Joseph Brodsky as self-translator: Analysis of lexical changes in his self-translations

The dissertation, on the basis of an in-depth analysis of Brodsky's Russian original poems and English self-translations, develops a systematic approach for the examination of the lexical changes Brodsky introduces in his English translations. The analysis reveals tendencies Brodsky develops as self-translator and provides insight into his poetics and cultural consciousness.;'The study of lexical modifications is divided into two parts. The first part examines structural changes, such as sequels, insertions, omissions, and substitutions, which are then analyzed within each group according to their semantic, or stylistic properties. The second part demonstrates how Brodsky deals with translation challengers that include translation of idioms, the rendering of cultural realia, colloquial language, imagery, and word-play.;The analysis of lexical changes in Brodsky's self-translations leads us the following conclusions. As far as lexical faithfulness is concerned, two tendencies are observed. First, even under the demands of his self-imposed prosodic and rhyming faithfulness, Brodsky seeks greater lexical accuracy. Moreover, when he resorts to changes, they are still within the boundaries of his poetics. Secondly, there are obvious deviations from his originals and in the manner of writing. His texts carry more information, become more expressive, explanatory, and more lucid. In this connection a question arises: should the changes introduced by the author be treated differently than by a translator who is not the author of the original text? Brodsky allows himself more liberties and a different kind of freedom than would a translator who is not the author. He cannot resist experimentation with the new language. He introduces information that only he can provide, as no outsider would be privy to it. On a few occasions he deconstructs poetic reality. Though Brodsky's English text is not an "ideal" translation, neither it is a new poem. They prove that self-translations have their own status. They provide clarification or an explanation of the original, thus they render the original text incomplete. That is why Brodsky scholars should not be restricted only by one language version if two versions exist. But self-translations should not be treated simply as clarifications or interpretations of the originals. They have their own value as they give the English reader a sense of Brodsky's Russian voice.;If Brodsky's English texts read differently (with changes in tone, more expressiveness, more specificity), this is how he wants them to sound. The English language serves as estrangement which has a dual function, allowing the author, as he relives the past, to be more emphatic and precise than in his own language, and at the same time it permits the author to maintain a protective distance from the subject. Herein lies its therapeutic emancipatory power that enables the poet to put closure on the past. The large number of self-translations that increased over the time shows that self-translation was not a stage in Brodsky's bilingualism, but an important part in his creative writing.