Thesis (M.F.A.)--The University of North Carolina at Greensboro, 2008. / Directed by Stuart Dischell; submitted to the Dept. of English. Title from PDF t.p. (viewed Aug. 27, 2009).

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Ohio University, June, 2005. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 72-73)

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, 1912. / Reprint of the 1914 ed. Bibliography: p. [210]-212.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Ohio University, June, 2005. / Title from PDF t.p. Includes bibliographical references (p. 72-73)

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2003. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 83-87).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1976. / Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 234-242).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1976. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 234-242). Also issued in print.

The aim of this study is to explore the stylistic identity of four translators of modern Greek poetry into English and to outline each translator’s distinct stylistic profile. In line with views on the subject expressed by Malmkjær (1996) and Baker (2000) a translator’s profile is seen as being composed by consistent patterns that can be identified throughout their work and which leave their personal mark on the text. A corpus-based methodology is used for the identification and exploration of these patterns, through a Specialized Corpus of English Translations of Modern Greek Poetry (SCETOMGP). This corpus contains translations by Rae Dalven, Kimon Friar, Edmund Keeley & Phillip Sherrard (working in collaboration) and David Connolly. The source-texts are taken from C.P. Cavafy, George Seferis, Yiannis Ritsos and Odysseus Elytis, who were extensively translated during the second half of the 20th century. The main purpose of the corpus is to facilitate direct comparison between the retranslations of the same poem. Such direct comparisons form the core of this study and have the advantage of making the issue of source-text influence on each translator directly observable, alongside their other stylistic traits. A detailed account of the theoretical views or reflections each translator has put forth is also presented. Following Holmes (1994) the translator of poetry is seen here as a meta-poet who requires skills similar to those of a critic and an original poet, and certain skills that are specific only to the translator. Consequently, the translators’ views on issues of language, literature, style and translation not only provide the backdrop for exploring any stylistic patterns found in the texts, but are seen as part of their stylistic profile. The distinguishing stylistic features for each translator are explored in both quantitative and qualitative terms. Overall word frequencies for each translator are examined, the stylistic features that are prominent in each case are identified, and their impact is considered. Special attention is also paid to the way those stylistic features that Boase-Beier (2005) calls ‘universal aspects of literature’ are treated by each translator. The next stage of the study involves the identification and sorting out of the patterns of stylistic features that consistently manifest in a translator’s work and examining how these patterns relate to their theoretical views and reflections. In the final stage, the stylistic profile of each translator is compiled by complementing the textual and contextual data together with each translator’s use of paratexts and extra-textual material.

This is the study of a previously neglected genre in pre-modern Arabic literature: the (poetic) epigram anthology. The epigram anthology was pioneered by a handful of poets in 14th-century Syria, but the genre was soon taken up by anthologists across the pre-modern Middle East and soon became one of the most popular types of Arabic poetry up until the modern period. This study is divided into two parts. Part One deals with critical issues in literary history and comparative literature, while Part Two is made up of three encapsulated studies on specific aspects of the social and literary (structural and textual) composition of the texts. In Part One, the epistemological background of the terms epigram and anthology is surveyed and their suitability for application to pre-modern Arabic literature is evaluated. Part One also includes a comprehensive history of the maqāṭīʿ (sing. maqṭūʿ, also maqṭūʿah) genre in Arabic as well as a detailed explication of this style of poetry, its anthological context, its generic status in the Arabic literary tradition, and its relation to the wider world-literary category of epigram. The three chapters of Part Two are devoted to the social network of anthologists and poets, the structure and composition of the anthologies themselves, and the way in which anthologists used a technique, which is called ‘variation’ in this study, to link the cited poetic material into an organic whole respectively. NB: This is a literary-historical study informed by the discipline of comparative literature; it is not primarily a philolological, biographical, or codicological investigation. The literary material presented here is what has been deemed most relevant for the purposes of the larger generic discussion at the centre of this literary-historical study. An annotated bibliography of unpublished sources is provided in an appendix in order to help the reader navigate the tricky present status of many Mamluk and Ottoman era sources.