The problem of literary translation in the views of D. Chyzhevskyi as a comparatist through the lens of cultural memory
Part one. A book as a metaphor for culture: between the past and the future. Reading — perception — interpretation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.28925/2311-259x.2025.4.1Keywords:
literary translation, reading, cultural memory, comparative literature, literary reception, influence, stimulusAbstract
This work is the first comprehensive analysis of the views of one of the leading representatives of Ukrainian literary studies abroad, D. Chyzhevskyi, on translation as a multifaceted scientific problem, which is the subject of the proposed study. The purpose of the work and the tasks it entails are to study the author’s translatology concept (with an emphasis on its integrity) as a significant component of the scholar’s comparative model through the lens of cultural memory. The work applies the achievements of historical-comparative, contextual analysis, and methods of receptive-aesthetic and cultural-historical schools.
The results. The first part of the study examines principles of the receptive approach, which D. Chyzhevskyi applied in the early period of his scientific activity, in particular to the comprehension of reading from a psychological point of view (which until then remained unnoticed by researchers). The second part of the work proves that theoretical and methodological tools used by the scholar also reshape the study of translation as a manifestation of reception and a mechanism for interpreting / transforming cultural heritage that belongs to other nations.
D. Chyzhevskyi’s translatology concept carries on the tradition of understanding literary translation in the projection of the interdisciplinary approach established, in particular, by Ukrainian scholars of the second half of the 19th — first third of the 20th centuries, and fundamentally deepens his multifaceted research (subordinating purely translation issues to general literary / cultural ones): for the first time the author draws attention to the role of translation as the most active “player” in polylogue — across time and space — not only of languages, literatures, cultures, but also of epochs and traditions, which convincingly illustrates his understanding of this phenomenon through the lens of cultural memory. Attention is focused on the fact that D. Chyzhevskyi’s innovative views on literary translation simultaneously enrich the scholar’s comparative model (which covers a wide range of interconnected problems of contactology and typology) and significantly clarify the idea of it.
D. Chyzhevskyi’s translatology concept, which is considered in the context of the consonant views of representatives, preeminently, of hermeneutics and receptive aesthetics, modern theories of cultural transfer, total translation, cultural memory, etc., provides every reason to decisively conclude that the émigré scholar was far ahead of his time. The researcher’s innovative thoughts and ideas, while signaling the importance of expanding the boundaries of comprehensive study of the phenomenon of translation on many levels and in different contexts (with the involvement of theoretical and methodological tools of literary studies, principally comparative, philosophy, psychology, anthropology, sociology, cultural studies, etc.), not only outline the place / contribution of Ukrainian science of that time to the development of global humanities as a whole, but also indicate great prospects for future interdisciplinary studies of the specified artistic phenomenon “under the dome” of comparative studies.
Downloads
References
Assmann, A. (2014). Prostory spohadu. Formy ta transformatsii kulturnoi pamiati [Spaces of memory: Forms and transformations of cultural memory] (K. Dmytrenko, L. Doronicheva, & O. Yudin, Trans.). Nika-Tsentr.
Braiko, O. (2009). Ukrainska komparatyvistyka druhoi polovyny XX – pochatku XXI stolittia [Ukrainian comparative studies of the second half of the 20th – early 21st century]. In Natsionalni varianty literaturnoi komparatyvistyky (pp. 386–438). Stylos.
Budnyi, V. (2008). Mizh dystsyplinamy: rozshyrennia kontekstiv literaturoznavchoi haluzi chy zmina statusu? [Between disciplines: Expanding the contexts of literary studies or changing their status?]. Visnyk Lvivskoho universytetu. Seriia filolohichna, 44(1), 22–31.
Chyzhevskyi, D. (1929). Do psykholohii chytacha ta chytannia [On the psychology of the reader and reading]. Knyholiub, 3–4, 12–26.
Chyzhevskyi, D. (2003). Knyha yak symvol kosmosu [The book as a symbol of the cosmos]. In R. Mnykh & Ye. Pshenychnyi (Eds.), Slavistyka. Vol. 1. Dmytro Chyzhevskyi i svitova slavystyka (pp. 367–398). Kolo.
Chyzhevskyi, D. (2005a). Antychna literatura v starii Ukraini [Ancient literature in old Ukraine]. In D. Chyzhevskyi, Filosofski tvory (Vol. 2, pp. 43–56). Smoloskyp.
Chyzhevskyi, D. (2005b). Kulturno-istorychni epokhy [Cultural-historical epochs]. In D. Chyzhevskyi, Filosofski tvory (Vol. 2, pp. 24–35). Smoloskyp.
Chyzhevskyi, D. (2005c). Platon v davnii Rusi [Platon in old Rus]. In D. Chyzhevskyi, Filosofski tvory (Vol. 2, pp. 57–66). Smoloskyp.
Chyzhevskyi, D. (2005d). Pochatky i kintsi novykh ideolohichnykh epokh [Beginnings and ends of new ideological epochs]. In D. Chyzhevskyi, Filosofski tvory (Vol. 2, pp. 14–23). Smoloskyp.
Espagne, M. (2009). L’histoire de l’art comme transfert culturel. Belin.
Fizer, I. (2005). Pro hadane hehelianstvo Dmytra Chyzhevskoho v yoho “Istorii ukrainskoi literatury”. Magisterium, 21, 54–56. https://ekmair.ukma.edu.ua/handle/123456789/14222
Gadamer, H.-G. (2001a). Chytannia i perekladannia [Reading and translating]. In H.-G. Gadamer, Hermenevtyka i poetyka (pp. 145–152). Yunivers.
Gadamer, H.-G. (2001b). “Eminentnyi” tekst i yoho istynnist [The “eminent” text and its truth]. In H.-G. Gadamer, Hermenevtyka i poetyka (pp. 153–175). Yunivers.
Gadamer, H.-G. (2003). Spohady pro Dmytra Chyzhevskoho [Memoirs about Dmytro Chyzhevskyi]. R. Mnykh & Ye. Pshenychnyi (Eds.), Slavistyka. Vol. 1. Dmytro Chyzhevskyi i svitova slavistyka (pp. 175–178). Kolo.
Hnatiuk, M. (2017). Ukrainske klasychne literaturoznavstvo i deiaki problemy suchasnoi retseptyvnoi estetyky [Ukrainian classical literary studies and some problems of contemporary receptive aesthetics]. Naukovi zapysky Ternopilskoho natsionalnoho pedahohichnoho universytetu imeni Volodymyra Hnatiuka. Seriia «Literaturoznavstvo», 46, 13–31. http://dspace.tnpu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/9157
Hrabovych, H. (2003). Teoriia ta istoriia: “horyzont spodivan” i rannia retseptsiia novoi ukrainskoi literatury (Prolegomena) [Theory and history: The “horizon of expectations” and early reception of modern Ukrainian literature]. In H. Hrabovych, Do istorii ukrainskoi literatury: Doslidzhennia, esei, polemika (pp. 46–126). Krytyka.
Hrinchenko, H. (2014). Das kulturelle Gedächtnis v suchasnykh doslidzhenniakh [Cultural memory in modern research]. In A. Assmann, Prostory spohadu. Formy ta transformatsii kulturnoi pamiati (pp. 9–17). Nika-Tsentr.
Hromiak, R. (2004). Vstup. Literaturoznavcha retseptsiia v komparatyvistychnykh studiiakh [Introduction. Literary reception in comparative studies]. In R. Hromiak & I. Papusha (Eds.), Literaturoznavcha retseptsiia i komparatyvistychnyi dyskurs (pp. 9–14).Pidruchnyky i posibnyky.
Izer, V. (1996). Protses chytannia: fenomenolohichne nablyzhennia [The reading process: A phenomenological approach]. In M. Zubrytska (Ed.), Slovo. Znak. Dyskurs: Antolohiia svitovoi literaturno-krytychnoi dumky (pp. 261–277). Litopys.
Limborskyi, I. (2011). Mezhi natsionalnoi identychnosti: zustrich “svoho” y “chuzhoho” v khudozhnii svidomosti yak problema khudozhnoho perekladu [Borders of national identity: Encountering the “own” and the “other” in artistic consciousness as a problem of literary translation]. In I. Limborskyi, Svitova literatura i hlobalizatsiia (pp. 77–96). Brama-Ukraina.
Markiewicz, H., & Sławiński, J. (Eds.). (1976). Problemy metodologiczne wspólczesnego literaturoznawstwa. Wydawnictwo Literackie.
Meizerska, T. (2009). Antropolohichna skladova literaturoznavchoi filosofii Dmytra Chyzhevskoho [The anthropological component of Dmytro Chyzhevskyi’s literary philosophy]. Naukovi zapysky Ternopilskoho natsionalnoho pedahohichnoho universytetu imeni Volodymyra Hnatiuka. Seriia “Literaturoznavstvo”, 27, 311–315.
Mnykh, R. (2003). PRO ET CONTRA, abo Try paradoksy Dmytra Chyzhevskoho [PRO ET CONTRA, or Three paradoxes of Dmytro Chyzhevskyi]. In R. Mnykh & Ye. Pshenychnyi (Eds.), Slavistyka. Vol. 1. Dmytro Chyzhevskyi i svitova slavistyka (pp. 13–20). Kolo.
Myshanych, O. (2003). Dmytro Chyzhevskyi – istoryk davnoi ukrainskoi literatury [Dmytro Chyzhevskyi – historian of early Ukrainian literature]. Slovo i Chas, 4, 7–14.
Nalyvaiko, D. (2007). Komparatyvistyka v systemi literaturoznavchykh dystsyplin [Comparative studies in the system of literary disciplines]. In D. Nalyvaiko, Komparatyvistyka y istoriia literatury (pp. 5–42). Akta.
Pavlenko, O. (2018). Khudozhnii pereklad yak nosii kulturnoi pamiati [Literary translation as a carrier of cultural memory]. Pytannia literaturoznavstva, 97, 175–190. https://doi.org/10.31861/pytlit2018.97.175
Pelʹo, N. (2019). Dmytro Chyzhevskyi — uchenyi-entsyklopedyst svitovoho rivnia [Dmytro Chyzhevskyi — a world-class encyclopedic scholar] [Bibliographic list of sources]. http://library.tnpu.edu.ua/index.php/bibliography-lists/276-bib-lists-liter-19/2599-chuzevskuj
Shmiher, T. (2009). Istoriia ukrainskoho perekladoznavstva XX storichchia [History of Ukrainian translation studies in the 20th century]. Smoloskyp.
Teterina, O. (2004). Khudozhnii pereklad yak naukova problema v ukrainskii literaturno-krytychnii dumtsi XIX – pochatku XX st.: komparatyvnyi dyskurs [Literary translation as a scholarly problem in Ukrainian literary-critical thought of the 19th – early 20th centuries: Comparative discourse] (Doctoral dissertation, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv).
Teterina, O. (2023). Perekladoznavcha kontseptsiia P. Kulisha: u proiektsii mizhdystsyplinarnoho pidkhodu [P. Kulish’s translation studies concept: In the projection of an interdisciplinary approach]. Visnyk Mariupolskoho derzhavnoho universytetu. Seriia: filolohiia, 29, 82–104. https://doi.org/10.34079/2226-3055-2023-16-29-82-104
Teterina, O. (2025). The model of comparative studies developed by the Ukrainian emigre community in the 1930s–1980s: Experience and prospects. Visnyk Mariupolskogo derzhavnoho universytetu. Seriia: filolohiia, 32, 79–105. https://doi.org/10.34079/2415-3168-2025-18-32-79-105
Tötösy de Zepetnek, S. (1999). From comparative literature today toward comparative cultural studies. CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture, 1(3), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.1041
Vasylenko, V. (2023). Doslidzhennia Dmytra Chyzhevskoho: kultura, epokha, styl [Research on Dmytro Chyzhevskyi: culture, epoch, style]. Visnyk NAN Ukrainy, 9, 42–61. https://doi.org/10.15407/visn2023.09.042
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ольга Тетеріна
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
