<p>The aim of this study is to compare metaphors from the 1970 edition of Joseph Conrsd's Heart of Darkness (originally published in 1902) with their Swedish translations in Mörkrets Hjärta, by Einar Hecksher (2006), to see how mwtaphors have been translated from English into Swedish, i.e. to see if there are any structural differences which cause semantic differences to the metaphors. By comparing the original metaphors with their translations, it is possible to point to difficulties, which may cause problems in the translation process. One example indicates that homonyms can be a problem. Nearly all of the English metaphors have been translated as metaphors in Swedish as well. About half of the metaphors studied have been semantically changed in their translations, yet without any pragmatic differences compared to the originals. It seems not that important which theory about metaphors (e.g. Lakoff, Leech, Levinson, Black) is more 'applicable' than the others with regard to translation. The result of translation of metaphors is more likely due to the translator's perception of the source language, rather than to theories about metaphors per se.</p>

The aim of this study is to compare metaphors from the 1970 edition of Joseph Conrsd's Heart of Darkness (originally published in 1902) with their Swedish translations in Mörkrets Hjärta, by Einar Hecksher (2006), to see how mwtaphors have been translated from English into Swedish, i.e. to see if there are any structural differences which cause semantic differences to the metaphors. By comparing the original metaphors with their translations, it is possible to point to difficulties, which may cause problems in the translation process. One example indicates that homonyms can be a problem. Nearly all of the English metaphors have been translated as metaphors in Swedish as well. About half of the metaphors studied have been semantically changed in their translations, yet without any pragmatic differences compared to the originals. It seems not that important which theory about metaphors (e.g. Lakoff, Leech, Levinson, Black) is more 'applicable' than the others with regard to translation. The result of translation of metaphors is more likely due to the translator's perception of the source language, rather than to theories about metaphors per se.