Leyb Kvitko's A tsig mit zivn tsigelekh |
When
you learn another language, you eventually get to the point where translating
seems like a feasible idea. In fact, translating has been central to my experience
of Yiddish, because rather than do the sensible thing and work my way through
one or more of the excellent Yiddish textbooks out there, for most of the last
two years I’ve been learning by reading and translating (with varying success
and with gradually increasing speed) a glorious selection of Yiddish
literature. This suits me perfectly, since knowing how to ask for more coffee
or describe someone’s clothes is absolutely fine when you might need a language
for holidays and polite travel chit-chat, but my love for Yiddish came from
knowing that so much of its literature was out there to be discovered, as yet
untranslated and completely unknown to me.
Having
moved from I. L. Peretz and I. B. Singer short stories to Celia Dropkin’s
poetry, my eternally patient reading partner and Yiddish mentor (take a bow,
Stephen Ross) suggested that we read Sholem Aleichem’s novel Motl, peysi dem khazns (Motl, the Cantor’s Son). Although on a
completely different scale from our previous readings, what Motl has in common with those shorter texts is that it
isn’t written in standard YIVO Yiddish. The Yiddish of Sholem Aleichem is not
the same as the Yiddish of Peretz, which in turn isn’t the same as the Yiddish
of Singer or Dropkin. Each author mixes in different degrees of loshn-koydesh and their work is shaped
by the Yiddish that surrounded them in childhood. These different Yiddishes
vary in their spelling and their pronunciation, and are often scattered with untranslatable
words that I can’t find in any of my five dictionaries. But while these authors
have all had their work translated into English by far more accomplished
Yiddishists than me, there are plenty who have not.
Leyb Kvitko (1890-1952) |
Leyb Kvitko (1890-1952) falls
into the latter category. Known primarily as a writer of extraordinarily popular
children’s books, Kvitko also wrote poetry in Yiddish, becoming increasingly politically
active until he was arrested and executed by Stalin’s regime. And yet it’s one
of Kvitko’s poems, “Shteyner eyntsike”, which has been the best illustration of
the complexities involved in translating Yiddish, particularly since Kvitko’s
particular version of Soviet Yiddish tests my translation abilities to a
staggering degree. It speaks volumes about the level of my Yiddish obsession that
my first thought on reading Kvitko was, “I wonder how long it would take to
translate one of these poems?” The answer was hours and hours. And hours. But my
volume of Kvitko’s poetry has voyaged from Moscow, where it was published in 1967,
to Montreal and now it is here in Warwickshire sitting demurely on my desk. A
book that has travelled so far certainly deserves this attention, despite the
considerable challenges that it presents to someone with limited Yiddish, and a newly
heightened awareness of just how slippery translation can be.
The
first challenge with this poem is the title. Shteyner I know means “stones”, so that’s easy, but “eyntsike” can
mean “rare”, “single”, “individual” and “only”, amongst other possibilities.
Unluckily for me, almost all of these potential translations work in the context
of the title, so from the outset the different possible versions of the poem
start multiplying with abandon.
Leyb Kvitko, 1919 |
The
second challenge was that there were several words that I couldn’t find in any
of my dictionaries. “Shteyner eyntsike” was written in 1917, so I assumed that
my earlier, pre-standardised dictionaries would be my best bet. Alas, Yiddish
just isn’t that logical. And if eyntsike
gave me grief, it was nothing on stosnvayz.
Four of my dictionaries drew a blank, but the fifth noted that stos is, or was, a card game. In the context
of the line, could stosnvays refer to
a pattern in which these stones are laid out, as part of a game? Then there’s arbelekh, another word that I can’t
find. Arbl means sleeves, so could arbelekh mean “little sleeves”? Or is it
something to do with arb, meaning “inheritance”?
That word occurs in a line about a child’s smile, mit arbelekh farshart, so is that smile covered with little sleeves
or is it being described as a “mischievous little inheritance”? Either way, the
grammar doesn’t work – there are plurals nestling up against singulars in a
most indecisive way.
Then
there’s the challenge presented by being the kind of lunatic who owns five
Yiddish dictionaries, all of which want to argue amongst themselves about the best
way to translate any given word. This means that oysgebroyter could mean “curved” or “crooked”, but it could also
mean “constructed”. Since the stanza where it occurs follows imagery of
building, that’s less troubling than it might have been, but should I translate
troym as “dream” or “ideal”?
Finally,
Kvitko plays a really unexpected trick. Many of his poems contain loshn-koydesh words that have been
spelled out phonetically. This means that mayse-bilder
foxed me but good, until I realised that mayse
(מײַסע) was the same word
as mayse (מעשׂה), or “story”. Oy, did I feel dumb.
Leyb Kvitko, Dos ketsele |
This
was when I realised that the various different incarnations of this poem weren’t
going to resolve themselves into a single, final, coherent translation, at
least, not for me. All these crooked dreams and constructed ideals were going
to continue to co-exist, implacably stubborn, no matter how many times I
checked and rechecked every word in every dictionary. Whether the narrator turns
into a climbing frame or simply builds one, the outcome is the same: this poem
is alive again after years spent stilled and silent, waiting for another
Yiddish reader to come along. I certainly never thought that I would love this
linguistic uncertainty so much, or that seeing these competing narratives
springing up from a single line of verse would produce such joy from such utter
incomprehension. I expect that as my Yiddish improves, these chimerical moments
where the language squirms and flexes and resists being fixed into a single
meaning will become fewer and fewer. I will miss them.
No comments:
Post a Comment