahti’s retranslation from 2006 and TT3 refers to Emilia Numminen’s retranslation from 2008. Thus, numbering of the target texts follows the order of publication.