Titlu: | Modalităţi de adaptare a neologismelor în primele cărţi de bucate româneşti |
Autor: | Emanuela I. Dima |
Publicația: | Studii și cercetări lingvistice, LXVI (1), p. 69-70 |
p-ISSN: | 0039-405X |
Editura: | Editura Academiei |
Locul: | București |
Anul: | 2015 |
Rezumat: | [Ways to Adapt French Neologisms in the First Romanian Cookbooks] One of the first Romanian cookery-books, published in 1846, Reţete cercate în număr de 500 din bucătăria cea mare a lui Robert, întâiul bucătar al Franţei, potrivit pentru toate stările (500 trusty recipies from the great kitchen of Robert, the first cook of France) represents the translation of the French book La grande cuisine simplifiée, art de la cuisine nouvelle mise á la portée de toutes les fortunes suivie de la Charcuterie, de la Pâtisserie, de l’office, des Conserves de légumes et précédée d’un Dictionnaire de Cuisinier released one year earlier, in 1845, in Paris, whose adjusting and translation into Romanian was made by the Moldavian court marshal Manolachi Drăghici. Looked upon from the main principle of the translation neology perspective, according to which ”one can never translate a language into another one”, we can notice several strategies made use of by the author of this translation in order to render, as appropriately as possible the content of the original book. On the one hand, one faces a certain tendency of avoiding the new words: whenever possible the translater renders the word related to a new concept by a partial synonym (e.g. fr. purée is translated by a dialectal term făcăluit, -ă ‘mashed’ when the French term refers to ‘vegetables’ and by tocătură when is related to ‘meat’) thus avoiding the acceptance of this neologism into this particular cookbook. On the other hand, if accepted, the neologism is always completely adapted to the phonetic and morphological rules of Romanian, even if there is no need for this word, as the language has perfect synonyms for the French term (gato, for instance, from fr. gâteau, it is supposed to render the concept ‘pie’, but the translator could have used the Romanian word plăcintă ‘pie’ or prăjitură ‘cake’). As regards proper names, one can notice similar procedures: whenever possible the author avoids them (Potage à la Conde is reproduced as Supă deasă ‘dense soup’, Potage à la Crecy is rendered as Supă de rădăcină ‘root crops soup’ s. o.). If accepted in the title of the recipe, the foreign name – be it an anthroponym or a toponym – is also, rendered according to the Romanian phonetical rules: Durcelle ou fines herbes à papillotes becomes Darsăl (DRB 59/31), Ragoût à la Toulouse is rendered as Mâncare de la Tuluza ‘Dish from Tuluza’ (DRB 114/51) s.o. Because of these opposite tendencies – avoiding certain neologisms and adapting them completely if accepted – most of these items never became literary ones. |
Linkuri: | ![]() |
Citări la această publicație: 1
0 | Ioan Milică | Registrul culinar: variație textuală și particularități stilistice | Chivu, 341-365 | 2017 |
Referințe în această publicație: 0
Lista citărilor/referințelor nu cuprinde decît texte prezente în baza de date, nefiind deci exhaustivă.
Pentru trimiterea de texte, semnalarea oricăror greșeli, și eventualul refuz ca „Diacronia” să facă publice textele, vă rugăm să folosiți adresa de email [Please enable javascript to view.].