Abstract One of the key issues in recent translation theories has been on whether translation should domesticate or foreignize the source text. Venuti (1995) defines domesticating translation as a replacement of the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text with a text that is intelligible to the target-language reader. Foreignizing translation is defined as a translation that indicates the linguistic and cultural differences of the text by disrupting the cultural codes that prevail in the target language. Other scholars, like Tymoczko (1999), criticise this dichotomy by pointing out that a translation may be radically oriented to the source text in some respects, but depart radically from the source text in other respects, thus denying the existence of the single polarity that describes the orientation of a translation. For my research I have chosen five English translations of Lev Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina, covering over a century of the history of translations into English: Dole (1886), Garnett (1901), Maude (1918), Edmonds (1954) and Pevear and Volokhonsky (2000). My main objective has been to analyse the relationship between earlier and later translations. Since modern English language readers are more familiar with Russian language, literature and culture as well as with Tolstoy’s works than the 19th century readers were, theoretically speaking, translating Tolstoy in 2000 should be easier than it was in 1886. In reality each translator still had to choose between the adequate representation of Tolstoy’s text and the acceptability of their translation for their contemporary English speaking audiences (the terms described in Toury 1995) on a sliding scale between audience and text. In a way, with the higher development of the art and scholarship of translation, the expectations of readers and critics grow, and adequate representation of a text in a different language becomes more challenging. My hypothesis is that literary translation evolves as an exploration of deeper and deeper layers of the source text. In the present thesis I try to show how the history of translation of Anna Karenina into English reflects these different stages of evolution.

O principal objetivo deste trabalho é verificar quantitativamente a chamada hipótese da retradução de Berman (1990), através do Método das Modalidades de Tradução (MMT), elaborado por Aubert (1977, 1998), derivado do modelo pedagógico de procedimentos técnicos da tradução de Vinay e Darbelnet (1958), num estudo de caso de duas traduções para a língua inglesa do livro A Paixão Segundo G. H., escrito por Clarice Lispector em 1964, traduzido por Ronald W. de Sousa, em 1988 e retraduzido por Idra Novey, em 2012. A fundamentação teórica discorre sobre os conceitos de domesticação e estrangeirização, segundo Venuti, e sobre o percurso da retradução, desde 1990 até nossos dias. Também são comentados a vida e a arte de Clarice Lispector, bem como seus dois tradutores. Os trabalhos de Hélène Cixous e Benjamin Moser são relacionados aos possíveis motivos para a retradução. O MMT é apresentado e explicado. A comparação intuitiva sugeriu que as duas traduções pareciam muito literais, com algumas diferenças possivelmente devidas à subjetividade dos tradutores e exigências dos editores. Entretanto, o MMT, em uma amostra de 542 palavras, mostrou que a quantidade de domesticação na tradução foi estatisticamente mais alta do que na retradução, não rejeitando, portanto a hipótese de Berman. / This dissertation aims to quantitatively verify Bermans hypothesis of retranslation by describing and applying Auberts (1977, 1989) Method of Modalities of Translation (MMT), derived from Vinay and Darbelnets pedagogical model of technical procedures of translation (1958), in a case study of two English translations of The Passion According to G.H., by Clarice Lispector. The original was written in 1964, the first translation was made in 1988 by Ronald W. de Sousa, and the retranslation in 2012 by Idra Novey. The theoretical framework presents Venutis concepts of domestication and foreignization and the history of ideas on retranslation, from 1990 to the present. Clarice Lispector, the woman, and the writer, as well as its translators are described and commented on. Hélène Cixous and Benjamin Mosers works are presented as related to the motives of the retranslation. The Method (MMT) is presented and explained. Both translations seemed very literal with some differences possibly due to the translators subjectivity and demands of the editors. However, in a sample of 542 words the amount of domestication in the translation was statistically higher than in the retranslation and therefore in line with Bermans hypothesis.

O principal objetivo deste trabalho é verificar quantitativamente a chamada hipótese da retradução de Berman (1990), através do Método das Modalidades de Tradução (MMT), elaborado por Aubert (1977, 1998), derivado do modelo pedagógico de procedimentos técnicos da tradução de Vinay e Darbelnet (1958), num estudo de caso de duas traduções para a língua inglesa do livro A Paixão Segundo G. H., escrito por Clarice Lispector em 1964, traduzido por Ronald W. de Sousa, em 1988 e retraduzido por Idra Novey, em 2012. A fundamentação teórica discorre sobre os conceitos de domesticação e estrangeirização, segundo Venuti, e sobre o percurso da retradução, desde 1990 até nossos dias. Também são comentados a vida e a arte de Clarice Lispector, bem como seus dois tradutores. Os trabalhos de Hélène Cixous e Benjamin Moser são relacionados aos possíveis motivos para a retradução. O MMT é apresentado e explicado. A comparação intuitiva sugeriu que as duas traduções pareciam muito literais, com algumas diferenças possivelmente devidas à subjetividade dos tradutores e exigências dos editores. Entretanto, o MMT, em uma amostra de 542 palavras, mostrou que a quantidade de domesticação na tradução foi estatisticamente mais alta do que na retradução, não rejeitando, portanto a hipótese de Berman. / This dissertation aims to quantitatively verify Bermans hypothesis of retranslation by describing and applying Auberts (1977, 1989) Method of Modalities of Translation (MMT), derived from Vinay and Darbelnets pedagogical model of technical procedures of translation (1958), in a case study of two English translations of The Passion According to G.H., by Clarice Lispector. The original was written in 1964, the first translation was made in 1988 by Ronald W. de Sousa, and the retranslation in 2012 by Idra Novey. The theoretical framework presents Venutis concepts of domestication and foreignization and the history of ideas on retranslation, from 1990 to the present. Clarice Lispector, the woman, and the writer, as well as its translators are described and commented on. Hélène Cixous and Benjamin Mosers works are presented as related to the motives of the retranslation. The Method (MMT) is presented and explained. Both translations seemed very literal with some differences possibly due to the translators subjectivity and demands of the editors. However, in a sample of 542 words the amount of domestication in the translation was statistically higher than in the retranslation and therefore in line with Bermans hypothesis.