A mention of name in literature is almost always likely to recall the question Juliet posed to Romeo about his family name Montague in William Shakespeare´s Romeo and Juliet. In reading creative works we tend to identify characters basically by the names given to them. It is on this basic premise that some character analysis methods tend to define characters by taking recourse to their names and sometimes identifying them in metaphorical terms or as speaking names. Names play a very central and important role in any reading exercise and so would certainly the names given to characters be of importance to us. These are linguistic or semiotic signs that play a very crucial role in the overall linguistic structure of a literary text or its signification. Decoding of the names therefore becomes an important critical engagement in as far as it helps the reader in his deciphering of the text in which the names are. Characters´ names, as this article will show, can be used artistically to achieve a number of goals like encoding a central trait in a particular character´s signification, embracing crucial thematic motifs, ideological toning as well as even showing the particular writer´s point of view. Some of these qualities are easily lost in translation.

The motif of the doppelgänger has been present in literature and the visual arts, but also, more or less concealed, in music, from classical antiquity until today and may manifest itself in the most various forms, dependent on genre, epoch, and culture. This has led criticism to consider the motif of the doppelgänger as a genre in its own right and to propose, especially during the last years, numerous classifications of the ways in which this psychological and anthropological phenomenon is treated in the arts. In the present study I have concentrated my attention on creations in which the doppelgänger represents the disturbing aspects of the hero’s ego. This motif was especially prominent in German late romanticism and has considerably spread during the last decades in cinematography and in fantastic literature. Though there exists a large amount of criticism on the motif of the doppelgänger, what has hardly been analyzed up to now is the role of the characters’ and their doppelgängers’ names. Therefore the aim of my study was to exemplify by means of numerous examples from antiquity until present times the role the proper name has played in literature and other arts dedicated to the theme of the doppelgänger.

In deze scriptie wordt binnen het theoretische kader van de descriptieve vertaalwetenschap onderzocht hoe eigennamen uit The Fellowship of the Ring door J.R.R. Tolkien worden vertaald naar het Nederlands en het Afrikaans. De namen worden verzameld in een drietalig corpusonderzoek en daarna gecategoriseerd volgens type en de door Jan Van Coillie (2006) beschreven vertaalstrategieën. De resultaten van de twee vertalingen worden dan vergeleken en gepresenteerd met enkele illustratieve voorbeelden uit beide vertalingen. Het resultaat van de analyse toont aan dat de Afrikaanse vertaling meer doelcultuur-gericht is dan de Nederlandse en dat de vertaaloplossingen in de Afrikaanse vertalingen minder consequent zijn uitgevoerd. / This essay studies how proper names in The Fellowship of the Ring by J.R.R. Tolkien are translated into Dutch and Afrikaans through the theoretical framework of Descriptive Translation Studies. The names are collected in a three-language corpus study and then categorised by type of name and translation strategy as described by Jan Van Coillie (2006). The results from the two translations are then compared and presented with a few illustrative examples from both translations. The results from the analysis show that the Afrikaans translation is more target culture-oriented than the Dutch translation and that the Afrikaans translation contains less consistent translation solutions.

Der Begriff der ‚Selbstbezeichnung‘ gewann seine Bedeutung und Bedeutsamkeit zunächst in politischen Kontexten. Um ihn an theoretische Konzepte anschlussfähig zu machen, werden im Folgenden probeweise zwei Differenzierungen vollzogen, die sich im weiteren Verlauf jedoch beide wieder aufheben.

Detta konstnärliga examensarbete är ett försök att som pianist nå en fördjupad förståelse för Franz Schuberts Drei Klavierstücke (D.946). Verket komponerades under Schuberts dödsår 1828 men var det i mars eller maj? Syftet är att framföra Drei Klavierstücke på bästa möjliga sätt. Det utförs genom kontextualisering av Schubert liv och en fördjupad analys av hans musik samt jämförelser av olika partiturutgåvor, finnandet och problematiseringen utav Schuberts huruvida verket skrivs i mars eller maj, samt att erhålla djuplodade kunskaper som underlag för att skapa minnesvärda associativa titlar. Därigenom kan jag bättre visualisera inom mig det som ska spelas. Med andra ord, den konstnärliga gestaltningen byggs därmed upp genom min visualisering av verket i min instudering. De första två styckena i Drei Klavierstücke hänger utan tvekan ihop med varandra (Leisinger, et al., 2015) och därför har jag valt att framföra dessa två på min examenskonsert. I studien vill jag ändå skapa associativa titlar till alla tre styckena. Med en konstnärlig metod samt litterära kunskaper på tyska, engelska och svenska skapade jag de associativa namnen. Dessa redovisas i studiens resultatkapitel, med originalspråk på tyska: Reise in Jenseits in Drei Teilen, 1. Lebensende, 2. Jenseits, 3. Himmelstür. Emellertid skapades även översättning på svenska: 1. Livetsslut, 2. Efterlivet, 3. Pärleporten. Gällande mars eller maj lämnar förlagens svar på detta öppet. Enligt dem stavades maj som M-A-Y. Schubert talade sannolikt engelska då han tidigare arbetat som hjälplärare. Det verkar ändå konstigt att ange månaden på engelska i ett dokument som i övrigt författades på tyska? / This artistic thesis is an attempt to reach a deeper understanding of the piano pieces Drei Klavierstücke (D.946) composed by Franz Schubert in 1828, but was it in March or May? The aim is for me as a pianist to perform Franz Schubert's Drei Klavierstücke in the best possible way. It is carried out through contextualization of Schubert's life and an in-depth analysis of his music as well as comparisons of different score editions, the finding and problematization of Schubert's writing of May or March, as well as obtaining deep knowledge as a basis for creating memorable associative titles. This way I can better visualize a representation of the work in my rehearsal. The first two pieces of Drei Klavierstücke are undoubtedly related to each other (Leisinger, et al., 2015) and therefore I have chosen to perform these two at my graduation concert. In the study, I still want to create associative titles for all three pieces. With a poetic method and literary knowledge in German, English and Swedish, I created the associative names. These are reported in the result chapter of the study, with original language in German: Reise in Jenseits in Drei Teilen, 1. Lebensende, 2. Jenseits, 3. Himmelstür. However, an English and a Swedish translation was also created: 1. End of Life, 2. Afterlife, 3. Heaven’s Gate. Regarding March or May, the publisher's answer to this is left open. According to them, May was spelled M-A-Y. Schubert, who was previously an assistant teacher, certainly spoke English. However, why would he do that in a document that was otherwise written in German? / <p>Repertoar:</p><p>Leoš Janáček (1854 – 1928)”På en övervuxen stig”, Serie I1. Våra kvällar (Naše večery)2. Ett bortblåst löv (Lístek odvanutý)4. Madonnan av Frydek (Frýdecká panna Maria)</p><p>Franz Schubert (1797 – 1828)Drei Klavierstücke, D.946 posth.I. Allegro assai, ”Lebensende, The End of Life, Livetsslut.”II. Allegretto, “Jenseits, Afterlife, Efterlivet.”</p><p>Wilhelm Stenhammar (1871 – 1927)Tre fantasier för piano, Op. 11.Nr. 1 Molto appassionato</p><p>Paus</p><p>Frédéric Chopin (1810 – 1849)Ballad Nr. 3, Ass dur, Op. 47  </p><p>Robert Schumann (1810 – 1856) arr. Franz Liszt (1811 – 1886)Liebeslied (Widmung), S. 566.Ur: Myrthen op. 25   </p><p>Ludwig van Beethoven (1770 – 1827)ur: Sonat Nr. 21 C-Dur Op.53II. Introduzione: Adagio moltoIII. Rondo. Allegretto moderato — Prestissimo</p><p>- - -</p><p>Medverkande: Daniel Chun, piano.</p><p>Georg Asplund, KMH lärarstudent inriktining musik och mediaproduktion,  uppgift: videofilm.</p><p>Axel Wokander, KMH klassisk musik pianostudent, uppgift: bild projektor keynote.</p><p>- - -</p><p>Keynote presentation som visades på storskärm, innehöll namn på repertoar för publikens skull.</p><p>- - - </p><p>Videofilm på konserten, togs från inifrån scenen och fångar även publiken förutom vänster sida av pianisten Daniel Chun och pianot.</p>