their - The University of Texas at Dallas

“Actually,” in a voice so low as to be almost
inaudible, “I’m not going very far.” She says this
both to hide the lack of money with which she
would pay the exorbitant fee demanded by such
wagon-drivers, and out of fear that some old
friend might see her aboard such a pre-historic
conveyance. The latter, in her mind, would signal
the forefeiture of her well-attended extrinsic
elegance. (Dougherty 3)
It is in this third-person voice that are expressed
the internal conflicts and ambiguities of which the
characters themselves seem unaware. As in reality, the
voices heard in internal monologues or dialogues
between characters present but single threads in the
weft and weave of the narrative fabric.
The principal tensions of the narrative diverge from
the ill-fated relationship between Ruth and Pepe, a
successful black marketeer. Their trials parallel in
miniature, as do the stories of the secondary
characters, frustrated attempts to cope with the endless
monotony of daily existence in the oppressive society
of the Great Protector, grasping at hopes represented
by life as it exists in the North.
This ambivalent struggle between hope and
resignation characterizes Ruth and Pepe’s first
meeting. Having saved her from an accident in the
street and then accompanied her during her ritual visit
to the cemetery, Pepe’s presence shakes Ruth’s
feigned self-reliance. “Ruth recedes behind the
barriers of her most intimate defenses, like a warrior
who in spite of himself retreats from combat. He
accompanies her, he protects her, and without wanting
it to, the relief of knowing herself to be cared for
soothes her, like a bandage applied to a wound”
(Dougherty 53). Sheltered by the optimism and
success of this working-class suitor, Ruth undergoes a
remarkable transformation that astounds her
neighbors.
The expression on Ruth’s face, never losing its
aristocratic air, has sweetened thanks to a certain
underlying benevolence, born perhaps of the
satisfaction that has completed her being. … In
sum, watching her pass before them with her head
held high and her proud aristocratic carriage, the
neighbors discover, much to their surprise,
something they never would have guessed: Ruth
is an exquisitely beautiful woman. (Dougherty 78)
The body of the novel explores Ruth’s life, past
and present, uncovering ambiguous, compelling, and
at times disturbing glimpses of her psychological
defenses against the multiple oppressors that haunt her
existence, until finally the narrative circle is closed as
Amelia once again watches her set out for the
cemetery.
The remainder of this article will discuss how the
structural and thematic elements of Leyva’s novel are
reiterated linguistically throughout, and choices made,
at first unconsciously, then with greater intentionality,
during the translation process to sustain the lyricism
of the original prose.
At its most functional level, the myth of linguistic
equivalence, although enticing to novice learners of a
second language, is routinely disproved in translation
through transference, transposition, modulation,
insertion/omission, compensation, synonymy, and
functional or descriptive equivalency, techniques vital
to the rendering of a text that sounds as if it was
originally written in the target language. 6 Given the
inherent lyricism of Leyva’s prose, maintaining and
recreating the sound, the rhythm, and the musicality of
the text was a fundamental goal. Therefore, the
myriad choices made and techniques employed in
rendering an English version of this work were guided
by this principle of authentic voice and resonance.
The following examples will perhaps lend insight
into the process, sometimes conscious and other times
less so, of echoing the multiple voices of this rich
narrative. Among the standard techniques employed,
there are multiple examples of transference, the
appropriation of a non-target language word, in this
case Spanish, in my English translation of Ruth. The
names of the characters, the intersection of Principal
and Apóstoles streets in Havana, the titles of don and
doña are obvious example of linguistic elements that,
while technically translatable, are better left alone.
Correspondingly, some words and phrases benefit
from the use of a functional or descriptive equivalent
rather than a literal translation. Religious
exclamations, frequent in Spanish dialogue, can sound
stilted, or even blasphemous, in English if not finessed
a bit. “¡Ay, Dios mío! ¡Virgen María!” (Leyva 156),
rather than “Oh my God! Virgin Mary!”, became
“God help me! Jesus, Mary and Joseph!” (Dougherty
140), thereby expressing the context of the
exclamation while reflecting differences in the way
73