This master's thesis deals with the comparison of the two Czech translations of the book A Stranger Came to the Farm by Mika Waltari. The first translation was made by Vladimír Skalička in 1941 and the second one by Jan Petr Velkoborský in 2005. The thesis is divided into two main parts, a theoretical part and an analysis. The purpose of the theoretical part is to introduce the reader to Mika Waltari, both translators and the original book. I also briefly write about the translation theory. The analysis deals with lots of problems. One of them is the translation of the title and names. I am also interested in creativity of the translators, in the lexical richness of the adaptations and in their mistakes as well. I also show the difference in the approach of literal and free translation. Another big problem this thesis deals with is which text was the source for work of Velkoborský, because in his time there were two Finnish versions with small differences in them and also Skalička's interpretation already existed.

This master's thesis deals with the comparison of the two Czech translations of the book A Stranger Came to the Farm by Mika Waltari. The first translation was made by Vladimír Skalička in 1941 and the second one by Jan Petr Velkoborský in 2005. The thesis is divided into two main parts, a theoretical part and an analysis. The purpose of the theoretical part is to introduce the reader to Mika Waltari, both translators and the original book. I also briefly write about the translation theory. The analysis deals with lots of problems. One of them is the translation of the title and names. I am also interested in creativity of the translators, in the lexical richness of the adaptations and in their mistakes as well. I also show the difference in the approach of literal and free translation. Another big problem this thesis deals with is which text was the source for work of Velkoborský, because in his time there were two Finnish versions with small differences in them and also Skalička's interpretation already existed.

Inom fältet för översättningsstudier har det traditionellt varit ett angeläget forskningsområde att erhålla kunskap om hur man hanterat samma källtext i olika kulturella kontexter. På våren år 1950 utkom en spansk översättning av den finske författaren Mika Waltaris historiska roman, Sinuhe egyptiläinen (Sinuhe egyptiern), och senare samma år, i Mexiko, nyöversattes verket för Latinamerika som en respons på den första. Föreliggande uppsats är en fallstudie och har genomförts i syfte att undersöka på vilket sätt och varför detta originalverks två översättningar på samma språk skiljer sig åt. Översättningarna har jämförts parallellt med dess källtext och studerats kontrastivt genom en kombination av kvantitativ och kvalitativ analys med hjälp av shift som teoretiskt verktyg. Resultaten av denna fallstudie visar att översättningarna skiljer sig åt i vissa innehållsmässiga aspekter och att dessa skillnader med all sannolikhet härrör från de samhälleliga politiska kontexter där de producerats. Genom studien uppdagas även att det finns slående likheter mellan de två måltexterna, främst i form av strykningar men också vad gäller innehåll, vilket ger skäl att tro att den ena utgåvan använts som någon form av underlag för den andra. / Within the field of translation studies, it has traditionally been an important field of research to gain knowledge of how to deal with the same source text in different cultural contexts. In the spring of 1950 a Spanish translation of Mika Waltari's historical novel Sinuhe the Egyptian was published, and later that year, in Mexico, appeared a second version translated for the audience in Latin America as a response to the first. This paper is a case study and has undertaken to examine how and why these two translations in the same language differ. The translations have been compared in parallel with its source text and studied contrastively by a combination of quantitative and qualitative analysis using the shift as a theoretical tool. The results of this case study show that the translations differ in certain aspects of the level of content and that these differences in all probability arose from the social- political contexts in which the texts were produced. The study reveals also that there are striking similarities between these two target texts, mainly in form of deletions but also in terms of content, giving reason to believe that one of these two editions was used as some form of basis for the other.