Magin_Edward-thesis

30
poem into consideration and does not consider other forms that are found in the receptor
language (Holmes 1988:25-6).
The next approach, the “analogous form,” is the process of matching the verse
form of the poem to a verse form in the receptor language. This was the approach of von
Willamowitz-Moellendorff. Holmes (1988:26) says that translators using this approach
focus on “the function of [the poem’s] form within its poetic tradition.” Only then, with
this information in mind, does the translator search for a verse form in the receptor
language that has a similar function. Holmes calls these first two forms, the mimetic and
the analogous, “form-derivative forms,” as both approaches focus on the form of the
original text (Holmes 1988:26).
Similar to the analogous form is the “organic form,” which Holmes (1988:27)
describes as being “content-derivative.” With this approach, the content of the original
poem is used, not the form. Holmes (1988:27) writes that the translator “starts from the
semantic material, allowing it [the poem] to take on its own unique poetic shape as the
translation develops.” Finally, the last form is known as a “deviant form” or
“extraneous,” for it does not take into consideration either the form or the content of the
original poem. Holmes (1988:27) says that “the translator making use of this approach
casts the metapoem into a form that is in no way implicit in either the form or the content
of the original.”
2.2.4.1.3 Re-creative translation
For many, referring to a poem as a “re-creative translation” is an oxymoron. If a
poem has been re-created, how can it possibly be considered a translation? Many would
say it is not even close to being an approximate rendition of the original. However, some
scholars―past and present―find great value, and preference, in taking a poem and
writing it in a way that brings it “up to date,” modernizing it for use in a new time. As we
consider what people have written about “creative” and “re-creative” translation
strategies, do bear in mind that the definitions may not be equal between writers. So