Poeturi Targmanis Lingvistika 3

m e s a m e n a w i l i
poeturi teqstis Sinaarsi

da misi Targmani
199
* * *
Targmanis Teoretikosebi tradiciulad msjeloben TargmanSi

Sinaarsisa da formis erTianobis Sesaxeb, Sinaarsis sisworesa da sizusteze,
magram TviT Sinaarsis cneba Targmanis TeoriaSi ganusazRvreli rCeba. meore
mxriv, im dros, rodesac Targmanis Teoria mxatvruli nawarmoebis da misi
calkeuli komponentis Sinaarsze msjelobs zogadad da zedapirulad, teqstis
lingvistikam, rogorc SedarebiT axalgazrda mecnierulma dargma
lingvistikisa, gadadga didmniSvnelovani da gabeduli nabijebi teqstis
Sinaarsis interpretaciis TvalsazrisiT, rac ar SeiZleba SeumCneveli da
gauTvaliswinebeli darCes mecnierebis iseTi mniSvnelovani sferosaTvis,
rogoric gaxlavT Targmanis Teoria da, saerTod, Targmanis mecnieruli
Seswavla da aRwera.
teqstis lingvisturi meTodikis gamoyenebam saSualeba mogvca,
gagvesazRvra Sinaarsis cneba dedansa da TargmanSi da gagvexsna Targmanis
Seqmnis meqanizmi misi Semdgomi srulyofis mizniT. teqstSi oTxi saxis
Sinaarsobriv informacias vansxvavebT: 1) leqsis zedapiruli Sinaarsobrivi
qarga, anu Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informacia (i. r. galperinis
terminologiis Tanaxmad)1, 2) koncepti, anu Sinaarsobriv-konceptualuri
informacia (isev i. r. galperinis terminiT), 3) qveteqsti, anu rasac galperini
Sinaarsobriv-qveteqstur informacias uwodebs da 4) xati, romelic i. r.
galperinis mier SemoTavazebuli sistemiT araa gaTvaliswinebuli. rogorc
teqstobrivi kategoria, igi Cven mieraa wamoyenebuli, da mas zemoaRniSnul
kategoriaTa analogiiT Sinaarsobriv-xatobriv informacias vuwodebT.
yoveli zemodasaxelebuli Sinaarsobrivi kategoria, Cveni Sexedulebis
Tanaxmad, da gansxvavebiT i. r. galperinis mier SemoTavazebuli sistemisagan,
ar warmoadgens mxolod erTiani leqsis an misi calkeuli strofis
kuTvnilebas. teqstis interpretaciis procesSi, agreTve misi Targmnis
procesSi, Sinaarsobrivad relevanturi SeiZleba aRmoCndes dasrulebuli
azris gamomxatveli sityva an sityvaTa jgufi, romelic warmoadgens kidec
teqstisa Tu Targmanis erTeuls. aseTi erTeuli SeiZleba iyos leqsis
1 ix. nawili I, Tavi III.
200
calkeuli striqonic, romelsac analizis dros SeiZleba mivuyenoT aRniSnul
kategoriaTa sistema.
vidre SevudgebodeT poeturi teqstis Sinaarsis aRweras, aucileblobad
migvaCnia zustad ganvsazRvroT, Tu ras vgulisxmobT am saxis teqstSi da
rogoria misi Semecnebis SesaZlebloba.
poetur teqstSi igulisxmeba garkveuli azris gamomxatveli werilobiTi
erTeuli, romlis poeturi varianti aucileblad samyaros mxatvruli da
poeturi xedvis Sedegad iqmneba da misi dekodireba aseve mxatvruli teqstis
aRqmis Cvevebs moiTxovs.
poeturi teqsti SeiZleba saTanado komentarebiT iyos warmodgenili,
rac, udavod, xels uwyobs mis swor realizacias mkiTxvelis mier. komentari
SeiZleba ekuTvnodes avtors an redaqtors. aseT komentarebs Cven agreTve
erTiani teqstis aucilebel, magram araZiriTad komponentad miviCnevT da
misgan gamijvnis mizniT mas Tanateqsts vuwodebT. 1
aranakleb mniSvnelovania is codna, romelic komentarebSi ar aisaxeba,
magram igulisxmeba, rom igi moqceulia mkiTxvelis cnobierebaSi da poeturi
teqstis avtori xSirad swored aseTi codnis mixedviT qmnis Tavis nawarmoebs,
anu im SegnebiT, rom saTanado mkiTxvelSi mis mier nagulisxmevi qaragma ara
marto sworad iqneba gagebuli, aramed sasurvel mxatvrul efeqtsac miaRwevs.
amis saukeTeso magaliTia aluzia, rogorc stilisturi xerxi, romelic,
SesaZloa, redaqtoris komentarSive aRmoCndes ganmartebuli. xolo im
SemTxvevaSi, Tu is komentarSi araa dafiqsirebuli, es ar niSnavs imas, rom
misi monawileoba ar igulisxmeba teqstis Sinaarsis SeqmnaSi.
aseTi codna teqstis miRma, mis gareT arsebobs, magram is aucileblad
monawileobs teqstis realizaciaSi, radgan is erT-erTi ZiriTadi damakavSi-
rebeli rgolia mweralsa da mkiTxvels Soris da mas, Cveulebriv, mwerlisa
Tu mkiTxvelis Tezaurusi ewodeba, rasac pirobiTad gare teqsts vuwodebT.
damokidebuleba mkiTxvelisa da avtoris Tezaurusebs Soris cvalebadi da
sxvadasxvagvaria. cvalebadia imdenad, ramdenadac mkiTxveli droTa
ganmavlobaSi zrdis Tavis Tezauruss, xolo poeturi nawarmoebi misi Seqmnis
momentisaTvis erTgvarad afiqsirebs avtorisas. Tumc, aqve unda aRiniSnos
isic, rom mkiTxvelma, SesaZloa, amoikiTxos teqstSi iseTi ram, rac poets
1È. Ìåðàáèøâèëè, Ê âîïðîñó î êàòåãîðèè èíôîðìàòèâíîñòè, – Â ñá.: Äèàëåêòèêà ôîðìû è

ñîäåðæàíèÿ â ÿçûêå è ëèòåðàòóðå, Тбилиси-Ленинград, 1986, ñтр. 97-98.
201
Segnebulad da gacnobierebulad arc hqondes Cadebuli masSi, magram aseTi
informaciis arseboba gaucnobiereblad iyos SesaZlebeli.
sxvadasxvagvarobaSi ki aucileblad vgulisxmobT im realur
sxvadasxvagvarobas, romelsac mkiTxvelTa nairsaxeoba gvTavazobs. es
ukanaskneli aucileblad avlens im mudmiv da ucvlel saerTos mkiTxvelsa da
poets Soris, romelic gvaZlevs uflebas nawarmoebi garkveuli Rirebulebis
mqoned gamovacxadoT.
202
pirveli Tavi
Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informacia
dedansa da TargmanSi
rogorc ukve iyo aRniSnuli, Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informacia

gulisxmobs cnobebs im faqtebis, movlenebisa da procesebis Sesaxeb, romelTac
adgili aqvT rogorc realur, ise warmosaxviT sinamdvileSi. misi
gamomxatveli enobrivi erTeulebi, Cveulebriv, pirdapiri mniSvnelobebiT
arian teqstSi warmodgenili.
poetur TargmanSi Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informacia
Tanamimdevruli sizustiT arasodes gadmoicema, rac araviTar SemTxvevaSi ar
niSnavs voluntarizms, rogorc upasuxismgeblo TviTnebobas mTargmnelis
mxridan. magram, amave dros, dedniseuli teqstis calkeuli detalis Sinaarsis
gauTvaliswineblobam Tu ugulebelyofam SeiZleba daamaxinjos Targmanis
Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi fena rogorc dednis Sesabamisi fenis arekvla da
garkveuli uaryofiTi gavlenac iqonios sxva Sinaarsobriv fenaTa
realizaciaze.
calke msjelobis sagania is SemTxvevebi, rodesac teqstSi mTargmnels
axali faqtobrivi detali Semoaqvs.
ganvixiloT, pirvel yovlisa, iseTi SemTxvevebi, rodesac Targmani
arasworad asaxavs dedanSi arsebul faqtobriv informacias, kerZod, rodesac
erTi Sinaarsobrivi detali meore, araSesabamisi detaliT gamoixateba.
magaliTisaTvis davasaxelebT baironis zemoT ganxilul leqss `Fragment
Written Shortly After the Marriage of Miss Chaworth”, anu “Hills of Annesley~ (ix. nawili
II, Tavi III), rogorc mas moixsenieben xolme.
baironebis sagvareulo mamulis, niustedis, gverdiT mdebareobs ensli,
Cavorsebis kar-midamo, sadac cxovrobda mSvenieri qaliSvili meri en Cavorsi.
igi bairons Soreul naTesavadac ekuTvnoda. baironis winapars, mexuTe
lords, romelic Tavisi mZime bunebis gamo `borot lordad~ iyo wodebuli,
duelSi mouklavs Cavorsebis winapari. miuxedavad im SuRlisa, romelic or
gvars Soris iyo Camovardnili, Cavorsebis ojaxs baironi kargad miuRia. da
203
es moxda maSin, rodesac ymawvilma lordma Caibara memkvidreoba da Tavis
mamulSi dasaxlda. baironi maTi xSiri stumari gaxda da mas TavdaviwyebiT
Seuyvarda meri, gansakuTrebuli Sinagani bunebis mqone mSvenieri asuli. maSin
baironi 15 wlis gaxldaT, meri ki masze ori wliT ufrosi. es iyo 1803 wlis
zafxulSi.
meris mSvenebiT mojadoebuli ymawvili yovel cismare dRes Turme
cxenze amxedrebuli mihqroda enslisaken, raTa exila Tavisi àmomavali
varskvlavi~, rogorc mas Tavad uwodebda. bairons merisTan ganSoreba ver
warmoedgina da amitomac iyo, rom man skolaSi dabrunebaze uari ganacxada da
mTeli saswavlo semestri gaacdina. meri Turme usityvod xvdeboda yvelafers,
Tumc siyvaruliT ar pasuxobda.
1805 wlis zafxulSi, rodesac 17 wlis baironi kembrijis universitetSi
Cairicxa, meri Cavorsma iqorwina mezobel memamuleze. am ambavs sulis
siRrmemde SeuZravs poeti... mZime gancdebi riTmebSiRa poulobdnen
gamoZaxils. ase Seiqmna leqsi `nawyveti, dawerili mis Cavorsis qorwinebis
Semdeg~.
Cven aq moviyvaneT leqsis Seqmnis ambavi, raTa ukeT warmovaCinoT is
erTi patara detali, romelic analizis TvalsazrisiT gvainteresebs. es
gaxlavT Sesityveba “Hills of Annesley”, anu, sityvasityviT, ènslis gorakebi~,
ènslis borcvebi~. aRniSnuli leqsis pirveli qarTuli Targmani, ramdenadac
CvenTvis cnobilia, ekuTvnis giorgi niSnianiZes:
aneslis mTao, civo da berwo,

Cemi bavSvoba Sen gebareba,
o, mTao, mTao, Sens lamaz mkerdze
ra susxiani qrian qarebi!
me veRar gnaxav da nuRar meli,

nacnob adgilebs ver vesaubro,
aw Sens Tavs, mTao, Rimili meris
ver momaCvenebs caTa sauflod.
(19, gv. 100)
giorgi niSnianiZis Targmanis mixedviT, Tu mkiTxveli leqss dedanSi ar

ecnoba, iqmneba STabeWdileba, rom leqsSi moqceuli sevda baironma
daukavSira erT mTas, civsa da berws, romelic amave dros mTargmnelis
204
interpretaciaSi ratomRac lamazi mkerdis mqoned warmodgeba. es ki sruliad
axali da araSesatyvisi detalia, rameTu dedanSi ènslis gorakebi~
Sefasebulia uaryofiTi epiTetebiT: “bleak” (civi), “barren” (unayofo), da am
borcvebze gaismis CrdiloeTis Seurigebeli qariSxlebis zuzuni _ “how the
northern tempests warring...”.
davubrundeT ZiriTads: “Hills of Annesley” _ anu enslis borcvebi, gnebavT
gorakebi, ar unda iTargmnebodes rogorc erTi mTa da isic enslis saxelis
matarebeli, radgan es absoluturad ewinaaRmdegeba im eqstralingvistur
garemos, romelic dedanSia asaxuli: ènsli~ gaxlavT erT-erTi mamuli
inglisSi, notingemSiris sagrafoSi, romelic mTiT saerTod ar gamoirCeva.
magram es adgili cnobilia odnav amaRlebuli, gaSlili borcvebiT,
romelTaganac yovel calkeuls Tavisi saxeli gaaCnia. esenia: Ladycot Hill
(ledikot hili), Castle Hill (qasl hili), Saddle Hill (sedl hili), Diadem Hill (daiadem
hili), magram am borcvTagan arc erTs ar hqvia ensli hili.
rogorc zemoT aRvniSneT, ensli hqvia mTlianad im aremares, sadac es
borcvebia ganlagebuli.
aRniSnuli Sesityveba sworadaa asaxuli a. blokis rusul TargmanSi.
mogvyavs rusuli Targmanis sruli teqsti:
Îòðûâîê, íàïèñàííûé âñêîðå ïîñëå

çàìóæåñòâà Ìèññ ×àâîðò
Áåñïëîäíûå ìåñòà, ãäå áûë ÿ ñåðäöåì ìîëîä,

Àíñëåéñêèå õîëìû!
Áóøóÿ, âàñ îäåë êîñìàòîé òåíüþ õîëîä
Áóíòóþùåé çèìû.
Íåò ïðåæíèõ ñâåòëûõ ìåñò, ãäå ñåðäöå òàê ëþáèëî

×àñàìè îòäûõàòü,
Âàì íåáîì äëÿ ìåíÿ â óëûáêå Ìåðè ìèëîé
Óæå íå çàáëèñòàòü.
(27, ò. II, c.8)
rogorc zemoT aRvniSneT [z], bgeris aliteracia SesityvebaSi “Hills of

Annesly”, [′hilz әv ′ænzli] rogorc stilisturi efeqti, araa gadmocemuli arc
niSnianiZis èneslis mTaSi~ da arc a. blokis SesityvebaSi “Àíñëåéñêèå õîëìû”,
205
Tumca a. blokTan [c] bgera, romelic aJRerebulia rogorc pirvel sityvebSi,
ise mTel leqsSi, exmianeba gansazRvrebas “Àíñëåéñêèå” da aRwevs kidec
saTanado efeqts.
rac Seexeba Cvens variants, SevecadeT mogvenaxa am Sesityvebis
SedarebiT sivrcobiTi asaxvis saSualeba da SevCerdiT leqsemaze `serebi~,
romelic Tavisi mniSvnelobiT srulad Seesabameba mis Sinaarss, gansazRvreba
ènslis~-Tan erTad qmnis [s] bgeris aliteracias, da amdenad gvaZlevs
dedniseuli teqstis msgavs stilistur efeqts (naw. II, Tavi III).
ganxiluli magaliTi naTelyofs im faqts, rom Targmnis procesSi
gansakuTrebiT relevanturia is informacia, romelic leqsis Seqmnis ambavsa
Tu masSi asaxuli eqstralingvisturi detalebis gacnobierebas gulisxmobs,
rasac Cven gareteqsts vuwodebT. aseTi codna rig SemTxvevebSi Tanateqstis
statuss iZens, Tu is avtoris an redaqtoris komentarebSic aisaxeba.
Tu zemoT ganxiluli leqsi warmoadgens magaliTs, romelic
gareteqstis codnas moiTxovs, xSiria SemTxvevebi, rodesac Sinaarsobriv-
faqtobrivi informacia irRveva da gareteqsti arafer SuaSia.
ganvixiloT isev baironis leqsi, “I would I were a Careless Child” – `netav
uzrunvel bavSvad maqcia~. es leqsi pirvelad 1808 wels gamoqveynda, e. i. maSin,
rodesac poeti oci wlis iyo. masSi asaxulia axalgazrda poetis
damokidebuleba samyarosadmi, misi ltolva Tavisuflebisadmi, rodesac igi
laR da uzrunvel bavSvobas ixsenebs.
gTavazobT leqsis srul teqsts, romelsac vurTavT Cveneul qarTul
Targmans:
I would I were a careless child

Still dwelling in my Highland cave,
Or roaming through the dusky wild,
Or bounding o'er he dark blue wave;
The cumbrous pomp of Saxon pride

Accords not with the freeborn soul,
Which loves the mountain’s craggy side,
And seeks the rocks where billows roll.
Fortune! take back these cultured lands,

Take back this name of splendid sound!
206
I hate the touch of servile hands,
I hate the slaves that cringe around.
Place me among the rocks I love,
Which sound to Ocean’s wildest roar;

I ask but this – again to rove
Through scenes my youth hath known before.
Few are my years, and yet I feel

The world was ne’er design’d for me:
Ah! why do dark’ning shades conceal
The hour when man must cease to be?
Once I beheld a splendid dream,

A visionary scene of bliss:
Truth! – wherefore did thy hated beam
Awake me to a world like this?
I loved – but those I loved are gone;

Had friends – my early friends are fled:
How cheerless feels the heart alone,
When all its former hopes are dead!
Though gay companions o’er the bowl

Dispel awhile the sense of ill;
Though pleasure stirs the maddening soul,
The heart – the heart – is lonely still.
How dull! to hear the voice of those

Whom rank or chance, whom wealth or power,
Have made, though neither friends nor foes,
Associates of the festive hour.
Give me again a faithful few,

In years and feelings still the same,
And I will fly the midnight crew,
Where boist’rous joy is but a name.
And woman, lovely woman! thou,

My hope, my comforter, my all!
207
How cold must be my bosom now,
When e’en thy smiles begin to pall!
Without a sigh would I resign

This busy scene of splendid woe,
To make that calm contentment mine,
Which virtue knows, or seems to know.
Fain would I fly the haunts of men –

I seek to shun, not hate mankind;
My breast requires the sullen glen,
Whose gloom may suit a darken’d mind.
Oh! that to me the wings were given

Which bear the turtle to her nest!
Then would I cleave the vault of heaven,
To flee away, and be at rest.
(11, p. 43.)
netav uzrunvel bavSvad maqcia,

rom hailendis mRvimeT mxareSi
vegebebode mwuxrs, Tu ganTiads,
kvlavac vapobde sivrces TareSiT.
Tavisufali sulis qomagma

viT avitano saqsonT sixarbe,
mTebTan trfiali rogor momaklda,
momnatrebia me zRvis silaRe.
bedo! amas gTxov, waiRe ukan

simdidre mTeli, rac ram momeci,
rCeuli gvaric waiRe ukan,
mZuls yvela mona, yvela momTmeni.
iq damasaxle, sadac wylis Tqafuns

usmens da xvdeba klde frTazviadi,
ocnebas erTs Tu vinaxav saTuTs _
dabrundebodes is ganTiadi.
208
vici, samyaro CemTvis ar qmnila,
wlebiT Wabuki, var dazafruli,
ratom ar metyvi, RmerTo, axdilad,
Tu sad momiswrebs me aRsasruli.
gamaxsendeba sizmari wrfeli,

aRsavse xibliT, netari marad,
rad gamaRviZe am satanjvelSi,
sicxadis sxivo, wyeulis darad.
vinc me miyvarda, visac Zmad vTvlidi,

yvela gafrinda, yvela wavida,
me marto vdgevar qargadavlili,
imedic, albaT, mitom wamixda!
Tumc gamiqarwylebs dRes wamiT Rvino

am wuTisoflis yvela siaves,
da Smagi sulic boboqrobs TiTqos,
guls vervin Svelis, guls _ naiarevs!
saubedurod lxinis dros vismen

sityvebs arca mtris, da arc megobris,
aramed maTi, isev da isev,
qveynisgan xeirs vinc gamoelis.
veRirsebode kvlavac im wamebs,

rom gverdiT isev myavdnen erTgulni,
gaveqceodi xom me im wamsve
Ramis uqm Tevas, cnobils rCeulTTvis.
Sen ki mSvenebiT savse diaco,

gTvlidi imedad, Svebis sawindrad,
gulSi rom grZnoba aRar ciagobs,
dRes Sens Rimilsac vigdeb sacinlad!
mzad var davtovo daufiqreblad

sevdac, siamec, qveynis _ codvilis,
rom TviTon viqce me srulqmnilebad,
Zala rom hqvia, keTilSobili.
209
minda movcilde, movwyde kacT modgmas,
xalxi ki ar mZuls, _ maT Tavs varideb,
suls, rom swuxs mudam, stiris da mosTqvams,
myudro savane surs imTaviTve.
frTebi rom momca gareul mtredis,

cis kars gavapob, gavcdebi freniT!
maSin viqnebi me sul sxva bedis,
da movisveneb maradis SvebiT. 1
leqsSi ZiriTadad ori Temaa gamokveTili da urTierTdakavSirebuli.

pirveli _ swrafva Tavisuflebisaken, rogorc protesti realuri sinamdvilis
winaaRmdeg, xolo meore _ ltolva simSvidisa da Soreuli simaRlisaken. es
ori pwkari Tavis kulminacias leqsis bolo strofSi aRwevs, rodesac poeti
aRmoTqvams survils, moswydes miwier samyaros da, frinvelis darad, Sveba da
mosveneba caSi povos.
poeti miiswrafvis ganmartoebisaken, ciuri samyarosaken, magram
araviTar SemTxvevaSi kacTmoZuleobis gamo. misi miswrafeba, ganeridos xalxs
_ tragizmiTaa aRsavse. misi protesti kacobriobis mimarT udidesi
kacTmoyvareobiT aixsneba. poetis es damokidebuleba garesamyarosadmi
sakmaod naTladaa gadmocemuli striqoniT “I seek to shun, not hate mankind”. poeti
TiTqos da sagangebod mimarTavs da afrTxilebs kidec mkiTxvels: `me vcdilob
gaverido, magram ar mZuls xalxi~.
miuxedavad amisa, iseTi maRalniWieri mTargmneli, rogorc valeri
briusovi gaxldaT, leqsis am nawils Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informaciis
uxeSi darRveviT gadmoitans rusul enaze: “Ìíå íåíàâèñòåí ðîä ëþäñêîé”, – `me
mZuls kacTa modgma~. es is frazaa, romelic ar uTqvams bairons da ar gvaqvs
ufleba mivaweroT mas, gansakuTrebiT konkretul konteqstSi.
aRniSnuli frazis swori interpretacia saSualebas gvaZlevs poetis
imedgacruebul damokidebulebaSi amovikiTxoT ara zizRi da siZulvili
adamianisadmi, aramed Sebraleba da Secodeba mis mankier mxareTa gamo.
ai, ratom surs poets moswydes miwier garemos da masze amaRlebulma
zeciur samyaroSi monaxos Sveba...
1 ix. i. merabiSvili, baironi qarTulad, gv. 22-24.
210
aRniSnuli frazis zemoT warmodgenili interpretaciis gansamtkiceblad
moviyvanT striqons `Caild haroldis~ mesame simReridan, sadac poeti kvlav
imave gancdas gviziarebs:
To fly from, need not be to hate, mankind:

All are not fit with them to stir and toil.
(11, Child-Harold, L XIX Canto III, p.212)
aqve mogvyavs pwkaredi: `moSorde aqaurobas, ar niSnavs gZuldes kacTa

modgma: yvelas ar SeuZlia maTSi gareva da maTTan erTad Sroma~.
rogorc davrwmundiT, aq saqme gvaqvs aSkara TviTnebobasTan
mTargmnelis mxridan da am SemTxvevaSi teqstis interpretacia, iseve rogorc
misi realizacia, momenturi gancdis xasiaTs iZens da gamarTlebulia TiTqos
sxva strofebSi moqceuli damokidebulebiT garSemo myofTa mimarT (ix.
leqsis IV da V strofebi, rac brwyinvaledaa asaxuli rusul TargmanSi).
valeri briusovis frazis gasamarTleblad SeiZleba moviSvelioT iseTi
didi humanistis momenturi poeturi gancda, rogoric gaxlavT aleqsandre
puSkini, romelic èvgeni oneginSia~ aRbeWdili: “Êòî æèë è ìûñëèë, òîò íå
ìîæåò â äóøå íå ïðåçèðàòü ëþäåé”. (36, ò. 4, ñ. 23).
da mainc, Cven principulad vewinaaRmdegebiT teqstis Sinaarsobriv-
faqtobrivi informaciis iseT TviTnebur Secvlas, rogorsac adgili hqonda v.
briusovis TargmanSi, da romelmac aucileblad daasva daRi, erTi mxriv,
leqsis koncepts, xolo, meore mxriv, mis qveteqsts, romelzedac qvemoT
gveqneba saubari, aRniSnul kategoriisadmi miZRvnil TavSi.
es leqsi araerTxel iTargmna qarTul enaze, gansakuTrebiT sayuradRebo
da popularulia o. WeliZis Targmani, romelic baironis leqsebis mcire
krebulSia Sesuli. am Targmanis mixedviT zemoganxiluli striqoni “I seek to shun
not hate mankind” Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informaciis swori interpretaciiT
aris realizebuli:
siamiT davTmob xalxis samyofels,

arc kacTa modgmas vaxseneb zizRiT.
(15, gv. 8)
leqsis bolo strofi, romelic Seicavs Cven mier ganxilul frazas,

uaRresad sainteresoa im TvalsazrisiTac, rom misi bolo oTxi pwkari
bibliur aluzias warmoadgens, sakuTriv daviTis 54 fsalmunisa, romelic mefe
jeimzis inglisuri redaqciis mixedviT Semdegnairad JRers:
211
“And I said, O that I had wings like a dove
For then would I'fly away, and be at rest”.
da vambob: `vin momcems frTas, viTarca mtreds?~

gavfrindebodi da davbinavdebodi.
(fsalmuni, 54)
“È ÿ ñêàçàë: “Êòî äàë áû ìíå êðûëüÿ, êàê ó ãîëóáÿ”
– ß óëåòåë áû è óñïîêîèëñÿ áû”.
(Ïñàëòûðü, 54)
Tu SevadarebT fsalmunis zemoT warmodgenil redaqcias, vnaxavT, rom

sityva “dove” (mtredi) baironTan asaxulia sityviT “turtle”, romelic agreTve
mtreds (turtle, turtle-dove) niSnavs. magram saqme isaa, rom leqsemas “turtle”
inglisur enaSi kidev ori sxva mniSvneloba gaaCnia garda mtredisa. erTi
gaxlavT `gvriti~ da meore – `ku~, umTavresad zRvisa. es ukanaskneli am
sityvis rigiT pirvel mniSvnelobas warmoadgens da amdenad, enis matarebel
koleqtivSi sayovelTaod cnobilia.
aRniSnuli leqsis erT-erT qarTul TargmanSi moxda kuriozi swored am
leqsemis gamo. mTargmnelma, rogorc Cans, ar icoda “turtle”-is sxva mniSvneloba
garda erTisa, e. i. `kusi~ da teqstTan gacnobisas es leqsema mxolod kus
daukavSira. samwuxarod, rogorc Cans, man arc saTanado leqsikonebs mimarTa,
raTa gadaemowmebina is Sinaarsobrivi Seusabamoba Tu uxerxuloba, rac am
leqsemis `kus~ mniSvnelobiT Targmnas SeeZlo Seeqmna. gTavazobT am Targmans:
o, ufalo, Tu gansacdels mravals

mimzadeb da frTebs momamtvrev aqve.
kus nabijiT mainc caSi aval,
rom elvare mzis sxiviviT Cavqre.
(21, gv. 204)
esoden kuriozuli cnebis SemotaniT mTargmnelma mTeli strofis

Sinaarsi am uCveulo cnebaze gaawyo da, amdenad, Seqmna sruliad uCveulo saxe:
frTebmomtvreuli arseba, romelic kus nabijiT adis caSi, raTa iq elvare
sxiviviT Caqres. aseTi kuriozuli SemTxvevis warmoqmna miT ufro
sakvirvelia, rom es leqsi mravalgzis Targmnila da gamoqveynebula kidec
araerTi redaqciiT, sadac aluzia swored iyo interpretirebuli, iqneba es v.
briusovis rusuli Targmani, Tu o. WeliZis qarTuli varianti:
212
ho, netav mxrebze frTebi momesxas,
ar gavfrindebi budisken maSin,
SevuerTdebi usazRvroebas
samaradisod aWrili caSi.
(15, gv. 9)
aluziis SemTxveva am TavSi CvenTvis saintereso Seiqna ara TviT im

qaragmis gamo, romelsac es stilisturi xerxi gvTavazobs (rac gacilebiT
ufro mkveTrad gamovlindeba Sinaarsis sxva fenaTa interpretaciis dros),
aramed im faqtobrivi Seusabamobis gamo, romelic mxolod erTi sityvis
arasworma Targmanma gamoiwvia.
rac Seexeba TviT fsalmunis qarTul redaqcias, vfiqrobT, striqonis
bolo sityva ar asaxavs im Sinaarss, romelic inglisur da rusul
variantebSia gadmocemuli. frazebi “and be at rest” “è óñïîêîèëñÿ áû” ar niSnavs
`dabinavebas~ (`da davbinavdebodi~). Cveni azriT, am SemTxvevaSi is, piriqiT,
dabinavebis sapirispiro Sinaarss Seicavs, ramac Tavi iCina WeliZis qarTul
TargmanSi, rodesac baironis sityvebi “that brings the turtle to her nest” iTargmna
rogorc àr gavfrindebi budisken maSin~. aq dabinavebas, budis monaxvas
daupirispirda caSi aWra da iq maradiuli Svebis mopoveba.
saintereso magaliTs warmoadgens baironis zemoT ganxiluli leqsi
“Fare Thee Well” (nawili II, Tavi III), sakuTriv misi pirveli strofi, romelic
ivan kozlovis mier Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informaciis TvlsazrisiT
darRveviTaa transformirebuli:
Fare thee well! and if for ever,

Still for ever, fare thee well:
Even though unforgiving, never
‘Gainst thee shall my heart rebel.
pirveli strofis bolo ori striqoni ase SeiZleba warmovadginoT

pwkaredSi: `Tumc araa mpatiebeli, Sens winaaRmdeg Cemi guli arasodes ar
aRsdgeba.~
`Tumc araa mpatiebeli~ _ “Even though unforgiving” _ dednis mixedviT ekuTvnis
Tavad mas, poets, im dros, rodesac iv. kozlovma es Tviseba miakuTvna poetis
meuRles. bunebrivia, gvmarTebs Cveni azri gamovTqvaT daSvebuli Secdomis
irgvliv. mogexsenebaT, iv. kozlovi usinaTlo da invalidis savarZels mijaWvuli
poeti gaxldaT da, vfiqrobT, inglisuri teqsti mas rodesac sxvam waukiTxa,
213
kavSiri “though” (Tumc) man moismina rogorc meore piris nacvalsaxeli “thou” (Sen),
radgan es ori sityva erTi xmovani bgeriT gansxvavdeba: thou [ðau] _ Sen, xolo
though [ðou] _ Tumca. iqidan gamomdinare, rom mxolobiTi ricxvis meore piris
nacvalsaxeli thou _ aris Zveli poeturi forma inglisurSi da naklebad ixmareba,
xSirad mas arasworad warmoTqvamen, sakuTriv ise, rogorc iwereba, e. i. _ [ðou].
rogorc Cans, rusi poeti iv. kozlovi am nacvalsaxels ase warmoTqvamda, ramac
gamoiwvia es faqtobrivi Secdoma.
amgvarad, miviReT sxva informacia rusul variantSi. aseTi garRveva ki
mxolod faqtobrivi informaciis araswori asaxvis Sedegia.
samwuxaroa, rom verc erTma rusulma redaqciam es Secdoma ver SeniSna,
miT umetes, rom baironis yvela akademiur gamocemaSi, iqneba es XIX, Tu XX
saukunis, aRniSnuli leqsi iv. kozlovis TargmaniTaa warmodgenili.
mogvyavs leqsis pirveli strofis Cveneuli qarTuli Targmani:
gemSvidobebi, morCa yoveli,

aw mZvinvarebiT guli aRivso,
guli, maradJams avis mgmobeli,
Sen ar gagwiravs samaradisod.
baironis rusul TargmanSi faqtobrivi informaciis araswori

realizaciis kidev mrvali magaliTi SeiniSneba. aseTad davasaxelebT,
magaliTad, qarTveli qalis Sefasebisadmi miZRvnil striqonebs:
But no one doubted on the whole, that she

Was what her dress bespoke, a damsel fair,
And fresh, and “beautiful exceedingly”,
Who with the brightest Georgians might compare;
(8, p. 776)
es gaxlavT `don Juanis~ meeqvse simReris ocdameTeqvsmete strofis
pirveli nawili, romelic aRwers qalis samoselSi gangeb gamowyobil Juans.
warmogidgenT teqstis pwkareds: àravis epareboda eWvi irgvliv, rom is iyo
is, rasac mowmobda misi samoseli, mSvenieri qalwuli, sruliad norCi da
ùsazRvrod lamazi~, romelic uelvares qarTvelebsac ki Seedreboda~.
Sesityvebas “beautiful exceedingly” (usazRvrod lamazi) baironi xmarobs
brWyalebSi, rameTu mianiSnebs, rom is aq axdens sxvis citirebas, sakuTriv, es
gaxlavT s. kolrijis reminiscencia misi cnobili `kristabelidan~ (“Cristabel”).
214
rac Seexeba aRniSnuli strofis t. gnediCiseul Targmans, is
Semdegnairad JRers:
Íèêòî íå ñîìíåâàëñÿ, ÷òî îíà,

Ïî ïëàòüþ ñóäÿ, – äåâà ìîëîäàÿ,
Øåïòàëèñü, ÷òî ãðóçèíêà íè îäíà
Ñðàâíèòüñÿ ñ íåé êðàñîþ íå ìîãëà.
(27, ò. I, ñ. 280)
rogorc vxedavT, rusul TargmanSi darRveulia Sesabamisoba Sedarebis

obieqtsa da Sesadarebels Soris, rac amcirebs, akninebs Sedarebis obieqts,
sakuTriv qarTvel qals da misi mSvenierebis Sefasebas. baironTan qarTveli
qalis silamaze etalonis rangSia ayvanili, im dros, rodesac rusul teqstSi
Sedarebis obieqti aris qalis samoselSi gamowyobili Juani, romlis
TvalismomWrel silamazes Turme verc erTi qarTveli qali ver Seedreba.
Cveni azriT, aRniSnuli Sedarebis kuriozuloba da ususuroba zedmet
komentars aRar saWiroebs.
analogiur Seusabamobas vawydebiT adreul rusul TargmanSic, romelic
pavel kozlovs ekuTvnis:
Îäíàêî æå âñå ñîãëàñèëèñü â òîì,

×òî íîâàÿ ïðèøåëèöà ïðåêðàñíà;
×òî â Ãðóçèè êðàñèâåå ëèöî
Îòûñêèâàòü íåâîëüíèöó íàïðàñíî,
(26, ò. III, ñ. 309)
winamdebare naSromis meore nawilSi Cven calkeuli Tavi mivuZRveniT

sityvis polisemanturobas, rogorc interpretaciisa da Targmanis problemas.
sityvis mravalmniSvneloba, TargmanSi misi transformaciis TvalsazrisiT,
udavod, qmnis garkveul problemas faqtobrivi informaciis asaxvis mxriv, rom
aRaraferi vTqvaT informaciis sxva danarCen saxeobebze. sakmarisia
gavixsenoT zemoT moyvanili magaliTi baironis `Caild haroldis~ pirveli
simReridan, sakuTriv Sesityveba “man’s heart”, romelic rusul TargmanSi erT
SemTxvevaSi warmodgenili iyo rogorc “ìóæñêîå ñåðäöå” (è ñåðäöà íå ïûòàé
ìóæñêîãî), xolo meore SemTxvevaSi, rogorc “äóøà ëþäñêàÿ” (Â äóøå
ëþäñêîé òàèòñÿ àä!).
215
rogorc aRniSnuli magaliTi mowmobs, kacis guli (ìóæñêîå ñåðäöå) da
adamianis suli (äóøà ëþäñêàÿ) sxvadasxva faqtobrivi informaciis realizacias
emsaxureba, rom aRaraferi iTqvas amis Sedegad warmoqmnil konceptsa da
qveteqstze.
friad sainteresod da sayuradRebod gvesaxeba iseTi SemTxvevebi,
rodesac polisemanturia Tavisi SinaarsiT ara marto sazogado, aramed
sakuTari saxeli da is Targmnis procesSi gansakuTrebul mopyrobas
saWiroebs.
magaliTisaTvis davasaxelebT inglisur sakuTar saxels “Mary”,
romelic qarTul da rusul enebSi or-ori variantiTaa damkvidrebuli:
pirveli, es gaxlavT misi qarTuli Sesatyvisi `mariami~, radgan `mariam
RvTismSobels~ inglisurSi swored saxeli “Mary” Seesatyviseba;
meore aris qalis sakuTari saxeli `meri~, romelic gacilebiT gvian
damkvidrda qarTul enaSi da is Tavisi evropuli transkripciidan [mεəri]
nasesxeb saxels warmoadgens.
`meri~ mariamis inglisuri formaa, romelic qarTulSi axali
Semosulia. es saxeli hqvia g. tabiZis poeturi ocnebis qaliSvils, romelsac
eZRvneba poetis ramdenime SesaniSnavi leqsi~, 1 _ wers zurab WumburiZe.
amgvarad, polisemanturia “Mary” ara imdenad Tavad inglisurSi, aramed
qarTulTan urTierTobisa da urTierTSesatyvisobis TvalsazrisiT.
analogiuria misi damkvidreba rusul enaSi: Ìàðèÿ (äåâà Ìàðèÿ), Ìåðè/ Ìýðè.
galaktioni saxels `meri~ orive mniSvnelobiT xmarobs: erTi mxriv, es
gaxlavT qalis saxeli `meri~, xolo, meore mxriv, RvTismSoblis xateba,
radgan es poeturi saxe mas RvTismSoblis kategoriaSi hyavs ayvanili. 2
amjerad mivmarTavT im konkretul magaliTs, rodesac inglisur
poeziaSi qalis saxeli meri “Mary” Tavisi orbunebovnobis gamo rusul
TargmanSi teqstobriv problemas qmnis. mogvyavs baironis `don Juanis~ mexuTe
simReris meoTxe strofi misi saTanado rusuli TargmaniT:
I have a passion for the name “Mary”

For once it was a magic sound to me;
1 z. WumburiZe, dedaena qarTuli, Tb., 1987, gv. 345.

2 i. merabiSvili, galaktionis enigmebi, nawili IV;
i. merabiSvili, baironidan galaktionamde, anu vin iyo galaktionis meri, wignSi:
galaktionologia, t. 2, Tb., 2003;
i. merabiSvili, Targmani rogorc kulturata dialogi, nawili III, Tb., 2005.
216
And still it half calls up the realms of fairy,
Where I beheld what never was to be;
All feelings changed, but this was last to vary,
A spell from which even yet I am not quite free:
But I grow sad – and let a tale grow cold,
Which must not be pathetically told.
(11, p. 699)
Àõ, ÿ ïðèñòðàñòåí ê èìåíè “Ìàðèÿ”!

Ìíå áûë êîãäà-òî äîðîã ýòîò çâóê;
ß ñíîâà âèæó äàëè çîëîòûå
Â òóìàíå ýëåãè÷åñêèõ ðàçëóê;
Îíî æèâèò ìîè ìå÷òû áûëûå,
Îíî ìåíÿ ïå÷àëèò, ìèëûé äðóã, –
À ÿ ïèøó ðàññêàç âåñüìà õîëîäíûé,
Îò âñÿ÷åñêîé ïàòåòèêè ñâîáîäíûé.
(27, ò. I, ñ. 229)
rogorc cnobilia, saxeli “Mary” baironTan ukavSirdeba umTavresad mis
tragikul siyvaruls meri Cavorsisadmi, Tumc kidev araerTi cxovrebiseuli
meri aisaxa mis SemoqmedebaSi. amdenad, rusul enaSi, iseve rogorc qarTulSi,
am saxelis Targmnisas arasworad migvaCnia “Ìàðèÿ”-s variantis Semotana,
radgan is aRar asocirdeba meri CavorsTan. meri Cavorsi xom baironis
adreuli periodis, misi ymawvilkacobis siyvarulia, romelic mas mTeli
cxovreba Tan sdevda rogorc naTeli da faqizi mogoneba. rac Seexeba `don
Juans~, es misi ukanaskneli da amave dros daumTavrebeli poeturi qmnileba
gaxlavT, sadac is araerTgzis acocxlebs meri Cavorsisadmi gancdil
siyvaruls. da, amdenad, Tu aq mTargmnelma raime uzustoba dauSva, sruliad
SesaZlebelia, rom mkiTxvelma ver gaigos misi realuri Sinaarsi, sakuTriv is,
rac moxda t. gnediCis rusul TargmanSi, rodesac “Mary”, nacvlad rusuli
“Ìýðè”-sa, “Ìàðèÿ”-s saxiT aRmoCnda warmodgenili.
rac Seexeba `don Juanis~ SedarebiT adreul rusul Targmans, romelic
pavel kozlovs ekuTvnis, iq “Mary” naTargmnia rogorc “Ìýðè”:
`Ëþáëþ ÿ èìÿ Ìýðè; Ìíîãî ãðåç

È öåëûé ðÿä íåñáûâøèõñÿ ìå÷òàíèé
217
Â ìîåé äóøå ñ òåì èìåíåì ñëèëîñü;
Îíî åùå ìíå ìèëî, õîòü ñòðàäàíèé
Íå ìàëî ÿ òÿæåëûõ ïåðåíåñ…
Îòðàäåí ñâåòëûé ìèð âîñïîìèíàíèé”!
(26, ò. III, ñ. 286)
`don Juanis~ t. gnediCiseul rusul Targmans 1981 wels moskovSi

gamocemul oTxtomeulSi axlavs n. diakonovas komentarebi, sadac dazustebulia
CvenTvis saintereso striqonis Sinaarsi. mogvyavs komentari srulad:
“…ïðèñòðàñòåí ê èìåíè “Ìàðèÿ”! – íàìåê íà äåòñêóþ ëþáîâü Áàéðîíà ê
Ìýðè Äýôô è íà åãî äëèòåëüíóþ ïðèâÿçàííîñòü ê Ìýðè Ýíí ×àâîðò”.
magram ra vuyoT iseT gamocemas, rodesac aRniSnul striqons komentari
ar axlavs? magaliTad davasaxelebT `don Juanis~ 1988 wlis saiubileo gamocemas
o. afoninas komentarebiT.
marTalia, am SemTxvevaSi komentari asworebs Targmanis teqstis

uzustobas, magram misi daniSnuleba xom dazustebaa da ara gasworeba. TviT
komentari, rogorc movlena da rogorc erTiani teqstis nawili, friad
mniSvnelovan rols asrulebs, pirvel yovlisa, dedniseuli teqstis
realizaciis, xolo Semdgom misi TargmanSi transformaciis TvalsazrisiT.
ganvixiloT konkretuli magaliTi:
1809 wels, 21 wlis asakSi baironi wers satirul nawarmoebs ìngliseli
bardebi da Sotlandieli mimomxilvelebi~ (“English Bards and Scotch Reviewers”),
sadac is mkiTxvels Tavisi pirveli mogzaurobis gegmebs gaandobs. poets surs
moinaxulos afrikis napirebi, gibraltaris kldovani mTebi, stambuli da
iqidan, ambobs poeti:
`minda vewvio silamazis mSobliur mxares,

sad kavkasions, kldiT Semosils, pirquSs, mrisxanes
gvirgvinad adgas didebuli TeTri myinvare.~
(Targmani Cvenia _ i. m.)
Yet once again, adieu! ere this the sail

That wafts me hence is shivering in the gale;
And Afric’s coast and Calpe’s adverse height,
And Stamboul’s minarets must greet my sight:
218
Thence shall I stray through beauty’s native clime,
Where Kaff is clad in rocks, and crown’d with snows sublime.
(8, p. 72; 10, p. 446)
mravali inglisurenovani gamocemis mixedviT, jer kidev XIX saukuneSi,
striqons “beauty’s native clime” (silamazis mSobliuri mxare) axlavs
erTsityviani komentari “Georgia”, sakuTar saxels “Kaff – Mount Caucasus”, rac
niSnavs imas, rom silamazis mSobliur mxareSi baironi saqarTvelos
gulisxmobda, xolo Kaff-Si _ kavkasions. aq da msgavs SemTxvevebSi, rogorc
vxedavT, SeuZlebelia striqonis Sinaarsis gageba saTanado komentaris gareSe.
axla vnaxoT, rogoraa aRniSnuli striqoni interpretirebuli rusul
TargmanSi, romelic s. ilins ekuTvnis da Sesulia baironis brokgauziseul
rusul gamocemaSi:
Òåïåð ïðîùàé, ïîêóäà âåòð ïðèáðåæíûé

Íå íàòÿíóë ìîé ïàðóñ áåëîñíåæíûé.
Áðåã Àôðèêè ìîé âñòðåòèò ñêîðî âçîð,
Êåëüïý íàïðîòèâ öåïь îòêðîåò ãîð,
Çàòåì ëóíà Ñòàìáóëà çàñèÿåò.
Íî ïóòü òóäà êîðàáëü ìîé íàïðàâëÿåò,
Ãäå êðàñîòó âïåðâûå ìèð ïîçíàë,
Ãäå íàä ãðîìàäîé âåëè÷àâîé ñêàë
Âîçíîñèò Êàôô êîðîíó ñíåãîâóþ…
(26, ò. III, ñ. 526)
aRniSnul gamocemas axlavs p. o. morozovisa da n. a. xolodkovskis

komentarebi, romelSic, samwuxarod, araferia naxsenebi saqarTvelosTan an
kavkasionTan kavSirSi.ÿ ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ
miuxedavad amisa, axla, roca ukve viciT strofis Sinaarsi, ufro
swored, viciT inglisuri teqsti da misi Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi aspeqti,
saqarTvelos silamazis amsaxveli striqoni, marTlac, didebulad JRers
rusul TargmanSi: “Ãäå êðàñîòó âïåðâûå ìèð ïîçíàë”.
ra aris es? qaragma, romelic saTanado asaxvis an komentaris gareSec
amoikiTxeba, Tu dafaruli gancda mTargmnelisa? udavod, meore, rameTu ori
saukunis manZilze aravis amoukiTxavs am mSvenier rusul striqonSi
219
`saqarTvelo~, baironiseuli striqonis dedaazri ki mxolod specialuri
kvlevis Sedegad aRmoCnda CvenTvis gasagebi. 1
mogexsenebaT, winamdebare monografiaSi poetur teqsts mxolod leqsis
doneze ganvixilavT. aqedan gamomdinare, Seqspiris dramaturgias 2 ar vexebiT,
Tumc, faqtobrivi informaciis TvalsazrisiT erT saintereso magaliTs
SemogTavazebT `mefe liri~-dan. pirvel yovlisa, aRsaniSnavia, rom es
tragedia Seqspirma 1606 wels Seqmna, xolo ilia WavWavaZem da ivane maCabelma
is Targmnes 1874 wels peterburgSi yofnisas.
mivaqcioT yuradReba im faqts, rom `mefe lirze~ muSaobis dros ivane
maCabeli 20 wlisaa da misi codna inglisuri samyaros Sesaxeb, erTi mxriv,
xolo, meore mxriv, mTargmnelobiTi meTodi ver iqneba gawafuli da unaklo.
SemdgomSi ivane maCabelma damoukideblad ganagrZo Seqspiris tragediebis
Targmna da dRes igi qarTuli mTargmnelobiTi moRvaweobis mwvervalad
rCeba. `mefe lirze~ muSaobis dasrulebisTanave iv. maCabeli swavlas
agrZelebs germaniasa da safrangeTSi. germaniaSi am droisaTvis a. Slegels
ukve naTargmni aqvs Seqspiri da es pirveli didi da warmatebuli ganacxadia
Seqspiris evropul TargmanSi. evropuli gamocdileba didad waadga maCabels
maRalmxatvruli qarTuli Targmanis SesrulebaSi saqarTveloSi
dabrunebisas. 1886 wels iTargmna `hamleti~, 1888 wels _ òtelo~, 1892 wels _
`makbeti~ da a. S.
`mefe liris~ pirveli moqmedebis meoTxe scenaSi aris Semdegi saubari
lirs, kentsa da osvalds Soris:
Lear: Do you bandy looks with me, you rascal?
Steward: I’ll not be strucken my Lord.
Kent: Nor tripp’d neither, you base football player.
(40, p. 42-43)
teqstis es monakveTi agebulia SeqspirisaTvis friad damaxasiaTebel
sityvis TamaSze, sakuTriv, zmnaze “bandy”, romelic polisemanturi sityvaa: 1.
1i. merabiSvili, `baironi da saqarTvelo~, gaz. `literaturuli saqarTvlo~, #11, 1991;

Innes Merabishvili, A note on Byron and Georgia, Byron Journal, London, 1997, p. 104-107;
i. merabiSvili, baironi qarTulad, Tb., 2002, gv. 66.
2 Seqspiris tragediebis Sinaarsobrivi analizi qarTul TargmanTan mimarTebaSi Cemi
xelmZRvanelobiT or sadisertacio naSromSi ganxorcielda:
zurRan gemazaSvili, uiliam Seqspiris `hamletis~ poeturi modelis SenarCunebis problema da
detalebis interpretacia axal qarTul TargmanebSi, sakandidato disertacia, Tb., 2002;
paata CxeiZe, ivane maCablis mTargmnelobiTi moRvaweoba Targmanis Tanamedrove Teoriis
prizmaSi, sakandidato disertacia, Tb., 2003.
220
berTis erTmaneTisaTvis gadagdeba (rogorc fexburTis ileTi); 2.
gadalaparakeba _ to bandy words _ erTmaneTTan dava, kinklaoba; erTmaneTis
dacinva; to bandy looks _ erTmaneTisaTvis gadaxedva. am ukanasknel Sesityvebas
xmarobs Tavad Seqspiri: “Do you bandy looks with me, you rascal?”, rac SeiZleba ase
iTargmnos: ès Sen mtyorcni mzeras, Se gaiZverav?~ aRsaniSnavia, rom `mzeris
tyorcnasTan~ erTad aq aqcentirdeba `mzeris gadagdeba~, rogorc analogi
`burTis gadagdebasTan~. es ukanaskneli mniSvneloba realizebuli aRmoCndeba
teqstis Semdeg winadadebebSi: “I’ll not be strucken”, rogorc `me ar waviqcevi~ da
Semdeg “nor tripp’d neither, you base football player” _ àrc fexi wamogedeba, Se mdabio
fexburTelo,~ _ etyvis osvalds kenti.
qarTul TargmanSi vkiTxulobT:
liri: sityvasac mibruneb me? rogor bedav magas Se wuwko, wuwkis Svilo!
osvaldi: ukacravad, me gasalaxi kaci ar gaxlavarT.
kenti: arc fexwamosakravi xar, Se nabiWvaro! wixliT saTelo! Se
takimasxarav!
(41, gv. 37-38)
ismis kiTxva:
ratom ar aisaxa qarTul TargmanSi “you base football player” _ `Se mdabio
fexburTelo~, miTumetes, rom am saubris xibli fexburTelis mir burTis
gadawodebazea agebuli?
ratom iTargmna “you base football player” ara rogorc `mdabio
fexburTelo~, aramed rogorc `Se nabiWvaro! wixliT saTelo! Se
takimasxarav!~
miuxedavad imisa, rom fexburTi evropaSi XVII-XVIII saukuneebSi ukve
damkvidrebuli TamaSia, rom aRaraferi vTqvaT inglisze, rogorc mis
samSobloze, saqarTveloSi is gacilebiT gvian, XIX saukunis miwurulsa da XX
saukunis dasawyisSi, Semodis. amdenad, aSkaraa, rom iliam da maCabelma ar
ician, ras niSnavs “football player” da qarTul teqsts fexisa (foot) da mdabioobis
(base) mniSvnelobebze ageben. es kidev erTxel adasturebs imas, rom teqstis
Targmna, pirvel rigSi, im realiebis codnas moiTxovs, romlebic dedanSi
aRibeWda.
aranakleb uxerxulobas Seuqmnis mTargmnelebs Seqspiris droindeli
qalis Tmis varcxniloba, romelic 130-e sonetSia aRbeWdili. am magaliTze
221
saubari gveqnebaqvemoT, me-3 nawilis me-4 TavSi, rodesac gavaanalizebT
Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informaciis kavSirs Sinarsobriv-xatobriv
informaciasTan.
222
meore Tavi
Sinaarsobriv-konceptualuri informacia
Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informaciisagan gansxvavebiT, romelic

teqstis erTiani Sinaarsis zedapirul qargas warmoadgens, koncepti mis ideur
kategoriad gvesaxeba. Sinaarsobriv-konceptualuri informacia gaxlavT is
siRrmiseuli azri teqstisa, romelic Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informaciis
saSualebiT amoikiTxeba, magram mis dekodirebaSi, Tavis mxriv, monawileobs
leqsis, rogorc erTi mTlianis, qveteqsti. koncepti, anu Sinaarsobriv-
konceptualuri informacia dagegmilia avtoris mier rogorc teqstis
ZiriTadi Canafiqri, rogorc modeli misi konkretuli (igulisxmeba leqsis
Seqmnis procesi) damokidebulebisa eqstralingvistur samyarosTan.
gansxvaveba Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informaciisa da mis konceptur Sres
Soris, erTi SexedviT, miuwvdomeli da SeumCnevelia, amave dros
mouxelTebelic, magram misi amocnoba, aRwera da daxasiaTeba miT ufro
sainteresoa da aucilebeli.
konceptis realizaciis saintereso magaliTad gvesaxeba baironis
Semdegi gamonaTqvami `don Juanidan~:
I wish men to be free

As much from mobs as kings.
(11, p. 758)
baironis zemoaRniSnuli gamonaTqvami sityvasityviT Semdegnairad

SeiZleba warmovadginoT: `me visurveb, rom adamianebi iyvnen Tavisufalni
brbosgan iseve, rogorc mefeTagan~. aRniSnul or pwkarSi, rogorc vxedavT,
Cadebulia didi poetisa da humanistis msoflxedva. misi swrafva
progresisaken araa mimarTuli mxolod monarqiis gauqmebisaken, aramed im
didi da naTeli momavlisaken, romelsac brbosgan ganTavisufleba SeiZleba
gulisxmobdes.
tatiana gnediCis mier Sesrulebul rusul TargmanSi vkiTxulobT:
Мне хочется увидеть поскорей

Свободный мир без черни и чарей.
223
Tu baironi brbosgan Tavisufal adamianebs mxolod momavlis survilSi
(“wish”) warmoaCens, t. gnediCi amas im surviliT warmogvidgens, romlis
naxvasac eswrafvis poeti:
“Мне хочется увидеть поскорей.”

imedia, mkiTxveli dameTanxmeba im azrSi, rom baironi arasodes yofila
gulubryvilo revolucioneri, romelic iCqarebda enaxa kacobrioba brbosgan
iseTive Tavisufali, rogorc mefeTagan. mogexsenebaT, baironi Tavisi
mrwamsiT ganmaTavisuflebelia, magram brZeni, da man mSvenivrad icis, rom
amas ver moeswreba. am ukanasknel azrSi mdgomareobs am naazrevis qveteqsti,
Tumc misi koncepti am saukeTeso momavlisken swrafvaa.
zemoaRniSnulidan gamomdinare baironis es didebuli gamonaTqvami Cven
Semdegnairad vTargmneT:
me momavali aseTi msurs ama qveynisa _

Tavisufali brbosgan ise, rogorc mefisgan.
davubrundeT wina TavSi Cven mier ganxilul baironis leqss: `nawyveti,

dawerili Zalian male mis Cavorsis gaTxovebis Semdeg~.
ènslis serebo~, _ ase mimarTavs poeti misTvis erT dros sayvarel
aremares, _ `civno da berwno, sadac gaiqrola Cemma uzrunvelma bavSvobam,
rogor qrian susxiani qariSxlebi~ da a. S.
aRniSnuli faqtobrivi informaciis fonze gamoikveTeba leqsis koncepti
rogorc poetis guliswyveta, guliswyroma, dardi, imedgacrueba,
sasowarkveTa.
meri Cavorsis gaTxovebis Semdeg sruliad icvleba poetis
damokidebuleba misTvis erT dros esoden mSvenieri aremarisadmi. yovelive
amis fonze gamoikveTa didi gardatexa, rogorc nawili nawarmoebis
konceptualuri Sinaarsisa. es is gardatexaa poetis cxovrebaSi, rodesac
warsuli gacnobierebulia, magram gaurkvevelia sevdiT aRsavse momavali.
rac Seexeba aRniSnuli leqsis realizacias zemoT warmodgenil rusul
da qarTul TargmanebSi, koncepti yvela SemTxvevaSi sworad da marTebulad
aris realizebuli.
am SemTxvevaSi sevda, imedgacrueba da didi gardatexa, rogorc koncepti,
erTi mxriv, upirispirdeba, xolo, meore mxriv, erwymis kidec qveteqsts,
rogorc Sinaarsis gansakuTrebul fenas, romelzec dawvrilebiT specialur
224
TavSi SevCerdebiT. aq ki aRvniSnavT, rom am leqsSi qveteqsturi Sinaarsi
siyvarulis gagrZelebas gulisxmobs.
warsuli, imedi, sixaruli da ensli TiTqos erT ganzomilebaSi darCnen,
xolo meri baironisTvis rogorc am leqsSi, iseve mTels mis SemoqmedebaSi Tu
mis cxovrebaSi, ufaqizesi siyvarulis simbolod rCeba.
konceptisa da qveteqstis analogiuri dapirispireba, romelic amave
dros maT realizacias emsaxureba, SegviZlia warmovaCinoT baironis ufro
gviandel leqsSi: `So we’ll go no more a roving” (`da aRar gavalT Cven
saseirnod~).
So, we’ll go no more a roving

So late into the night,
Though the heart be still as loving,
And the moon be still as bright.
For the sword outwears its sheath,

And the soul wears out the breast,
And the heart must pause to breathe,
And love itself have rest.
Though the night was made for loving,

And the day returns too soon,
Yet we’ll go no more a roving
By the light of the moon.
(11, p. 100)
leqsi, rogorc Cans, mimarTulia mijnuri qalisadmi, magram gadmoscems

TviT poetis sulier ganwyobas. teqstSi qalis pirovneba araa eqsplicirebuli
saTanado enobrivi niSniT (nacvalsaxeli “w e” miuTiTebs mxolod piris
mravlobiT ricxvze, e. i. avtori da kidev sxva). qalis, rogorc teqstis erT-
erTi partiis, monawileoba ki leqsSi farTo konteqstis saSualebiT vlindeba,
kerZod, siyvarulis aRmniSvneli cnebis sxvadasxva gramatikuli formiT
xmarebaSi gamoixateba. Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informacia, romelic
gvawvdis codnas sinamdvilis sagnebisa da movlenebisa da maT Soris arsebuli
urTierTobebis Sesaxeb, gulisxmobs poetis mimarTebas qalis pirovnebisadmi.
es ukanaskneli ki, rogorc vxedavT, mxolod farTo konteqstis saSualebiT
vlindeba.
225
ramdenadac koncepti teqstis kategorias warmoadgens, misi gamovlena
xerxdeba teqstis im elementebSi, romlebic dasrulebul azrs gamoxataven.
mocemul leqsSi teqstis aseT umcires elementad gvevlineba strofi, xolo
Semdeg mTeli leqsi. teqstis calkeuli strofis qveteqstis gansazRvrisas
gamovdivarT isev mTeli leqsis Sinaarsidan, Tundac misi faqtobrivi
informaciidan, da amgvarad, leqsis saerTo foni, saerTo STabeWdileba
ganapirobebs konceptis dadgenas mis yovel calkeul strofSi. ai, amitom
iqmneba aucilebloba leqsis ganmeorebiTi wakiTxvisa, yovel SemTxvevaSi, misi
ganmeorebiTi da mravaljeradi gaazrebisa.
leqsis pirveli strofi gadmogvcems Semdeg faqtobriv informacias:
poets aRar surs iseirnos mijnurTan erTad mTvarian Rames, miuxedavad imisa,
rom mis guls kvlav Seswevs siyvarulis unari da mTvaresac ar mohklebia
Cveuli elvareba.
teqstis am monakveTis siRrmiseuli wvdoma mTliani leqsis fonze
metyvelebs imaze, rom miuxedavad cxovrebis Cveuli da Zveleburi wesiT
dinebisa (“Though the heart be still as loving” da a. S.), romlis enobriv markerebad
gvevlinebian sityvebi “still” da “as” (isini strofSi or-orjer meordebian) da
garesamyaros trialSi TviT poetis monawileobisa, poetis Sinagan samyaroSi
momxdara didi cvlileba, romelmac mas es gadawyvetileba miaRebina. poetis
mxriv gadawyvetilebis miReba aqtualizebulia niSnebiT “no more” da “so”. “So”
Tavis potenciaSi daskvniT semas Seicavs da leqsis wina planzea wamoweuli _
teqstSi is pirvel sityvad gvevlineba, iseve rogorc mis saTaurSi. amgvarad,
poetis sulier samyaroSi momxdara cvlileba, romelic mas uflebas aZlevs,
uari Tqvas adre misTvis Cveulebriv movlenaze _ mTvarian Rames mijnurTan
erTad gaseirnebaze, rac warmoadgens pirveli strofis koncepts.
meore strofi, pirvel yovlisa, Tavisi faqtobrivi informaciiT da
Semdgom Tavisi konceptiT, logikurad agrZelebs pirvel strofs da xsnis
poetis sulier samyaroSi momxdari cvlilebebis arss. movlenaTa
perspeqtivis, rogorc erT-erTi gramatikuli kategoriis mixedviT, meore
strofi warmoadgens leqsis kulminacias da masSi moTavsebulia kidec leqsis
filosofiuri mrwamsis gaxsnis ZiriTadi SesaZlebloba.
sityva “for” akavSirebs pirvel strofs meoresTan da amiT xazs usvams
meore strofSi pirvelis mizezis arsebobas. aRniSnuli windebulis Semdeg
modis winadadeba “the sword outwears its sheath”, romelic Present Indefinite-is drois
226
formaSi ixmareba. es imas niSnavs, rom masSi mocemuli moqmedeba gaazrebuli
unda iqnes rogorc zogadi, e. i. xmals ucvdeba qarqaSi da ufro didxans Zlebs,
vidre qarqaSi (`gacveTisa~ da ùfro didxans gaZlebis~ semebi, rogorc
sityvis ori potenciuri mniSvnelobis ZiriTadi semebi, amjerad sityvis erT
xmarebaSi arian warmodgenilni). Present Indefinite-Si ixmareba ara marto
pirveli winadadeba, aramed mTeli strofi, rac zogads xdis aseve danarCen
moqmedebebs: xmali cveTs qarqaSs, suli cveTs mkerds, guli wyvets sunTqvas da
siyvarulic isvenebs. ai, aseTia strofis faqtobrivi informacia.
aq SeiZleba Seiqmnas mcdari subieqturi iluzia poetis mosvenebisaken
ltolvisa, misi TiTqos cxovrebiT daRlisa, romelic Semdeg TavisTavad
warmoqmnida pasiurobis da inertulobis ganwyobas mkiTxvelSi. aseTi
interpretacia ki absoluturad ewinaaRmdegeba baironis suls, misi
Semoqmedebis ZiriTad mrwamss, ewinaaRmdegeba, pirvel yovlisa, leqsis
konceptsa da Sinaarss.
msgavsad qarqaSidan amoRebuli xmlisa, suli Zlieria, suli, romelic to-
vebs xorciel arsebas da Tavis arsebobas ganagrZobs, suli, romlis gageba
baironTan misi religiuri interpretaciis miRma Tavisuflebis, brZolis, ke-
TilSobiluri saqmis gagrZelebas niSnavda. Cven viciT, rom poets swamda misi
saqmis ukvdavebisa, swamda im brZolisa, romelic man Tavisuflebis maRal
ideals daukavSira da romelsac Tavisi piradi cxovreba da sicocxle
usasyidlo zvarakad miuZRvna.
suli icocxlebs da iarsebebs msgavsad uqarqaSo xmlisa (teqstSi iqmneba
ùqarqaSo xmlis~ konkretuli xati qarqaSis gacveTisa da xmlis xangrZlivi
arsebobis azris gatarebis Sedegad), suli, romelic amaRldeba miwiersa da
xorcielze. siyvaruli ki, iseTive miwieri, rogoricaa Tavad Cveni arseba,
Svebas iTxovs, radgan ver wvdeba mas (strofSi iqmneba garkveuli semantikuri
rigi sityvebisa “heart”, “loving”, “breast”, rogorc miwieri cnebebisa, romelTac
upirispirdebian cnebebi “sword” da “soul”).
ai aseTia meore da sakvanZo strofis konceptualuri informacia.
amasTan kavSirSi gvaxsendeba misi gamosaTxovari leqsis “On this day I complete
my 36 years” (dRes Semisrulda 36 weli) strofi, sadac poetis sulis xati
gansakuTrebuli JReradobiTa da siZlieriTaa warmodgenili:
Awake! (not Greece – she is awake!)
227
Awake, my spirit! think through whom
Thy life-blood tracks its parent lake
And then strike home!
(11, p. 110)
baironis SemoqmedebisaTvis Cveuli mwuxareba, udavoa, igrZnoba leqsis
yovel strofSi, magram meore strofi gvamcnobs, rom mwuxareba samyaros
naadrevi filosfiuri Wvretisa gamsWvalulia sulis amaRlebis savse imediT. es
is tkivilia, romelsac axlis danaxvis sixaruli axlavs. es is ufskrulia,
romlis xilva masze amaRlebas niSnavs. sagulisxmoa, rom baironis TxzulebaTa
srul krebulSi Cvens sailustracio leqss axlavs Semdegi komentari, Ì went to
most of the ridottos, and though I did not dissipate much upon the whole, yet I found the sword
wearing out the scabbard, though I have but just turned the corner of twenty-nine” – Lord Byron to
Mr. Febr. 28. 1817 (`me TiTqmis arc erTi mejlisi ar gamicdenia, da Tu ver vityvi
didad gaverTe-Tqo, imas mainc mivxvdi, rom xmals qarqaSi ukve gascveTia,
Tumca ocdacxra wels es-esaa gadavabije.~)
es gaxlavT nawyveti baironis werilisa tomas murisadmi, romelic 1817
wlis 28 TebervliTaa daTariRebuli.
garda imisa, rom aq moyvanili nawyveti baironis werilidan asabuTebs
mis naadrev simwifes, is, pirvel yovlisa, amtkicebs zemoxsenebuli konceptis
realizacias _ mejlisebze siaruls misTvis, marTalia, sevda ar
gauqarwylebia, magram poeti mixvedrila, rom misi cxovrebis qarqaSi ukve
gacveTilia, miuxedavad axalgazrda asakisa.
mesame da daskvniTi strofi kvlav pirvel strofSi gatarebul Sinaarss
ubrundeba, ufro aZlierebs da STambeWdavs xdis mas. garda amisa, am strofis
koncepti aucileblad gulisxmobs miwieri sicocxlis xanmokleobis moments,
romelic teqstSi Ramis xanmokleobaSia gadmocemuli _ “Though the night was made
for loving, And the day returns too soon” (`Tumc Rame siyvarulisTvis Seqmnila da dRe
Zalian male brundeba~).
cxovreba waubiZgebs adamians daewafos miwier siamovnebas, magram,
miuxedavad amisa, poeti maRldeba masze, am azris markerad sityva “yet”
gvevlineba. igi maRldeba imitom, rom misi cxovrebis xedva momwifebulia da
is gascda grZnobaTa Relvis sisustes.
poeti dgas viTarca amoRebuli xmali da xedavs Tavisi sulis siZlieres _
ai, aseTia bolo strofis koncepti, romelic TiTqos agrovebs wina strofebis
228
Sinaarsobriv informacias da mTeli leqsis koncepts gadmoscems: cxovreba
warmtacia, siyvaruli kvlav momajadoebeli, magram poetis sulSi Camdgara axali
Zala simwifisa, Zala miwier vnebaTaRelvaze amaRlebisa, rac cxovrebis
filosofiur wvdomasa da amaRlebuli sulis dasacavad basri xmliT dgomas
niSnavs.
1938 wels baironis dabadebidan 150 wlisTavis aRsaniSnavad Tbilisis
saxelmwifo universitetma gamosca givi gaCeCilaZis patara wigni `baironi~,
sadac mTargmneli amave dros gvevlineba komentarebis avtorad.
SevCerdeT CvenTvis saintereso leqsze:
Cven arasdros aRar gavalT
Cven arasdros aRar gavalT

saseirnod RamiT gareT,
Tund guls trfoba surdes kvalad
da daadges Cven gzas mTvare.
ukve qarqaSs natrobs xmali,

suli mkerdSi iwvevs daRlas,
guls simSvidis ipyrobs Zali,
Sesvenebis grZnoba axlavs.
da Tumc swrafad siyvarulSi

Cndeba dila Ramis miRma,
mainc mTvaris cisfer rulSi
saseirnod nuRar mixmob!
(14, gv. 63)
rogorc vxedavT, leqsis TargmanSi koncepti sapirispirod aRmoCnda

Secvlili. nacvlad qarqaSis gacveTisa da xmlis, viT sulis maradiulobisa, aq
daRlili xmali TviTon natrobs qarqaSs.
araswori interpretacia Tavs iCens agreTve leqsis komentaris aseve
araswor warmoCenaSi. zemoT Cven moviyvaneT nawyveti baironis werilidan
tomas murisadmi da davurTeT mas Cveni sityvasityviTi Targmani. rac Seexeba
g. gaCeCilaZis Targmanis komentars, is Semdegnairia: àm periodSi baironi
swerda murs: `me vpoulob xmals, daRlils uqarqaSod, Tumca axlaxan
gadavuxvie ocdacxra wlis kuTxes~. aRniSnul Secdomas givi gaCeCilaZe Tavad
229
gaasworebs Semdgom gamocemebSi, sadac leqsis Targmans ukve meore variantiT
SemogvTavazebs:
ara, erTad aRar gavalT
ara, erTad aRar gavalT

saseirnod RamiT gareT,
Tund guls trfoba surdes kvalad
da daadges Cven gzas mTvare.
xmali qarqaSs scveTavs Tumca,

Tumc mkerdsac Rlis sulis yofa,
amosunTqva unda gulsac,
dasveneba unda grZnobas.
Tumc trfialSi Rames kvalad

male Sescvlis dilis are,
mainc erTad aRar gavalT
mTvariani RamiT gareT.
(18, gv. 150)
sayuradReboa, rom s. marSakis rusul TargmanSi leqsi konceptisa da

qveteqstis swori realizaciiT aris warmodgenili.
Íå áðîäèòü íàì âå÷åð öåëûé
Íå áðîäèòü íàì âå÷åð öåëûé

Ïîä ëóíîé âäâîåì.
Õîòü ëþáîâü íå îñêóäåëà
È â ïîëÿõ ñâåòëî êàê äíåì.
Ïåðåæèâåò íîæíû êëèíîê,

Äóøà æèâàÿ – ãðóäü.
Ñàìîé ëþáâè ïðèõîäèò ñðîê
Îò ñ÷àñòüÿ îòäîõíóòü.
Ïóñòü äëÿ ðàäîñòè è áîëè

Íî÷ü äàíà òåáå è ìíå –
Íå áðîäèòü íàì áîëüøå â ïîëå
Â ïîëíî÷ü ïðè ëóíå!
230
(27, ò. II, ñ. 106)
s. marSakis Targmanebi axali rusuli mTargmnelobiTi skolis

aRiarebul nimuSebs warmoadgens. es skola, mogexsenebaT, Teoriisa da
praqtikis gamTlianebas eyrdnoboda da sakadrisi xarisxiT gamoirCeoda. misi
upiratesoba, pirvel yovlisa, moqneul leqssa da daxvewil gemovnebaSi
mdgomareobs. sakmarisia s. marSakis Targmani SevadaroT 1864 wels
gamoqveynebuli gerbelis 1 Targmans, rom gansxvaveba aSkara gaxdes:
Íàì íåëüçÿ ïîëóíî÷íûõ ãóëÿíèé

Ïðîäîëæàòü â ÷àñ âñåîáøåãî ñíà,
Õîòÿ ñåðäöå æäåò òåõ æå ñâèäàíèé,
È ëóíà, êàê è ïðåæäå, ÿñíà.
Îò êëèíêà ïðîòèðàþòñÿ íîæíû,

Îò ñòðàñòåé ðàçðûâàåòñÿ ãðóäü:
Íóæåí ñåðäöó ïîêîé íåâîçìîæíûé,
Äà äîëæíà è ëþáîâü îòäîõíóòü.
È õîòü íî÷ü ñîçäàíà äëÿ ëîáçàíèé,

Òåõ ëîáçàíèé, ÷òî äíþ íå âèäàòü,
Ìû ñ òîáîé ïîëóíî÷íûõ ãóëÿíèé,
Ìèëûé äðóã, íå äîëæíû ïðîäîëæàòü.
es Targmani ara marto susti da mdare leqsiT aris warmodgenili

rusul enaze, interpretaciac mcdari da araadekvaturia. konceptis
realizaciis sakvanZo strofs Sua, anu meore strofi warmoadgens, sadac suli,
anu, ufro zustad rom vTqvaT, samSvinveli, qarqaSis damcveT xmalTanaa
Sedarebuli. i. gerbelTan ki suli vnebebamdea dayvanili _ “îò ñòðàñòåé
ðàçðûâàåòñÿ ãðóäü”. rogorc Cans, Tu erTis mkerdi sulis wrialiT iRleba,
sxvisi mxolod vnebaTa TareSiT. baironisaTvis suli da vneba sruliad
gansxvavebuli kategoriebia. leqsis is interpretacia, romelic
warmovadgineT, uflebas gvaZlevs aRniSnuli strofi da mTlianad leqsi
Semdegnairad warmovsaxoT Cvens TargmanSi:
de, nuRar gavalT Cven saseirnod
1сì. Í. Äåìуðîâà, Î ïåðåâîäàõ Áàéðîíà â Ðîññèè, – â êí.: Selections from Byron, M., 1979, cтр.
422.
231
de, nuRar gavalT Cven saseirnod,
amieridan mTvarian Rames,
Tumca guls trfoba kvlav ar daindobs,
an ra moaklebs RamiT eSxs mTvares,
xmals xom ucvdeba Tvisi qarqaSi,

sulis wrialiT iRleba mkerdic,
gulTan TviT sunTqvis wydeba TamaSi,
da siyvarulic xom Svebas eltvis.
Tumc siyvaruli RamiT zeimobs,

Tumc aRmoxdebis mze, viciT, male,
mainc ar gavalT Cven saseirnod
amieridan mTvarian Rames. 1
baironis SemoqmedebaSi sulis amaRleba drosTan Serkinebas da drois

kategoriaze gamarjvebas niSnavs. Tu a. puSkini Tavisi leqsiT xelTuqmnel
Zegls daidgams (ß ïàìÿòíèê ñåáå âîçäâèã íåðóêîòâîðíûé), rom JamTa svlas
gauZlos, Seqspiri dros, rogorc siberis momtans, leqsSi moqceul maradiul
simxnevesa da axalgazrdobas daupirispirebs:
Yet do thy worst, old Time! Despite thy wrong,

My love shall in my verse ever live young.
magram Tu ginda, Seni celiT yvela gaTibe,

es Cemi leqsi gadaarCens mis sinatifes.
(Targmani r. TabukaSvilisa 24, 19 soneti)
And all in war with Time for love of you,
As he takes from you, I engraft you new.
da radgan vici Sens siberes ver gadavitan,

me Cemi leqsiT siWabukes vamynob Tavidan.
(Targmani r. TabukaSvilisa _ 24, 14 soneti)
baironi ebrZvis dros da mas mTel Tavis arsebas, Semoqmedebasa da suls

upirispirebs. analogiuria droisa da sulis gaazreba g. tabiZis
SemoqmedebaSi, razec qvemoT gveqneba saubari.
1 ix. i. merabiSvili, baironi qarTulad, gv. 79.
232
amjerad gavixsenoT isev baironis leqsi “To Time” (dros), romlis
sruli teqsti zemoT, naSromis meore nawilSia (Tavi III) warmodgenili.
leqsis filosofiuri daniSnulebaa, rom poetma gamoiwvios dro,
Seerkinos mas, amaRldes da gaimarjvos masze. amave dros leqsi uaRresad
saintereso da efeqturia konceptualuri Sinaarsis ganviTarebis
TvalsazrisiTac. efeqts aq qmnis sakuTriv leqsis bolo striqoni:
And I can smile to think how weak

Thine efforts shortly shall be shown,
When all the vengeance thou canst wreak
Must fall upon – a nameless stone.
baironis es ormocstriqoniani leqsi grafikuladac erT uwyvet

mTlianobaSia warmodgenili, rac migvaniSnebs mis daunawevrianobasa da
gamTlianebaze. leqsi TiTqos erTi amosunTqviT CaikiTxeba. yuradRebiT
wavikiTxoT es leqsi da davrwmundebiT, rom ocdacxrameti striqonis
manZilze aq laparakia mxolod miwieri cxovrebis amaoebaze, warmavlobaze, im
sevdaze, romelic nebismier moazrovne mokvdavs uflebas aZlevs sakuTari
Tavi wuTisoflis stumrad gaiazros. es zogadi gancda, rasakvirvelia,
dramatizebulia TviT poetis individualuri mwuxarebiTa da sevdiani
damokidebulebiT cxovrebasTan.
droisadmi mimarTuli gamowvevis yvelaze mkveTri akordi leqsis bolo
strofi gaxlavT: “And I can smile to think how weak Thine efforts shortly shall be shown”
(da me SemiZlia gaviRimo, rodesac vfiqrob, Tu rogori sustia Seni
mcdelobani, romelTac Sen umal gamoamJRavneb) “When all the venqeance – thou canst
wreak”, rodesac mTeli Seni risxva, romelic Sen SegiZlia Tavs daatexo, unda
daeces (must fall upon) usaxelo qvas (a nameless stone), e. i. mxolod im saflavis qvas,
romelsac saxeli ar aweria, ara aqvs, rac, rasakvirvelia, usaxelo sikvdils
gulisxmobs.
ai, rogori susti da damarcxebulia dro, romelic poetma
orTabrZolaSi gamoiwvia.
lord baironis saxels drom marTlac veraferi daaklo, piriqiT,
samudamod daamkvidra da ukvdavyo igi.
leqsis amgvarma gaazrebam saSualeba mogvca misi finali Semdegnairad
gveTargmna:
233
Senze Cems fiqrebs Rimili Tan sdevs,
susti radgan xar, qedsac moixri,
risxvas Sen mxolod imas daatex,
vinc usaxelo sikvdils moimkis.
Cvens TargmanSi, rogorc naTelia, gamoiricxa Sesityvebis pirdapiri

mniSvnelobiT realizacia. leqsis konceptis warmodgenili interpretaciis
safuZvelze usaxelo saflavis qva misi gadataniTi mniSvnelobis
erTmniSvneliani realizaciiT ametyvelda Cvens TargmanSi. rogorc vxedavT,
Cven ver SevinarCuneT is dedniseuli efeqti, romelsac qmnis Sesityveba
“nameless stone” (usaxelo qva) Tavisi orazrovani xmarebiT _ pirdapiri da
gadataniTi mniSvnelobebiT, radgan TargmanSi SevCerdiT iseT saxeze
(mxedvelobaSia ùsaxelo sikvdili~), romelic dednisaTvis damaxasiaTebeli
orazrovnebiT veRar gaTamaSdeboda qarTul teqstSi. aseTi arCevaniT
upiratesoba mivaniWeT konceptis gamokveTas, erTi mxriv, xolo, meore mxriv,
sxarti poeturi formis gamonaxvas qarTulSi, rac ar ewinaaRmdegeba
Sesityvebis konteqstualur mniSvnelobas (mxedvelobaSia dedani).
samwuxarod, tatiana gnediCiseul rusul TargmanSi, romelic
bolodroindel yvela rusul gamocemaSia Setanili, koncepti, Tamamad SeiZleba
iTqvas, warumatebladaa realizebuli. mTargmneli mihyveba konceptualuri
Sinaarsis ganviTarebis xazs da bolomde erTguli rCeba im pesimisturi
ganwyobisa, romelic leqsis ocdacxramet xazs axasiaTebs, im dros, rodesac
baironisaTvis Cveuli pesimizmi aq fonis rols asrulebs im oTxi xazis mimarT,
sadac poetma droze saboloo gamarjveba moipova.
zemoT, leqsis srul teqstTan erTad Cven warmovadgineT misi rusuli
Targmani. xelaxla mivubrundeT am Targmans da yuradRebiT CavikiTxoT is
(nawili II, Tavi III).
dameTanxmebiT, es sxva leqsia, rameTu misi avtori drosTan damarcxebuli
JamTamWvretelia, romelmac kargad icis, rom dro yvelafers gaanadgurebs da
gaanadgurebs bolos TviT saflavis qvasac. ai, aseTia am rusuli leqsis koncepti,
romelsac aRaraferi aqvs saerTo dedniseuli teqstis konceptTan, sadac drois
fenomenTan didebuli Serkinebaa warmoCenili, is Serkineba, romelic poetis
mediduri gamarjvebiT sruldeba. samwuxarod, mTargmneli ver Seswvda dednis
simaRles da sakuTari warmosaxviT ver gaiziara is. da es moxda erTaderTi
sityvis mniSvnelobis ugulebelyofis, misi arasaTanado wvdomis gamo. es sityva
gaxlavT zedsarTavi saxeli “nameless”, romelic, rogorc ganmsazRvreli, erTvis
234
sityvas “stone” da qmnis Sesityvebas, romelic teqstSi ori mniSvnelobiTaa
realizebuli, e. i. ùwarwero, usaxelo qva~, da ùsaxelo sikvdili~, romelic
ganviTarda sityvis “nameless” meore mniSvnelobidan, rogorc ùcnobi~, `naklebad
cnobili~. sityvis es mniSvnelobebi saTanadodaa asaxuli ara marto inglisuri
enis, aramed did inglisur-rusul leqsikonSic:
nameless:
1. Áåçûìÿííûé; íå èìåþùèé èìåíè, íàçâàíèÿ;
2. Нåíàçâàííûé; àíîíèìíûé;
3. Нåèçâåñòíûé, ìàëîèçâåñòíûé;
4. Нåâûðàçèìûé, íåñêàçàííûé;
5. Нå ïîääàþùèéñÿ îïèñàíèþ, îòâðàòèòåëüíûé;
6. Нåçàêîíîðîæäåííûé.
(ÁÀÐÑ)
es niSnavs, rom Cveni dakvirvebis obieqtis SemTxvevaSi adgili hqonda
rigiT pirveli da mesame mniSvnelobebis realizacias. rac Seexeba
konceptualur Sinaarss, is sityvis rigiT mesame mniSvnelobis realizaciis
safuZvelze gamoikveTa, rodesac “stone”-s ganuviTarda `sikvdilis~ mniSvneloba,
rac nawilobriv mis okazionalur realizaciaze mianiSnebs, xolo “nameless”-Tan
erTobaSi Seiqmna ùsaxelo sikvdilis~ Sinaarsi.
t. gnediCis TargmanSi inglisuri zedsarTavi “nameless” Secvala rusulma
zedsarTavma “õëàäíûé”, romelic mxolod erT-erTi niSania `saflavis qvis~
niSanTagan, riTac erTiani konteqstualuri Sinaarsis gazrda da amozidva ver
moxerxdeboda.
dedniseuli Sinaarsis realizacias SedarebiT miuaxlovda n.
xolodkovski, romlis Targmani revoluciamdel brokgauziseul gamocemaSia
Setanili:
È âîò ñ óëûáêîé ìûñëþ ÿ

Êàê áóäåò ãíåâ áåññèëåí òâîé,
Êîãäà âñÿ çëîñòü è ìåñòü òâîÿ
Ïîñòèãíåò êàìåíü ëèøü íåìîé.
(26, ò. II, c. 205)
Tavisi pirdapiri mniSvnelobiT Sesityveba “íåìîé êàìåíü” ar utoldeba
Sesityvebas “nameless stone”, magram gadataniTi mniSvnelobiT, rogorc aRsavse
235
siCumiTa da dumiliT (“èñïîëíåííûé áåçìîëâèÿ, òèøèíû” 1) is gvaaxloebs
mniSvnelobasTan `saflavis qva, romelic arafers gvamcnobs~.
Sesityvebis _ “nameless stone” Cven mier warmodgenili interpretaciis
pirdapir dadasturebad, rasakvirvelia, leqsis erTiani konceptis fonze,
migvaCnia analogiuri azris gamoxatva SesityvebiT “nameless graves”, rogorc
ùsaxelo saflavis~ da ùsaxelo sikvdilisa~ baironis SedarebiT adreul
leqsSi:
Denied in death a monumental stone,
Whilst to the gale in mournful cadence wave
To sighing weeds that hide their nameless grave;
(11, p. 32)
zemoaRniSnuls exmianeba poetis es striqonebic:
Some few who never will be forgot

Shall burst the bondage of the grave.
(11, p. 37)
aq warmodgenili leqsis koncepti dadasturebas poulobs baironis

erTian poetur samyaroSi, misi cxovrebisa da Semoqmedebis filosofiur
mrwamsSi. amasTan dakavSirebiT SeiZleba gavixsenoT misi cnobili striqonebi:
Not in the air shall these my words dispperse,

Though I be ashes; a far hour shall wreak
The deep prophetic fulness of this verse,
And pile on human heads the mountain of my curse!
(11, p. 237)
an
Íî ìåñòü ìîÿ òåïåðü â ìîèõ ñòèõàõ,
Êîãäà ÿ áóäó òëåòü, åùå æèâûå,
Îíè, çâó÷à ïðîðî÷åñêè â âåêàõ,
Ïðåîäоëåâ ïðîñòðàíñòâà è ñòèõèè,
Ïàäóò ïðîêëÿòèåì íà ãîëîâû ëþäñêèå.
(27, ò. II, c. 275)
agreTve, striqonebi:
1 ñì. Ñëîâàðü ðóññêîãî ÿçûêà, Ì., 1958, ò. 2., ñòð. 627-628.
236
But I have lived, and have not lived in vain:
My mind may lose its force, my blood its fire,
And my frame perish even in conquering pain;
But there is that within me which shall tire
Torture and Time, and breathe when I expire;
(11, p. 238)
Çàòî ÿ æèë, è æèë ÿ íå íàïðàñíî!

Õîòü, ìîæåò áûòü, ïîä áóðåþ íåâçãîä,
Áîðüáîþ ñëîìëåí, ðàíî ÿ óãàñíó,
Íî íå÷òî åñòü âî ìíå, ÷òî íå óìðåò,
×åãî íè ñìåðòü, íè âðåìåíè ïîëåò,
Íè êëåâåòà âðàãîâ íå óíè÷òîæèò.
(27, ò. II, ñ. 276)
es striqonebi, rogorc zemoTqmulis mtkiceba, `Caild haroldis

mogzaurobidanaa~ aRebuli. es poema ki baironis is nawarmoebia, romelSic
drois xatma gansakuTrebuli filosofiuri JReradoba SeiZina, da romlis
meSvide gamocemaSi 1814 wels gamoqveynda TviT leqsic “To Time” (`dros~).
rogorc ukve iTqva, sulisa da drois gaazreba analogiur gamoZaxils
poulobs galaktionis poetur samyaroSi.
gavixsenoT galaktionis cnobili oTxi taepi:
gulo Cemo mRelvarev,

sulo Cemo myivaro _
erTi dRec ar gqoniaT
mSvidi, usatkivaro.
(33, gv. 166)
ivane qvaCaxias TargmanSi leqsi ase JRers:
Ñêîìêàíà, ðàñòîïòàíà,
Òû, äóøà ìîÿ, –
Ìèðíîãî, ñïîêîéíîãî
Íå áûëî è äíÿ!
(33, ñ. 167)
Targmani sxarti da poeturia, magram ara dedniseuli. nuTu
guldasawyveti mxolod is aris, rom mRelvare guli saerTod nominaciis miRma
237
darCa TargmanSi? rasakvirvelia, ara. guldasawyveti isaa, rom sulis, rogorc
leqsis, esoden faqizi da mniSvnelovani sayrdenis, interpretacia, sruliad
Seicvala TargmanSi.
rogoria sulis interpretacia galaktionis sxva nawarmoebebSi?
gavixsenoT galaktionis cnobili leqsi `Serigeba~:
totebs qarisas gadahyva marti,

TeTr tansacmelSi me movirTvebi
da waval qarSi, rogorc mocarti,
gulSi simReris msubuq zvirTebiT.
dRes yvelgan mzea. exla am baRebs

da myinvars, maRal zraxvaTa mefes,
maisi aliT aazambaxebs,
viT Seyvarebuls da meocnebes.
Cven gvirgvinebi gvaqvs odnav msgavsi,

lamazi, SuqTa maradi nTebiT:
me _ msubuq dafnis foTlebiT savse,
myinvars _ umZimes iagundebiT.
amaRldi, sulo, TeTr akldamaze

mSvenierebis leqsiT mqebeli:
dRes yvelgan mzea da silamaze
sikvdilTan Cemi Semrigebeli!
(33, gv. 36)
`TeTri akldama~ (sxva SemTxvevaSi `marmarilo~) galaktionTan
saflavis qvis mniSvnelobiT ixmareba. is aq sikvdilis sinonimia, SesaZloa –
simboloc.
Sedgeba fiqri TeTr akldamaze

gaunelebel cecxlis, nacaris,
sityva? sxva aris fiqri amaze...
logosi... azri misi, rac aris.
(`warwera wignze~, _ 33, gv. 180)
iseve rogorc baironTan, galaktionTanac suli imarjvebs sikvdilze,

imarjvebs leqsiT (mSvenierebis leqsiT mqebeli), da amgvari amaRlebiT da
238
mxolod amaRlebiT poeti urigdeba sikvdils, magram sikvdils mxolod
fizikurs, rameTu maradiuli sicocxle mas poeziaSi elodeba:
marmarilos qveS (mwuxareba uamrav droTa!

me poeziam daviwyebis cels amarida).
(`mgloviare serafimebi~ _ 33, gv. 64)
baironis msgavsad, poeti Tavisi leqsiT imarjvebs droze, rameTu swams,

rom mis leqss daviwyeba ar uweria. amgvarad, galaktionTan erTad
mkiTxvelic zeimobs mis gamarjvebas sikvdilsa da droze (SevadaroT baironis
zemoT ganxilul leqss `dros~, sadac droze gamarjveba poets saxelovani
sikvdiliT warmoudgenia).
kvlav davubrundeT `Serigebas~, sakuTriv mis bolo strofs da Sesabamis
rusul interpretacias iv. qvaCaxias TargmanSi:
Ïðèìèðåíèå
Óì÷àëè ìàðò ïîëîçüÿ âåòðà –

Âêîíåö ïîêîí÷åíî ñ íåíàñòüåì...
Êàê Ìîöàðò, ïåñíü ïî áåëó ñâåòó
Íåñó äóøîé, îòêðûòîé íàñòåæü.
Êàçáåê – âëàäûêà äóì âåðøèííûõ,

Ìå÷òàòåëü – âûçâîëåí èç ìðàêà,
È ñêîðî ìàé çàææåò äîëèíû
Îãíÿìè èðèñîâ è ìàêîâ.
Ó íàñ ñ âåðøèíîé ñèíåãëàâîé –

Îäíè è ðàäîñòè è áîëè,
Óâåí÷àí ÿ âåíöîì èç ëàâðà,
Êàçáåê – èç ÿõîíòîâ òÿæåëûõ.
Âîññòàâ èç ïåïëà ñåðäöå áüåòñÿ,

Ëåòèò äóøà íàâñòðå÷ó âåòðó...
Ñåãîäíÿ êðàñîòà è ñîëíöå
Íàñ ïðèìèðÿò – ìåíÿ ñî ñìåðòüþ.
(33, ñ. 37)
amaRlebis didi zeimi, rogorc leqsis ZiriTadi konceptualuri Sinaarsi,

marTalia, bolo strofSia ZiriTadad gaxsnili mTeli simZlavriT, magram is
239
TandaTan grovdeba da viTardeba wina strofebSi, dawyebuli pirveli
strofebidan, sadac poeti sakuTar pirovnebas mocarts _ hangebis jadoqars
adarebs. meore strofSi is myinvars gvixatavs `viT maRal zraxvaTa mefes~, raTa
momdevno strofSi mas isev sakuTari `me~ Seadaros. mas da myinvars Turme
gvirgvinebic odnav msgavsi aqvT. (mivaqcioT yuradReba im faqts, rom zemoT
warmodgenil rusul TargmanSi msgavsebis es natifi elementi, sakuTriv òdnav
msgavsi~, Seufereblad aRmoCndeba transformirebuli _ “Ó íàñ ñ âåðíøèíîé
ñèíåãëàâîé îäíè è ðàäîñòè è áîëè”).
poeti TandaTanobiT uaxlovdeba leqsis ZiriTad konceptualur
Canafiqrs _ gamarjveba izeimos sikvdilze leqsiT, poeziiT, im leqsiT,
romelic mSvenierebis maqebaria marad.
rac Seexeba striqonebs
`Âîññòàâ èç ïåïëà ñåðäöå áüåòñÿ
Ëåòèò äóøà íàâñòðå÷ó âåòðó...” –
isini ver asaxaven im konceptualur simrTelesa da siRrmes, romelic
galaktionis striqonSi àmaRldi sulo TeTr akldamaze~ aris mocemuli.
TargmanSi dakargulia agreTve konceptualuri Sinaarsis realizaciis meore
mniSvnelovani piroba: sulis amaRleba, rogorc sikvdilze gamarjveba, xom
leqsiT xdeba _ `mSvenierebis leqsiT mqebeli~. es ki TargmanSi ukugdebulia.
rusuli teqstis mixedviT, ferflidan aRdgeba guli, xolo suli miqris, raTa
qars miegebos..., rac jer kidev ar niSnavs sulis amaRlebas da mis zeims
miwieri cxovrebis warmavlobaze.
am leqsis Tavisufali Targmanis saintereso variants gvTavazobs
vladimer leonoviCi:
Ïðèìèðåíèå
Èãðàåò íåáî îáëàêàìè,
Ïðîñòðàíñòâî äâèæåòñÿ ðûâêàìè –
Êëóáèòñÿ – ðóøèòñÿ – ëåòèò –
Íà ìèã åäèíûé âîïëîòèò
Ìÿòóùóþñÿ äóøó ìàðòà,

Íå ïîçàáîòÿñü ñîõðàíèòü....
ß æèçíü âîñïåë è ñìåðòü âîçâûñèë,
È íåò ðàçëàäà ìåæäó íèõ!
Èòàê, ïðåêðàñíî âñå. Èòàê,
240
Áûë ñíåã è îáëàêà êëóáèëèñü,
À ìåñÿö Ìàé – ïðîõëàäíûé èðèñ.
ß çàãëÿæóñü â ëèëîâûé ìðàê...
(34, ñ. 20)
rogorc vxedavT, wina Targmanisagan gansxvavebiT, vladimer leonoviCi

ar misdevs strofs strofiT an striqons striqoniT, aramed swored ZiriTadi
konceptis transformacias isaxavs miznad, rasac, rogorc Cans, sakmaod
warmatebulad arTmevs Tavs:
ß æèçíü âîñïåë è ñìåðòü âîçâûñèë,

è íåò ðàçëàäà ìåæäó íèõ!
es ori striqoni, galaktionis sulis amaRlebas rom asaxavs rusul

TargmanSi, vfiqrobT, zedmet komentars aRar saWiroebs Tavisi sisrulis,
sisworisa Tu poeturobis gamo.
magram aqve dgeba sxva sakiTxi: marTalia, mTlianobaSi leqsis koncepti
SenarCunebulia warmatebiT, magram ramdenad daSorebulia Targmani calkeul
strofebSi moqceuli informatulobisagan, Tundac isev konceptis realizaciis
TvalsazrisiT. magaliTisaTvis SevexebiT leqsis pirvel strofs, miT umetes,
rom m. kveselavas zemoT warmodgenil azrSi (II nawili, Tavi II) galaktionis
Targmanis sirTulis Sesaxeb, striqoni òcneba, naxazi saganTa uariT~ swored
rom `Serigebis~ pirvel striqonTan erTad iyo moyvanili, sakuTriv
SemdegTan _ `totebs qarisas gadahyva marti~. davubrundeT dedans:
`totebs qarisas gadahyva marti,

TeTr samoselSi me movirTvebi
da waval qarSi, rogorc mocarti,
gulSi simReris msubuq zvirTebiT...~…
da Semdeg:
`dRes yvelgan mzea da silamaze...

maisi aliT aazambaxebs...~
es xom gazafxulis mosvlaa _ mziani, ayvavebuli gazafxulisa. ra aris

`totebs qarisas gadahyva marti~? es aris aucileblad martis Tvis gasvla da
aprilisa da maisis molodini, ufro zustad – aprilis mosvla da maisis
molodini. gadavxedoT zmnas `gadahyva~ qarTul enaSi, sadac mas, anu zmnas
241
`gadayoleba~ ZiriTad pirdapir mniSvnelobasTan (`Tan gayoleba~) erTad aqvs
araerTi gadataniTi mniSvneloba: 1. Sewirva, msxverplad mitana, 2. zedmetis
gayoleba, gataneba, zedmetis micema. 1
leqsis konteqsti gamoricxavs meore gadataniT mniSvnelobas, magram
aaelvarebs mTeli sisruliT pirvels, e. i. `Sewirvas, msxverplad mitanas~.
Tu vambobT ìs dards gadahyva~, `qali mSobiarobas gadahyva~ da sxva,
ratomaa ucxo, Tu marti qaris qrolvas Seewireba, misi msxverpli gaxdeba, rac
saocrad mravlisdamtevia Tavisi xatovanebiTa da eqspresiulobiT. amasTan
erTad, zmnaSi `gadahyva~ aqcentirdeba miyolebis, gayolebis Sinaarsi:
wavidnen qarebi, wavida martic, rac kidev ufro amdidrebs striqonis Sinaarss.
samwuxarod, es xati Tu sxva araerTi striqoni aumetyvelebeli rCeba v.
l. aleinikovis Tavisufal TargmanSi.
SedarebiT warmatebulad gamoiyureba iv. qvaCaxias varianti rogorc
pirveli striqonisa, aseve mTeli strofisa. Tumc, aRsaniSnavia, rom aq
Sewirvisa da msxverplad mitanis aspeqti Sinaarsisa gamqralia.
leqsis warmodgenili interpretaciis safuZvelze Cven Semdegnairad
SevasruleT inglisuri Targmani:
Reconciliation
To windy branches when March yields,
In white costume I’ll be clad,
Like Mozart walking in the wind,
With waves of songs in heart I’ll tread.
The sunny day is full of light

And icy Kaff 2, the king of dreams,
Draws hues of iris from May skies,
As that to lover passion brings.
We both have crowns that look alike,

Eternal light shines over them,
My wreath of laurel is so light,
But Kaff’s – of glacial heavy gems.
Oh, spirit, rise over tomb white
1 qarTuli enis ganmartebiTi leqsikoni, t. II, Tb., 1951.

2 Kaff – wina saukuneebSi inglisur poeziaSi kavkasioni aRiniSneba am sityviT.
242
With praise of beauty in bard’s words:
The sunny day is full of light
To reconcile me with my Death!
(38, p. 29)
davubrundeT isev galaktionis oTxtaepian leqss, romlis rusul
TargmanSi suli aris SekumSuli da gaTelili (ñêîìêàíà, ðàñòîïòàíà...), rac
ewinaaRmdegeba dedniseuli teqstis konceptualur Sinaarss:
dedniseuli teqstis konceptis da saerTod Sinaarsis realizacia
paraleluri elementebis TanxvedriT xorcieldeba. aq `mRelvare guls~
erTvis gansazRvreba `mSvidi~ rogorc sapirispiro cxovrebis amsaxveli,
`myvinvare suls~ _ ùsatkivaro~, rac azustebs da aviTarebs leqsis
Sinaarsobriv moculobas: poetis guli aris mRelvare, da amitomac, mas arc
erTi dRec ar hqonia mSvidi, suli poetisa marad ganicdis tkivils da yivis
marad, rameTu mas arc erTi dRe ar hqonia usatkivaro.
rogorc Catarebuli kvleva naTelyofs, mTargmneli xSirad eZebs irib,
arapirdapir gzebs konceptisa Tu faqtobriv-Sinaarsobrivi informaciis
asaxvisa Targmanis enaze, da am dros nominirebas ukeTebs ara sagans,
movlenas, moqmedebas Tu saerTod koncepts, aramed maT mizezs, an maT Sedegs,
magaliTad, im mizezs an im Sedegs, romelsac maTTan piradi mentaluri Tu
sulieri urTierTobisas TviTon warmoadgens da warmosaxavs. arcTu ise
iSviaTad es Sedegobrivi meditacia ar emTxveva dedniseul monacemebs da
sapirispiro an sawinaaRmdego Sinaarss warmoSobs.
striqonebi Ñêîìêàíà, ðàñòîïòàíà / Òû äóøà ìîÿ, _ Cveni rwmeniT,
Sedegia im meoradi nominaciisa, romlis uflebasac mTargmneli aZlevs
sakuTar Tavs, rodesac `myivar suls~ ki ar asaxelebs TargmanSi, aramed
warmoadgens, Tu ra mdgomareobaSia suli, romelic yivis. misi warmosaxviT
`myivari~ suli aris SekumSuli, aris gaTelili. galaktionis leqsis aseTi
interpretacia CvenTvis araa ucxo, miTumetes, rom zemoT, meore nawilis
meore TavSi, ukve warmovadgineT analizi leqsisa, `silaSi vardi~, sadac,
poeti vardze Semdeg sityvebs ambobs: `neba aqvs zecas sul daaWknos is, brbosac
neba aqvs, fexiT gasTelos!~
magram galaktionis leqsSi `mRelvare gulTan~ Tanaarsebobs `suli~,
romelic yivis ara imitom, rom is gaTelilia da daTrgunuli, aramed imitom,
243
rom mas ar daukargavs Zala igrZnos, ganicados da gamoxatos tkivili, didi
tkivili poetisa.
amdenad, mRelvare guli da `myivari~ suli erTobaSi qmnian im Rrma
Sinaarss, romelsac didi poetis leqsi hqvia.
sulis Tema galaktionis poeziaSi sxvadasxva variaciebiT warmodgeba.

gavixsenoT striqonebi `suli, vedrebiT ganaocebi, Sens ferxT qveS kvdeba,
rogorc pepela~ leqsidan `silaJvarde anu vardi silaSi~ (leqsi srulad
ixileT meore nawilis meore TavSi). friad sayuradReboa, rom suli arc am
SemTxvevaSia daTrgunuli da gaTelili, Tumc ivane qvaCaxias TargmanSi poeti
kvlav gaTelili da daTrgunulia winandeburad. Tu galaktioni Tavis
cxovrebis gzas, romelic msgavsia sizmrisa da Soreuli cis silaJvardisa,
adarebs vards nawvimar silaSi (silaSi da ara buCqnarSi, totze an baRSi,
aramed mowyvetils... silaSi), qvaCaxia am vards gaTelilsa da daglejils
warmogvidgens mxolod. miuxedavad amisa aRsaniSnavia, rom qvaCaxias Targmani
liriuli da musikaluria. mkiTxvels vTavazobT am Targmans:
Ëàçóðü èëè ðîçà íà çåìëå
Ñâÿòàÿ äåâà! ß ðàñïëàñòàí

Èçìÿòîé ðîçîé íà çåìëå,
È æèçíü ìîÿ – êàê ñîí, êàê ñêàçêà.
Ëåòèò â ëàçóðíîé ñèíåâå.
Ê ðàññâåòó íî÷ü ïîëçåò è ñòîíåò,

È åñëè ÿâèò áîã çàðþ,
Õìåëüíîé, óñòàëûé è áåññîííûé
Ïîéäó, øàòàÿñü, ê àëòàðþ.

Ïîéäó ê èêîíàì íà ïîêëîí,
Ïàäåò ñâÿòîé ïîñëàííèê ñîëíöà –
Ëó÷ æèâîòâîðíûé íà àìâîí.
Ñêàæó: âîò ÿ, ïîäðàíîê-ëåáåäü,

Ïðèøåë, ñêîðáÿ, èç ñàäà ãðåç,
Ñìîòðè íà ãîðå÷ü è íåëåïîñòü
Ìîèõ ãðåõîâ, îáèä è ñëåç.
244
Ñìîòðè! Â ãëàçàõ ìîèõ óñòàëûõ
Áëèñòàë êîãäà-òî ñâåò íåáåñ,
Íî ïðåæíåé ðàäîñòè íå ñòàëî,
Îñòàëàñü â íèõ îäíà ëèøü ìåñòü.
Áëàæåíñòâóé! – Â ýòîé æèçíè áðåííîé

Íåäîëãî ìíå îñòàëîñü ïåòü,
Äóøà, êàê áàáî÷êà, ñìèðåííî
Ó íîã òâîèõ âñòðå÷àåò ñìåðòü.
À ÷òî âçàìåí? – Îò ãîðäîé âåðû

Êàêèõ åùå ìíå æäàòü íàãðàä?
Èç ðàÿ èçãíàí Àëèãüåðè –
Ìåíÿ, èçãîÿ, ïðèìåò àä.
Ïðåðâåò ïîñëåäíèé ÷àñ íåñ÷àñòüÿ

Òå÷åíüå ìûñëåé è çàáîò.
È íà ïîñëåäíåå ïðè÷àñòüå
Íèêòî òеáÿ íå ïîçîâåò.
Ñëîæó ÿ ðóêè, è ïî ñêëîíó

Óì÷èò â îáðûâ êðûëàòûé êîíü
ß âå÷íûé îáðåòó ïîêîé.
Ñâÿòàÿ äåâà! ß ðàñïëàñòàí

Èçìÿòîé ðîçîé íà çåìëå,
È æèçíü ìîÿ – êàê ñîí, êàê ñêàçêà,
Ëåòèò â ëàçóðíîé ñèíåâå.
(33, ñ. 91-93)
striqoni `rogorc nawvimar silaSi vardi~ galaktionis poetikaSi,

interpretaciis TvalsazrisiT, erT-erT urTules saxes warmoadgens. Seqmnil
saxeze sagangebod SevCerdebiT xatisadmi miZRvnil TavSi, aq ki aRvniSnavT,
rom mTargmneli mas kvlav sakuTar prizmaSi gadakveTils mogvawodebs, da
isic, ara qaragmiT, rogorc es galaktionTanaa, aramed ukve sakmaod
gaxsnilad da martivad. am SemTxvevaSi iribi da arapirdapiri nominacia,
dedanTan SedarebiT, gamartivebuli da gaiolebulia, ufro zustad ki _
garkveulad gayalbebulic, rac sagrZnoblad azianebs leqsis ufaqizes
245
qveteqsts da masTan erTad leqsis erTian Sinaarss (leqsis qveteqstze da mis
TargmanSi realizaciis problemaze leqsis erTian SinaarsTan kavSirSi
momdevno TavSi visaubrebT).
udavod wamoiWreba kiTxva: azianebs Tu ara striqonis amgvari
gamartiveba strofis, da saerTod, leqsis koncepts, Tu, piriqiT, win wamoswevs
da gamoaaSkaravebs mas? am ukanasknels xSir SemTxvevebSi marTlac aqvs
adgili, magram aRniSnul leqsSi striqonis gamartivebiT konceptic
martivdeba, radgan is Tavad aris mravalwaxnagovani. striqoni _ `rogorc
nawvimar silaSi vardi~, mTeli leqsis fonze ar SeiZleba niSnavdes da
gulisxmobdes mxolod `gaTelil vards miwaze~ _ `Èçìÿòîé ðîçîé íà çåìëå”,
rasac kidev ufro auxeSebs da amZimebs am xatis pirdapiri dakavSireba poetis
xatTan, romelic Tavadaa miwaze garTxmuli, rac araa dedanSi eqsplicirebuli
da, gvwams, arc implicirebuli.
amave dros aRsaniSnavia isic, rom dedanSi gvaqvs `silaSi vardi~ da ara
`vardi miwaze~ _ “ðîçîé íà çåìëå”, rogorc amas qvaCaxia gvTavazobs, rac,
mogexsenebaT, bevriT acilebs Targmans dednis mier boZebuli
informatulobisagan.
Cven mTeli sisruliT vacnobierebT Targmanis sirTules, magram
miuxedavad amisa, realurad vxedavT misi srulyofis SesaZleblobebs.
moviyvanT am leqsis inglisur Targmans, romelic cnobil inglisel
mTargmnels da qarTvelologs donald reifilds ekuTvnis:
Azure-Land, Or Rose In Sand

Ave Maria, Virgin immaculate!
As, after rain, a rose in sand,
Life’s path is a’ mirage I battle at,
The faraway sky’s far azure-land.
Moutain chasms are wrapped in half-light.

Can I believe another dawn likely?
Worn out with wine and sleepless nights,
Weary as women, I’ll go to the icons.
Worn out with sleepless nights and with wine,

Collapsed on the altar I’ll free my soul.
A beam will shine and cut into Sion,
Irradiate the priest’s white stole.
246
Then shall I say: “Here I am, hearken:
From gardens of dreams a wounded swan.
Look down, be comforted, maidenly Parca
With agonised face and hands that are wan.
Look down. Be comforted. My eyes, once bright,

Used to pulse with dew and violets,
Worn out with wine and sleepless nights,
Now weep a threnody of vengeful violence.
Be comforted then… Must every poet

Waiting for thee surrender utterly?
My soul is stunned: prayers destroy it,
It dies at your feet, a short-lived butterfly”.
Where shall I find a fair redress?

What soul is certain to be well?
From Dante Alighieri’s paradise
I’m barred by purgatory and hell.
And when on a road accursed by fate

I finally see the shade of death,
At the last communion rite
Thy name will be on no-one’s breath.
Arms crossed in peace, I shall be borne

By horses on a tempest blast.
With wine and sleepless nights forlorn
The grave will give me rest at last.
Ave Maria, Virgin immaculate!

As, after rain, a rose in sand,
Life’s path is a mirage I battle at,
The faraway sky’s far azure-land.
(6, p. 31-33)
striqoni “As, after rain, a rose in sand” (rogorc wvimis Semdeg vardi silaSi)
sagrZnoblad uaxlovdeba dedans da, konceptis realizaciis TvalsazrisiT,
misi mravalaspeqtianobis SesaZleblobas gvinarCunebs.
247
miuxedavad esoden warmatebuli realizaciisa, Cven mainc SevecadeT
aRniSnul striqonSi mogveZebna kidev ufro daaxloebuli inglisuri
ekvivalenti SesityvebisaTvis `nawvimar silaSi~, romelic vTargmneT rogorc
“in rain soaked sand”. aseve SevecadeT gagvecocxlebina mzis xati `mzeo mariam~,
romelic vTargmneT rogorc “Sunny Virgin”.
aRniSnul variantebs mohyva leqsis sruli Targmani, romlis saTauri,
rogorc donald reifildis reminiscencia, siamovnebiT SevinarCuneT, radgan
mTargmnelma miagno dedniseuli saTauris warmatebul ekvivalents, iseTs
rogorsac i. naida `dinamiur ekvivalentobas~ uwodebs 1. gTavazobT leqsis
Cemeul Targmans:
Azure-land or Rose in Sand

Ave Maria, Sunny Virgin!
As if a rose in rain-soaked sand,
My life’s dream, in sleep imagined,
Of skies remote and azure-land.
The night descends on mountain sides,

And if the sun can ever rise,
Then as a weary woman sighing,
I’ll walk to icons greeting light.
And after sleepless drunken nights

I’ll rest myself on sacred doors,
Sunbeams will enter, burning bright,
Illuminating snow-white stoles.
Then I will say: I’ve come, a swan,

Wounded by the garden of dreams,
Look and enjoy! The fate of one
With worn out hands, exhausted mien.
Look and enjoy! What has become

Of eyes that flashed with violet dews,
From sleepless drunken nights in sum,
Are filled with tears of vengeful hues.
Do all the bards the same fate share,
248
As tortured thus by your retreat?
Do all the bards in wonder-pray,
Like butterflies dying at your feet?
I guess, this fortune never meant

To make me happier or wise,
With Hell now am I overwhelmed
Like Dante was in Paradise.
When on my way, accursed by fate,

I see the ghost of cruel Death,
I’ll never meet your name or face
With Eucharist at my last breath.
I’ll cross my hands, like hurricane

Will horses forward me ahead,
From drunken sleepless nights I came,
Now rush to grave – my final bed.
Ave Maria, Sunny Virgin!

As if a rose in rain-soaked sand,
My life’s dream, in sleep imagined,
Of skies remote and azure-land.
(38, p. 59)
xSiria SemTxvevebi, rodesac irib an meorad nominaciaSi mTargmneli
gamosavals poulobs da koncepti ar ziandeba. es, pirvel yovlisa, xdeba im
SemTxvevaSi, rodesac TviT leqsis koncepti Tavisi filosofiuri
daniSnulebiT mTargmnelisagan did sulier muSaobas ar moiTxovs.
magaliTisaTvis vasaxeleb isev galaktionis leqss da am leqsis iv. qvaCaxias
mier Sesrulebul Targmans:
moRalatis cxare taSi

da orpiris nugeSi
mezizReba, rogorc maSin,
rogorc siWabukeSi!
(33, gv. 196)
Óâàæàòü ãîòîâ âðàãà,
1 E. Nida, Ch. Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation, Lieden, 1969, p. 202.
249
Íî äâóðóøíûõ îäû
Íåíàâèæó, êàê òîãäà,
Â ìîëîäûå ãîäû.
(33, ñ. 197)
rogorc vxedavT, mTargmnels aq axali Sinaarsobrivi elementebi
Semoaqvs, sakuTriv “Óâàæàòü ãîòîâ âðàãà” da “îäû”, rac ar cvlis dednis
koncepts, aramed, piriqiT, axorcielebs mis Sesabamis realizacias.
Sinaarsobriv-konceptualuri informaciis TargmanSi realizaciis
saintereso magaliTad davasaxelebT Seqspiris 66-e sonetis qarTul da rusul
variantebs. pirvel yovlisa, gTavazobT aRniSnuli sonetis dedans:
Tir’d with all these, for restful death I cry:

As, to behold desert a beggar born,
And needy nothing trimm’d in jollity,
And purest faith unhappily forsworn,
And gilded honour shamefully misplac’d,
And maiden virtue rudely strumpeted,
And right perfection wrongfully disgrac’d,
And strength by limping sway disabled,
And art made tongue-tied by authority,
And folly, doctor-like, controlling skill,
And simple truth miscall’d simplicity,
And capitve good attending captain ill:
Tir’d with all these, from these would I be gone,
Save that, to die, I leave my love alone.
(39)
Seqspiris 154 sonetis sruli qarTuli Targmani pirvelma givi

gaCeCilaZem Seasrula. aRsaniSnavia, rom teqstis interpretaciis
TvalsazrisiT givi gaCeCilaZe dedanTan erTad s. marSakis rusul Targmansac
eyrdnoba. aRmoCndeba, rom rusuli mTargmnelobiTi skolis mdidari
gamocdilebis gaziareba, vimeorebT, pirvel rigSi teqstis interpretaciis
TvalsazrisiT, sakmaod sasikeTo gavlenas moaxdens poeturi niWiT uxvad
dajildoebul mTargmnelze, miTumetes, rom es aris qarTuli Targmanis
pirveli cda.
250
givi gaCeCilaZis qarTul TargmanTan erTad gTavazobT s. marSakisa da
b. pasternakis rusul Targmanebs. b. pasternakma Seqspiris mxolod oriode
soneti Targmna. rac Seexeba s. marSaks, man Targmna sonetebi srulad.
Targmanis saqmeSi naTqvami am axali da mniSvnelovani sityvisaTvis 1948 wels
mas saxelmwifo premia mieniWa.
veZaxi sikvdils, daqanculma rogor vumziro

maTxovrad Sobils da daTrgunvils qveynad Rirsebas,
rogor nTqavs ndobas sicruis zRva vrceli, uZiro,
suliT Rataki zRva simdidriT rogor ivseba!
uRirss pativi miegeba dagmobis nacvlad
da devnilia WeSmariti srulyofileba,
da ubiwoba gaTelila uxeSad, mkacrad,
da Zliereba uZlurebas emorCileba;
da xelovnebas brZanebebiT dabmia ena,
da brZnad gvaCvenebs Tavs regveni gamobrZmedili;
da sisuleled eCveneba simarTle smenas
da Tavis monad uqcevia borots keTili;
daqanculi var da sicocxle ar msurs srulebiT,
magram ver vtoveb, radgan qveynad Sen megulebi.
(Targmani g. gaCeCilaZisa, 23)
Зову я смерть. Мне видеть невтерпеж

Достоинство, что просит подаянья,
Над простотой глумящуюся ложь,
Ничтожество в роскошном одеянье,
И совершенству ложный приговор,
И девственность, поруганную грубо,
И неуместной почести позор,
И мощь в плену у немощи беззубой,
И прямоту, что глупостью слывет,
И глупость в маске мудреца, пророка,
И вдохновения зажатый рот,
И праведность на службе у порока.
Все мерзостно, что вижу я вокруг...
251
Но как тебя покинуть, милый друг!
(перевод С. Маршака: 31, стр. 74)
Измучась всем, я умереть хочу.

Тоска смотреть, как мается бедняк
И как шутя живется богачу,
И доверять, и попадать впросак,
И наблюдать, как наглость лезет в свет,
И честь девичья катится ко дну,
И знать, что ходу совершенствам нет,
И видеть мощь у немощи в плену,
И вспоминать, что мысли заткнут рот,
И разум сносит глупости хулу,
И прямодумье простотой слывет,
И доброта прислуживает злу.
Измучась всем не стал бы жить и дня
Да другу будет трудно без меня.
(перевод Б. Пастернака: 39, стр. 230)
aRniSnuli soneti saqarTveloSi gansakuTrebiT popularuli Seiqmna

rezo TabukaSvilis mier Sesrulebuli mSvenieri variantiT:
yvelafriT daRlils, sanatrelad sikvdili damrCa,

radgan maTxovrad gadaiqca axla Rirseba,
radgan araram Seifera Zvirfasi farCa,
radgan sicrue erTgulebis gaxda Tviseba,
radgan uRirsebs usamarTlod daadges dafna,
radgan mruSobiT Selaxula umankoeba,
radgan didebas samarcxvinod uTxrian saflavs,
radgan Zlieri daimona koWlma droebam.
radgan uwmindes xelovnebas asoben laxvars,
radgan uvici da regveni brZenobs advilad,
radgan simarTle sisuleled iTvleba axla,
radgan sikeTe borotebis tyved Cavardnila.
ase daRlili, am qveynidan gaqcevas varCev,
magram ar minda, Cemi satrfo oblad rom darCes.
(24)
252
miuxedavad imisa, rom warmodgenili Targmani erT-erTi saukeTeso
nimuSia Seqspiris sonetebis qarTulad aJRerebisa, sami striqonis
alogikuroba CvenTvis mainc TvalSi sacemia. eseni gaxlavT:
1) radgan maTxovrad gadaiqca axla Rirseba;

2) radgan sicrue erTgulebis gaxda Tviseba;
3) radgan mruSobiT Selaxula umankoeba.
ismis kiTxva: rogor SeiZleba maTxovrad gadaiqces Rirseba? Rirseba

xom Tavad aris maRali zneobis maCvenebeli da igi ar SeiZleba gaxdes
maTxovari. igive iTqmis sicrueze, romelic ver gaxdeba erTgulebis Tviseba,
xolo umankoeba darCeba umankoebad da mas mruSoba ver Selaxavs. mruSoba
mxolod umankoebis sapirispiro mdgomareobaa. vnaxoT, ra xdeba Tavad
originalSi, e. i. Seqspiris mier Seqmnil sonetSi, ra xdeba sxva TargmanebSi.
pirvel rigSi gamovyoT CvenTvis saintereso meore xazi “As, to behold
desert a beggar born”, romelic sityva-sityviT ase iTargmneba: `radgan vxedav, rom
Rirseuli adamiani maTxovradaa Sobili.~
mivaqcioT yuradReba marSakis pirvelive striqons, sakuTriv, mis
pirvel winadadebas, romelic naTlad mowmobs im faqts, rom g. gaCeCilaZe
Tavis pirvelive sityvebs Targmnis ara imdenad Seqspiridan, ramdenadac
marSakidan: “Зову я смерть” _ `veZaxi sikvdils~ (SeqspirTan sikvdilisadmi
mimarTva striqonis bolo sityva “cry”-Sia moqceuli).
iq, sadac Seqspiri wers “And purest faith unhappily forsworn” _ `da uwmindesi
rwmena ubeduradaa uaryofili~ (zmna “forswear” niSnavs ùaryofas~, `ficis
gatexvas~), g. gaCeCilaZe sworad arTmevs Tavs frazas da Targmnis `rogor
nTqavs ndobas sicruis zRva vrceli, uZiro~. aseve araferia sadavo marSakTan,
romelic Seqspiris meoTxe pwkars mesameSi gadmoitans da Targmnis, rogorc
“Над простотой глумящуюся ложь”. aseve marTebulia pasternakis Targmani, sadac
rusuli teqstis meoTxe pwkari originalis meoTxe pwkars emTxveva da JRers
ase: “И доверять, и попадать впросак”. aq warmodgenili Targmanebidan,
samwuxarod, arasworad gamoiyureba am pwkaris r. TabukaSviliseuli
Targmani `radgan sicrue erTgulebis gaxda Tviseba~, romelic ver Tavsdeba
logikuri msjelobis CarCoebSi.
253
rac Seexeba Cveni SexedulebiT mesame alogikur magaliTs TabukaSvilis
variantidan, `radgan mruSobiT Selaxula umankoeba~, is dedanSi Semdegs
Seesabameba, sadac Seqspiri wers: “And maiden virtue rudely strumpeted”. es striqoni
sityva sityviT niSnavs: `qalwulis umankoebaze uxeSad iZalaves~.
inglisur enaSi “strumpet” marTlac niSnavs `mruSs~, `meZave qals~ da es
sityva, rogorc arsebiTi saxeli, mxolod am mniSvnelobiTaa warmodgnili
mraval inglisurenovan leqsikonSi, iqneba es ganmartebiTi Tu orenovani.
magram faqtia, rom Seqspiri mas xmarobs rogorc zmnis namyo mimReobas _
“strumpeted”. amdenad, mosaZebnia is leqsikografiuli wyaroebi, romlebic
afiqsireben Seqspirisdroindel xmarebas aRniSnuli sityvisa. pirvel yovlisa,
es xerxdeba sruli ganmartebiTi leqsikonebis saSualebiT, iqneba es
britanuli Tu amerikuli, sadac vkiTxulobT, rom “strumpet” laTinuri
warmoSobis sityvaa (stuprum) da Sua saukuneebis inglisurSi ukve ixmareba,
agreTve, rogorc zmna, romelic niSnavs `saxelis gatexvas~, `Sercxvenas~,
`gaupatiurebas~, `Zaladobas~, `Seuracxyofas~.
amdenad, Seqspiris striqonis sicxadesTan SedarebiT, r. TabukaSvilis
frazis alogizmi miT ufro naTeli xdeba.
sayuradReboa, rom aRniSnul striqons warmatebulad gaarTva Tavi g.
gaCeCilaZem, romelmac is Semdegnairad warmoadgina: `da ubiwoba gaTelila
uxeSad, mkacrad~. am SemTxvevaSic givi gaCeCilaZe iziarebs marSakiseul
interpretacias, sadac vkiTxulobT: “И девственность, поруганную грубо”.
aRniSnuli striqonis Seqspiriseul Sinaarsobriv sivrceSi
warmatebulad rCeba agreTve pasternakic, romelic ityvis: “И честь девичья
катится ко дну”. am dros TabukaSvili Targmnis: `mruSobiT Selaxula
umankoeba~. rogorc vxedavT, kvlav dairRva Seqspiriseuli rkinis logika.
mavani da mavani ikiTxavs: poezia xom logikuri CarCoebis msxvrevaa?
udavod, magram yovelTvis gamarTlebuli. aq mxedvelobaSi gvaqvs geniosebi
da ara versifikaciaze gavarjiSebuli moyvarulebi.
geniosebTan irRveva ara logika, aramed misi gamoxatvis gacveTili
formebi. Tu axal xedvas nebismier droSi interpretaciis progresul
meqanizms mivuyenebT, is dekodirebas aucileblad daemorCileba. ase xdeba
Tavad galaktionTanac, radgan misi nebismieri enigma, rogorc bundovani
gamoTqma, umkacresi da umaRlesi logikis nayofia, gancdaze rom aRaraferi
254
vTqvaT. SeqspirTan gancda udavod didi sulierebis siRrmidan moedineba,
xolo gonebiT igi azrovnebis mwvervalebs ipyrobs da uzenaesSi ayvanili
logikiT wardgeba TaobaTa winaSe.
amdenad, yvelaze maRali logika ara mxolod maTematikur formulaSi

unda veZioT, aramed upirvelesad maRal poeziaSi. amas marina cvetaevac
dagvidasturebs:
Стихи растут, как звезды и как розы,

Как красота – ненужная в семье.
А на венцы и на апофеозы –
Один ответ: – Откуда мне сие?
Мы спим – и вот, сквозь каменные плиты,

Небесный гость в четыре лепестка.
О мир, пойми! Певцом – во сне – открыты
Закон звезды и формула цветка.
ar vityvi, rom am sonetis poetur Targmanze ar mimuSavia. 1998 wels

Sesrulda 400 weli sonetis Seqmnidan. saliteraturo Jurnal `kldekaris~
redaqtorma, batonma oTar CxeiZem, SemomTavaza sonetis axali Targmani
Semesrulebina. am sonetis Cemeuli varianti sxva arsebul TargmanebTan erTad
Jurnalis me-3 nomerSi gamoqveynda. gTavazobT am sonetis Cemeul Targmans
bolo redaqciiT:
ase daRlili mosvenebas sikvdilSi veZeb:

roca Rirseuls dabadebuls vxedav maTxovrad,
spetaki rwmena SemogCivis uiRblo bedze,
roca pativi kacur kacTan, ici, ar mova.
ubiwo qalwuls ZaladobiT axdian namuss,
da arakaci sazeimod kvlav moirTveba,
Seuracxyofil srulqmnilebas vin gascems pasuxs?
dauZlureba Zlierebis _ saqmed iTvleba!
dRes xelovneba daamunja mmarTvelma Zalam,
Tavqariani, Tu uvici, Trgunavs gonebas,
vxedav, kai yma tyveobaSi isev suls Rafavs,
pirdapiroba da simarTle ar cnes monebma.
255
ase daRlili am yvelafriT aryofnas vnatrob,
magram, vai, rom Cems siyvaruls aq vtoveb marto.
marTalia, aRniSnuli soneti Cven ganvixileT Sinaarsobriv-

konceptualuri informaciis TargmanSi realizaciis TvalsazrisiT da,
rogorc vxedavT, masSi aisaxa samyaros erTiani uaryofiTi Sefaseba Seqspiris
mier, aSkaraa, rom soneti rCeba ufaqizes himnad siyvarulisa, rac mis
qveteqstSi amoikiTxeba: poeti yvelafriT daRlila da sikvdilisaken
miiswrafis, magram is am nabijs ar gadadgams, radgan am qveynad Tavisi
siyvaruli eguleba _ is, romelsac ver miatovebs marto.
256
mesame Tavi
Sinaarsobriv-qveteqsturi informacia
winamdebare nawilis I TavSi Cven ganvixileT baironis leqsi “Hills of

Annesley” da misi Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informacia. miuxedavad siyvarulSi
didi imedgacruebisa Tu ubedobisa, rogorc leqsis ZiriTadi konceptisa,
qveteqstis saxiT gamosWvivis poetis gaunelebeli siyvaruli merisadmi.
i. r. galperinis monografiaSi qveteqsti subieqtur kategoriad aris
warmodgenili. misgan gansxvavebiT, Cven qveteqsts obieqtur kategoriad
warmovadgenT, rameTu vxedavT, rom is enobrivi masalis saSualebiTaa
eqsplicirebuli teqstSi da misi amocnobac am faqtors emyareba, ragind
subieqturi ar unda aRmoCndes misi interpretaciis SesaZleblobebi.
leqsSi “Hills of Annesley” baironi, marTalia, guliswyromiT uyurebs
misTvis erT dros sanatrel adgils, magram TviTon merisadmi
damokidebulebas ar cvlis. daikarga imedi bednieri momavlisa, magram meris
mis gulSi isev is adgili ukavia. imedis dakargva araa gamowveuli meris
mimarT damokidebulebis SecvliT, misdami guliswyromiTa Tu aRSfoTebiT.
cnobierad Tu qvecnobierad, damokidebuleba merisadmi, rasac isev siyvaruli
hqvia, mtkicdeba erTi patara sityviT, es sityva gaxlavT pirveli piris
kuTvnilebiTi nacvalsaxeli “my” (Cemi) – “Now no more my Mary smiling makes you
seem a Heaven to me” – àmieridan Cemi meris Rimili Tqvens Tavs samoTxed ver
momaCvenebs~. sayuradReboa isic, rom leqsSi iqmneba SefasebiTi kontrasti _
baironi uaryofiTi epiTetebiT (“barren”, “bleak” da sxva) afasebs enslis _
misTvis erT dros umSvenieres adgils, im dros, rodesac meris moixseniebs
sityviT “my” (Cemi). meri iyo misi da darCa ase samudamod, miuxedavad maTi
tragizmiT aRsavse urTierTobisa. amas amtkicebs poetis Semdgomi Semoqmedeba
da mTeli misi cxovreba.
ismis kiTxva: SeZles Tu ara mTargmnelebma am ufaqizesi fenis
SenarCuneba leqsis sxva enaze ametyvelebis dros?
g. niSnianiZis TargmanSi dedniseul SefasebaTa kontrasti ènsli da
meri~ gadainacvlebs sxvagvar kontrastSi, sakuTriv SemdegSi: enslis silamaze
da susxiani qarebi (ò, mTao, mTao, Sens lamaz mkerdze ra susxiani qrian
qarebi!~). rac Seexeba meris, is aq TiTqmis misdami damokidebulebis gamoxatvis
257
gareSe rCeba. qarTveli mkiTxvelisaTvis Zneli gasagebia, rogoria poetis
bolodroindeli damokidebuleba merisadmi, ram gamoiwvia guliswyveta,
prostracia, imedgacrueba, ram aaqrola mTis `lamaz mkerdze~ `susxiani
qarebi~. ismis kiTxva: es aris merisadmi siyvarulis kvdoma, Tu kvdoma imedisa,
rom siyvaruli bednierebiT dagvirgvindeba?
arsebuli Targmanis mixedviT, dednis teqstis gareSe, Cveni azriT,
Znelia amaze pasuxis gacema. aRniSnuli TargmaniT iqmneba STabeWdileba, rom
poets surs garideba, mTasTan ganSoreba, rac ver gamoxatavs merisadmi
siyvarulis gagrZelebas.
SefasebaTa kontrasti _ ensli da meri warmatebiT ganxorcielda a.
blokis rusul TarganSi, sadac merisadmi damokidebuleba da sifaqizis gancda
Cinebulad gamoxata zedsarTavma “ìèëîé”, romelic meris saxels erTvis: “Âàì
íåáîì äëÿ ìåíÿ â óëûáêå Ìåðè ìèëîé óæå íå çàáëиñòàòü”.
Cven mier Sesrulebul TargmanSi poetis ufaqizesi da amave dros uryevi
damokidebuleba merisadmi SevecadeT gamogvexata fraziT `cisieri misi
mSveneba~ _ `meris Rimili, cisieri misi mSveneba veRarasodes momaCvenebs
Tqvens Tavs samoTxed~.
qveteqstis eqsplikaciis friad saintereso magaliTad gvesaxeba ana
axmatovas Semdegi leqsi:
Я научилась просто, мудро жить,

Смотреть на небо и молиться Богу,
И долго перед вечером бродить,
Чтоб утомить ненужную тревогу.
Когда шуршат в овраге лопухи

И никнет гроздь рябины желто-красной,
Слагаю я веселые стихи
О жизни тленной, тленной и прекрасной.
Я возвращаюсь. Лижет мне ладонь

Пушистый кот, мурлыкает умильней,
И яркий загорается огонь
На башенке озерной лесопильни.
258
Лишь изредка прорезывает тишь
Крик аиста, слетевшего на крышу.
И если в дверь мою ты постучишь,
Мне кажется, я даже не услышу.
(3, ñ. 153)
rogorc vxedavT, poetis cxovrebaSi damdgara axali xana, xana

simSvidisa da vnebaTa Relvaze amaRlebisa, rodesac poeti garkveul Zalasac
ki mimarTavs, raTa am sulier mdgomareobas miaRwios.
konceptTan erTad, leqsSi realizebulia qveteqsti, rogorc konceptze
damokidebuli da amave dros masTan dapirispirebuli fena Sinaarsisa, rac
SemdegSi mdgomareobs: marTalia, poetis cxovrebaSi damdgara axali xana
simSvidisa da vnebaTaRelvaze gamarjvebisa, magram amis misaRwevad mas
Zalisxmeva dasWirda _ “ß íàó÷èëàñü ïðîñòî, ìóäðî æèòü...” es xana TavisTavad
ar mosula, poetma sakuTar Tavs Zala daatana, SeZlo eswavla sada da
brZnuli cxovreba, rac mianiSnebs imaze, rom poetis sulier samyaroSi jer
isev brZola mimdinareobs, brZola vnebaTaRelvasTan, grZnobaTa
TviTnebobasTan.
leqsis dasasruls gaismis bolo akordi siyvarulTan damSvidobebisa:
“È åñëè â äâåðü ìîþ òû ïîñòó÷èøü, ìíå êàæåòñÿ, ÿ äàæå íå óñëûøó”, romelic
amave dros Seicavs frazas “ìíå êàæåòñÿ”. es ukanaskneli ki, nebsiT Tu
uneblieT, eWvgareSea, gamoxatavs poeti qalis Sinagan sulier mdgomareobas,
sakuTriv imas, rom siyvarulis unari jer ar Camqrala. poeti araa mtkiced
darwmunebuli Tavis gadawyvetilebaSi, rom veRar SeZlebs siyvaruls. magram,
amave dros, aRsaniSnavia meore momenti qveteqsturi Sinaarsisa, romelic
mocemul konteqstSi uviTardeba frazas “ìíå êàæåòñÿ”. siyvarulis
molodinTan erTad es gaxlavT agreTve daRlis momentic. Cans, qals eSinia,
vaiTu verc gaigos misi daZaxeba.
ai, aseTi molodiniTaa aRbeWdili ana axmatovas es mSvenieri leqsi.
frazebi _ “ÿ íàó÷èëàñü” da “ìíå êàæåòñÿ” warmoadgenen or lingvistur
markers Sinaarsobriv-qveteqsturi informaciisa, rac siyvarulis unaris
arsebobas gamoxatavs. amgvarad, leqsis konceptTan erTad, gacxaddes
grZnobebTan damSvidobeba da maTze amaRleba, qveteqsti, rogorc siyvarulis
259
unaris gadarCena, qmnis garkveul Sinaarsobriv kontrapunqts, rac gamoarCevs
kidec maRalsa da WeSmarit poezias.
is, Tu raoden didia am markerTa mniSvneloba teqstSi da raoden
mniSvnelovania maTi gaerTianeba teqstis erTian qsovilTan, gansakuTrebulad
mkveTrad vlindeba TargmanTan Sepirispirebis gziT. warmogidgenT irina
Jeleznovas mier Sesrulebul inglisur versias ana axmatovas aRniSnuli
leqsisa:
A simple way of life I've learned and wise:

I watch the sky, and pray to God, and daily,
To tire distress, with promptitude unfailing
Take long, long walks before the evening dies.
When bursdock stir and sign in the ravine

And rowans droop and bow their branches meekly,
I make up cheerful verses and serene
Of life, sweet life that passes all too quickly.
At home, the cat licks at my hand and fills

The quiet room with pleased and happy purring.
Up in the tower of the sawing mill
A single bright and steady light is burning.
A stork nests on the roof; its cry is queer

And rends the pregnant hush, deep and bewitching.
If at my door you knock, I will not hear:
The sound will die away and never reach me.
(2, p. 152)
rogorc vxedavT, zemoaRniSnuli ori markeridan TargmanSi

SenarCunebulia mxolod erTi, da es gaxlavT pirveli _ “ß íàó÷èëàñü”,
rogorc “I've learned” (“A simple way of life I’ve learned and wise”). rac Seexeba meore
markers, e. i. frazas “ìíå êàæåòñÿ”, is inglisur variantSi araa warmodgenili,
rac sagrZnoblad aRaribebs leqsis Sinaarsobriv tevadobas.
i. Jeleznovas Targmanis mixedviT iqmneba STabeWdileba, rom warsuli
dasrulda da damTavrda samudamod, guli samudamod gacivda da is
aRarasodes gamoexmaureba warsulis Zaxils, Zaxils siyvarulisa. Tu dedanSi
faruli molodini gaismis, TargmanSi grZnobebisaTvis yvela kari darazulia.
260
aq yvela gza moWrilia, rac ara marto klavs ufaqizes qveteqstur Sinaarss
leqsisa, aramed cvlis TviT konceptsac, rameTu koncepti qveteqstiT aris
saintereso da piriqiT. isini xom leqsSi gadajaWvulni arian. qveteqstis
gauCinarebam TargmanSi gaauxeSa da gaatlanqa koncepti, rogorc axali
cxovrebis dawyebis xana, xana grZnobaTa Relvaze gamarjvebisa, miT umetes,
rom pirvelma markerma koncepti meores gareSe kidev ufro Zalismieri
gaxada: qals uswavlia, rogor icxovros martivad da brZnulad da axla mis
mosvlas, mis daZaxebas veRarasdros gaigonebs. aq aris simtkice da zurgis
Seqceva, rac aviwroebs leqsis koncepts da, amdenad, mTlianad ucvlis mas
saxes.
miuxedavadi amisa, aRsaniSnavia, rom Tavisi melodiiT, simsubuqiT,
faqtobrivi informaciis gaTvaliswinebiT (inglisur variantSi “ìíå êàæåòñÿ”
warmoadgens erTaderT xelSesaxeb danakargs), Targmani sakmaod
warmatebulad gamoiyureba.
qveteqstis realizaciis friad saintereso magaliTs gvTavazobs
baironis “Ode to Napoleon Buonaparte” – òda napoleon bonapartisadmi~.
qvemoT mogvyavs nawarmoebis sruli teqsti:
I
‘Tis done – but yesterday a King!
And arm’d with Kings to strive –
And now thou art a nameless thing:
So abject – yet alive!
Is this the man of thousand thrones,
Who strew’d our earth with hostile bones,
And can he thus survive?
Since he, miscall’d the Morning Star,
Nor man nor fiend hath fallen so far.
II
Ill-minded man! why scourge thy kind
Who bow’d so low the knee?
By gazing on thyself grown blind
Thou taught’st the rest to see.
With might unquestion’d, – power to save, –
Thine only gift hath been the grave,
261
To those that worshipp’d thee;
Nor till thy fall could mortals guess
Ambition’s less than littleness!
III
Thanks for that lesson – It will teach
To after-warriors more,
Than high Philosophy can preach,
And vainly preach’d before.
That spell upon the minds of men
Breaks never to unite again,
That led them to adore
Those Pagod things of sabre sway
With fronts of brass, and feet of clay.
IV
The triumph and the vanity,
The rapture of the strife –
The earthquake voice of Victory,
To thee the breath of life;
The sword, the sceptre, and that sway
Which man seem’d made but to obey,
Wherewith renown was rife –
All quell’d! – Dark Spirit! what must be
The madness of thy memory!
V
The Desolator desolate!
The Victor overthrown!
The Arbiter of others’ fate
A Suppliant for his own!
Is it some yet imperial hope
That with such change can calmly cope?
Or dread of death alone?
To die a prince – or live a slave –
Thy choice is most ignobly brave!
262
VI
He who of old would rend the oak,
Dream’d not of the rebound:
Chain’d by the trunk he vainly broke –
Alone – how look’d he round?
Thou, in the sternness of thy strength,
An equal deed hast done at length,
And darker fate hast found:
He fell, the forest prowlers’ prey;
But thou must eat thy heart away!
VII
The Roman, when his burning heart
Was slaked with blood of Rome,
Threw down the dagger – dared depart,
In savage grandeur, home –
He dared depart in utter scorn
Of men that such a yoke had borne,
Yet left him such a doom!
His only glory was that hour
Of self-upheld abandon’d power.
VIII
The Spaniard, when the lust of sway
Had lost its quickening spell,
Cast crowns for rosaries away,
An empire for a cell;
A strict accountant of his beads,
A subtle disputant on creeds,
His dotage trifled well:
Yet better had he neither known
A bigot’s shrine, nor despot’s throne.
IX
But thou – from thy reluctant hand
The thunderbolt is wrung –
263
Too late thou leav’st the high command
To which thy weakness clung;
All Evil Spirit as thou art,
It is enough to grieve the heart
To see thine own unstrung;
To think that God’s fair world hath been
The footstool of a thing so mean;
X
And Earth hath spilt her blood for him,
Who thus can hoard his own!
And Monarchs bow’d the trembling limb,
And thank’d him for a throne!
Fair Freedom! we may hold thee dear,
When thus thy mightiest foes their fear
In humblest guise have shown.
Oh! ne’er may tyrant leave behind
A brighter name to lure mankind!
XI
Thine evil deeds are writ in gore,
Nor written thus in vain –
Thy triumphs tell of fame no more,
Or deepen every stain:
If thou hadst died as honour dies,
Some new Napoleon might arise,
To shame the world again –
But who would soar the solar height,
To set in such a starless night?
XII
Weigh’d in the balance, hero dust
Is vile as vulgar clay;
Thy scales, Mortality! are just
To all that pass away:
But yet methought the living great
Some higher sparks should animate,
264
To dazzle and dismay:
Nor deem’d Contempt could thus make mirth
Of these, the Conquerors of the earth.
XIII
And she, proud Austria’s mournful flower,
Thy still imperial bride;
How bears her breast the torturing hour?
Still clings she to thy side?
Must she too bend, must she too share
Thy late repentance, long despair,
Thou throneless Homicide?
If still she loves thee, hoard that gem, –
‘Tis worth thy vanish’d diadem!
XIV
Then haste thee to thy sullen Isle,
And gaze upon the sea;
That element may meet thy smile –
It ne’er was ruled by thee!
Or trace with thine all idle hand
In loitering mood upon the sand
That Earth is now as free!
That Corinth’s pedagogue hath now
Transferr’d his by-word to thy brow.
XV
Thou Timour! in his captive’s cage
What thoughts will there be thine,
While brooding in thy prison’d rage?
But one – “The world was mine!”
Unless, like he of Babylon,
All sense is with thy sceptre gone,
Life will not long confine
That spirit pour’d so widely forth –
So long obey’d – so little worth!
265
XVI
Or, like the thief of fire from heaven,
Wilt thou withstand the shock?
And share with him, the unforgiven,
His vulture and his rock!
Foredoom’d by God – by man accurst,
And that last act, though not thy worst,
The very Fiend’s arch mock;
He in his fall preserved his pride,
And, if a mortal, had as proudly died!
XVII
There was a day – there was an hour,
While earth was Gaul’s – Gaul thine –
When that immeasurable power
Unsated to resign
Had been an act of purer fame
Than gathers round Marengo’s name
And gilded thy decline,
Through the long twilight of all time,
Despite some passing clouds of crime.
XVIII
But thou forsooth must be a king,
And don the purple vest,
As if that foolish robe could wring
Remembrance from thy breast.
Where is that faded garment? where
The gewgaws thou wert fond to wear,
The star, the string, the crest?
Vain froward child of empire! say,
Are all thy playthings snatched away?
XIX
Where may the wearied eye repose
When gazing on the Great;
Where neither guilty glory glows,
266
Nor despicable state?
Yes – one – the first – the last – the best –
The Cincinnatus of the West,
Whom envy dared not hate,
Bequeath’d the name of Washington,
To make man blush there was but one!
(22; 11; 72-74)
aRniSnuli nawarmoebis qveteqstis amosacnobad saWiroa ara marto misi

mravaljeradi wakiTxva, aramed TviT poetis cxovrebisa da Semoqmedebis
kargi codna, gansakuTrebiT nawarmoebis Seqmnis winapirobisa, rac
aucileblad misi konceptualuri Sinaarsis swor gaazrebasac gulisxmobs.
`Caild haroldisa~ da `korsaris~ avtorma, ocdaeqvsi wlis lord
baironma ganacxada, leqsis weraze xeli aviReo. da es, pirvel yovlisa, imitom,
rom poeziaze maRla igi saqmes ayenebda. ùkeTesi saqme rom iSovos kacma,
kalami xelSi ra asaRebiao”, _ ambobda igi da iqve dasZenda: ìyo pirveli kaci
_ ara diqtatori _ ara sula, 1 aramed vaSingtoni an aristide _ winamZRoli
niWiT da simarTliT _ es niSnavs iyo RmerTkaci~.
1814 wlis 9 aprils tomas murisadmi miweril werilSi vkiTxulobT:
`leqsebs metad aRar davwer, ufro zustad, maT Cemgan nuRar eliT. me mivdivar
am scenidan da amieridan aRar msurs masxaraoba. me mqonda Cemi dro da vici,
rom is dasrulda... am droebiT saxels imis xarjze mivaRwie, rom sayovelTaod
miRebul azrebsa da crurwmenas kriWaSi Cavudeqi, mmarTvel Zalas arasodes
vepirferebodi da arasodes damifaravs Tundac erTi azri, romelic me
amaRelvebda...~
imave saRamos bairons gazeTiT Seutyvia napoleonis taxtidan
gadadgomis ambavi, rasac erTianad SeuZravs poeti: ìqneb gvirgvini arc Rirs
Tavis mokvlad, magram rogor SeZlo aqamde misvla man, vinc lodis 2 brZola
moigo. am arsebasTan SedarebiT Tavi mweri mgonia, da mainc gacilebiT patara
raimes gamo sicocxle gamiwiravs~, _ aRSfoTebuli moTqvamda baironi, _ ò,
RmerTo Cemo! am saimperio almass zadi hqonia da axla meSuSes Tu gamoadgeba
Tavis saWrelSi, Torem istorikosis kalams is erT dukatadac ar uRirs. Tumc
1 sula, lucius kornelius (Zv. w. 138-78) _ romaeli sardali da diqtatori, romelmac

gaanadgura mteri, aRadgina senati da Tavisi nebiT gadadga mmarTvelobidan.
2 lodi _ qalaqi CrdiloeT italiaSi, sadac napoleonma avstriis jari daamarcxa.
267
dRes is yvela Tayvanismcemelma miatova da mas yvela gaurbis, me zurgs mainc
ar Sevaqcev~. 1
napoleonis gadagomis ambavma bairons sityva gaatexina. meore dilas mas
niaRvariviT waskda riTmebi: ès iyo gansakuTrebuli SemTxveva, rodesac me
Tavi fizikurad ver Sevikave~, _ werda amis Sesaxeb poeti Tavis megobarsa da
gamomcemels, jon maris.
10 aprils bairons dRiurSi Cauweria: `yoveldRiurad vvarjiSob krivSi
jeksonTan 2 erTad... rac ufro metad viRlebi, miT ufro ukeTesi ganwyobileba
meufleba. dRes erTi saaTis manZilze vivarjiSe, davwere oda napoleon
bonapartisadmi _ gadavwere _ SevWame eqvsi galeti _ davlie oTxi boTli
sodiani wyali...~ 3
ase Seiqmna òda napoleon bonapartisadmi~ _ geniosis civi gonebiTa da
mgznebare poeturi gancdiT dawerili ganaCeni im pirovnebis mimarT,
romelsac baironi kerpadac miiCnevda.
baironis mizania gamoaaSkaraos napoleonis avsuloba da simwire (`Dark
spirit”, “All Evil spirit as thou art”, “Nor till thy fall could mortals guess Ambition is less than
littleness” da a. S.), raTa dagvanaxvos misi warsuli didebisa da Zalauflebis
amaoeba, rac òdis~ ZiriTad koncepts, mis mTavar konceptualur Sinaarss
warmoadgens. aRniSnuli nawarmoebi sainteresoa im TvalsazrisiT, rom
koncepti aq araerTgvarovania: zemoaRniSnuli koncepti teqstSi emijneba
meore konceptualur xazs, romelic momavlisadmi rwmenaSi gamoixateba:
gTavazobT meaTe strofs Cveneul qarTul TargmanSi:
rac dedamiwam SenTvis omSi sisxli daRvara!

gaRmerTebuli Sens sakuTars mudam zogavdi,
win migiZRoda gamarjvebuls buki, naRara
da kankalebda umowyalod Sens win monarqi!
Tavisuflebav! Sens xatis win locvad vidgebiT,
radgan uRirs mters aRar swyalobs Suqi didebis,
niRabTan erTad man dakarga ukve qomagic.
1 Lord Byron, Selected Prose, Penguin Books, 1972, p. 197.

2 jeksoni, joni _ britanuli krivis siamaye, daumarcxebeli Cempioni, baironis megobari.
3 ix. komentarebi wignSi: The Poetical Works of Lord Byron, Complete in one volume, New York, 1869, p.
264-265;
lord baironi, oda napoleon bonapartisadmi, inglisuridan Targmna da komentarebi daurTo
inesa merabiSvilma, Tb., 1996.
268
RmerTma ara hqnas odes iSvas qveynad tirani,
vin _ kvlav cdunebiT moutanos xalxs satkivari!
(22, gv. 37)
miuxedavad imisa, rom Tavdapirvelad bairons Teqvsmeti strofi Seuqmnia

da bolo sami strofi misi gamomcemlis, jon maris, TxovniT miumatebia,
cxrametive strofma geniosis xelSi sruli kompoziciuri da Sinaarsobrivi
simrTele SeiZina da konceptmac Tavis kulminacias daskvniT strofSi miaRwia.
aq jorj vaSingtoni aris is kontrastuli figura, romelic poetma napoleons
daupirispira, rogorc ideali momavali Taobebisa, kaci, romelmac daTmo
Zalaufleba aRzevebis xanaSi, romelsac baironma romaeli legendaruli
pirovnebis darad `dasavleTis cincinatusi~ uwoda. amave dros gavrcelebulia
azri imis Sesaxeb, rom, rodesac baironi òdaSi~ napoleons vaSingtons
adarebda, amiT igi mianiSnebda im marcxze, romelic ganicada safrangeTis
revoluciam da romelic araswori gziT ganviTarda amerikis revoluciasTan
SedarebiT.
“To make man blush there was but one” gaxlavT òdis~ bolo striqoni,
romelic aucileblad napoleonis portretis bolo Strixs gulisxmobs, raTa
ufro gamokveTos, erTi mxriv, jorj vaSingtonis figura, xolo, meore mxriv,
napoleonis arsebis ukiduresad uaryofiTi Sefaseba. napoleonis portretis
Sav ferebs kidev ufro amZafrebs jorj vaSingtonis portretis sinaTle:
Yes, – One – the first, – the last, – the best –
The Cincinnatus of the West.
gTavazobT am strofis Cveneul Targmans:
XIX
did pirovnebebs warsulisas SevavloT Tvali!
samagaliTos da sagmiros cota gviambobs.
SeubRalavi vin datova didebis kvali,
arodes iyo vin uRirsi da uniaTo?
gamorCeuli simamaciT, sindis-namusiT
moCans bneleTSi dasavleTis cincinatusi –
jorj vaSingtoni _ viT anderZi, marad kiafobs!
qveynad is iyo erTaderTi, pirvelic, boloc,
269
Semarcxveneli kacTa modgmis erTia mxolod!
amdenad, bolo striqoni “To make man blush there was but one” Cven mier
Semdegnairadaa interpretirebuli: adamians unda rcxvenodes mxolod erTi
kacis gamo, anu adamianis Semarcxveneli erTia mxolod.
am daskvnamde misvlas win uZRvis mTeli rigi Sedarebebisa, rameTu
baironi gvixatavs galereas ZlierTa ama qveynisaTa: milon krotoneli,
lucius kornelius sula, espaneTis mefe karlos I, Temurlengi. xolo XVI
strofSi napoleons man promeTe daupirispira.
XVI
msgavsad titanis, visi madliT cecxli anTia,

iqneb Senc SeZlo yovel dartymas gmirulad Sexvde,
ganawamebi miegebi axal ganTiads,
orbma rom gkortnos mijaWvuli frialo kldeze!
RmerTma gagwira, SegaCvena Zem kacTa modgmis,
Seni dacema grZneul eSmas dRes sxvas ras mohgvris,
Tu ara RvarZliT savse Rimils, kvlav msxverpls rom eZebs;
zevsTan mebrZolma, man Rirseba rom ar dakarga,
is TviT mokvdavic mokvdeboda mxolod amayad!
XVI strofi gaxlavT is nawili, romelSic moqceulia nawarmoebis

qveteqsturi Sinaarsi _ poetis miswrafeba, realobad aqcios miTi da ixilos
mokvdavi, romelic iseve amayad mokvdeboda, viTarca promeTe: “And, if a mortal, had as
proudly died!”
amdenad, napoleonTan kontrasts qmnis ori figura: promeTe da jorj
vaSingtoni. am ukanasknelsac, rogorc mogexsenebaT, baironi RmerTkacs
gautolebs, rodesac msjelobs misi praqtikuli qmedebisa da zogadad
saxelmwifo moRvawis saqmianobis upiratesobaze: ìyo pirveli kaci _ ara
diqtatori, ara sula, aramed vaSingtoni an aristide _ winamZRoli niWiT da
simarTliT _ es niSnavs iyo RmerTkaci~. 1
kontrasti am SemTxvevaSi baironisaTvis ideali da miswrafebaa. aris Tu

ara es mowodeba miswrafebisaken, romelic sxvas unda waadges magaliTad?
rasakvirvelia, aris, magram, pirvel yovlisa, es gaxlavT TviT baironis
miswrafeba am idealisaken.
270
ori antiTezidan: `napoleoni _ promeTe~ da `napoleoni _ vaSingtoni~,
rac lingvisturad saTanadod gamoxatulia XVI da XIX strofebSi, iqmneba
faruli azrobrivi antiTeza `promeTe _ vaSingtoni~, rogorc obieqti avtoris
miswrafebisa.
baironi irCevs promeTes, rogorc jer ararsebuls, arnaxuls...
arsebuls mxolod miTSi, mxolod legendad. rac Seexeba vaSingtons, baironi
mas realur movlenad aRiqvams da amayobs misi gmirobiT. promeTe misTvis
faqtobrivad momavlis idealia, rodesac mokvdavs SeeZleba mokvdes iseve
amayad, rogorc es promeTem gaakeTa, man, romelmac orTabrZolaSi TviT zevsi
gamoiwvia.
ra aris es, tipiuri aluzia, rogorc stilisturi xerxi, Tu kidev sxva
ram? baironis SemTxvevaSi aluzia ara marto literaturuli fenomenia,
aramed Zalian xSirad Tavad cxovrebis wesia poetisaTvis, im poetisaTvis,
romelic miTologiur gmirebsa Tu literaturul personaJebs ansaxierebda
cxovrebaSi.
romeo da julieta baironisa da meri Cavorsis siyvarulSi
gansxeuldeba, leandris miTi _ baironis mier helespontis gadacurvaSi, medea
_ medeas msgavsi qalis ZebnaSi da margarita konisadmi trfialSi da a. S. da a.
S.
rac Seexeba promeTes, man udidesi gavlena iqonia poetis Semoqmedebaze.
`manfredis~ avtors araerTgzis mianiSnes faustis gavlenaze. bairons ki aseTi
pasuxi miugia: `ris fausti, ra fausti. marlos fausti arc wamikiTxavs da arc
dadgmuli minaxavs, goeTes `faustidan~ mxolod ramdenime adgili miTargmnes.
ai, rac Seexeba esqiles `promeTes~ _ es swored isaa, ramac udidesi gavlena
iqonia Cemze, promeTe yvelaferSia, rac ki me odesme Semiqmniao~.
amdenad, meTeqvsmete strofSi realizdeba nawarmoebis qveteqsturi
Sinaarsi, romelic promeTesadmi, misi gmirobisadmi miwier miswrafebas
niSnavs.
baironi, qmnida ra òdas~, werda tragizmiT aRsavse ganaCens napoleonis _
misTvis esoden saTayvanebeli pirovnebis mimarT, da amave dros gamoxatavda
sakuTar miswrafebas idealuri gmirisaken. promeTe axla misTvis ukve cxovrebis
miznad iqca. am miznis ganxorcielebas baironma zustad aTi weli moandoma
dRidan òdis~ Seqmnisa. igi 1824 wlis 19 aprils gardaicvala saberZneTis q.
misolungSi. misi sicocxle saberZneTis ganTavisuflebas Seewira. igi iqca
1 iqve gv. 9.
271
uangaro patriotizmis simbolod da saberZneTis erovnul gmirad. am
SemTxvevaSic promeTesadmi aluzia misi cxovrebiT gamarTlda. viTarc promeTe,
is, rogorc mokvdavi, mokvda amayad...
Catarebulma analizma gamoavlina is faqti, rom òdis~ ZiriTadi
qveteqsti, rogorc promeTesadmi, misi gmirobisadmi miswrafeba gamoxatulebas
poulobs XIV strofSi, romelic valeri briusovis mier sworad aris
interpretirebuli TargmanSi:
Î, åñëè á òû, êàê ñûí ßïåòà,

Áåññòðàøíî âñòðåòèë âèõðè ãðîç,
Ñ íèì ðàçäåëèâ íà êðàå ñâåòà
Çíàêîìûé êîðøóíó óòåñ!
À íûíå íàä òâîèì ïîçîðîì
Õîõî÷åò òîò ñ íàдмåííûì âçîðîì,
Êòî ñàì ïàäåíüÿ óæàñ ñíåñ,
Îñòàëñÿ â ïðåèñïîäíåé òâåðäûì,
È óìåð áû, – áóäü ñìåðòåí, – ãîðäûì!
(27, с. 69)
Cem mier Sesrulebuli qarTuli Targmani òdisa~ pirvelad 1989 wels

gamoqveynda. amdenad, saqarTveloSi baironis am nawarmoebs mkiTxveli XIX
saukunidan moyolebuli valeri briusovis rusuli TargmaniT ecnoboda. es
Targmani erTaderTia, romelic Sesulia baironis yvela rusul gamocemaSi,
dawyebuli brokgauziT, damTavrebuli Tanamedrove gamocemebiT.
galaktion tabiZes uTargmnia odis pirveli ori strofi, magram es
Targmani Sesrulebulia ara baironis dedniseuli teqstidan, aramed
rusulidan, e. i. v. briusovis Targmanidan. viTvaliswinebT ra nebismieri
mkiTxvelis interess, qvemoT mogvyavs galaktionis Targmani v. briusovis
teqstiTurT, romelic, saocrad uaxlovdeba SinaarsiTa da stiliT v.
briusovis teqsts. rac Seexeba galaktionis Targmans, is mxolod or strofs
Seicavs da Cven aq ar SegviZlia vimsjeloT qveteqstis, rogorc Sinaarsis
ufaqizesi fenis realizaciaze.
gaTavda! guSin mZleTamZleoba

gvirgvinosani mefe mefeTa
272
dRes usaxelo xar saxeoba,
romels dacemis gza SeefeTa.
igi, vinc taxtebs aZlevdi monebs,
sikvdils swiravdi mTel legionebs,
maSin SegeZlo rom Segebeda _
exla? dacemis aseTis mere
Sen scocxlob _ rogorc sicaliere.
II
ugonov! hklavdi maTraxis cemiT,
vinc Sens winaSe Tavs xrida, yvelas,
dabrmavebuli mwvel diademiT,
sxvebs upirebdi TvalTa axelas.
jildos micema SegeZlo didi,
Sen ki erTgulebs mwareT uxdidi,
bneli samariT aZlevdi Svelas.
Sen dagvimtkice, viT iwureba
araras sulSi mediduroba.
(16, t. 7, gv. 193)
aqve mogvyavs v. briusovis Sesabamisi teqsti
Âñå êîí÷åíî! Â÷åðà âåí÷àííûé

Âëàäûêà, ñòðàõ öàðåé çåìíûõ,
Òû íûí÷å – îáëèê áåçûìÿííûé!
Òàê íèçêî ïàñòü – è áûòü â æèâûõ!
Òû ëü ýòî, ðàçäàâàâøèé òðîíû,
Íà ñìåðòü áðîñàâøèé ëåãèîíû?
Îäèí ëèøü äóõ ñ âûñîò òàêèõ
Áûë ñâåðãíóò áîæèåé äåñíèöåé:
Òîò – ëîæíî íàçâàííûé Äåííèöåé!
II
Áåçóìåö! Òû áûë áè÷ íàä òåìè,
Êòî âûè ïðåä òîáîé êëîíèë.
Îñëåïøèé â ÿðêîé äèàäåìå,
273
Äðóãèì îòêðûòü ãëàçà òû ìíèë!
Òû ìîã áû îäàðÿòü áîãàòî,
Íî âñåì ïëàòèë åäèíîé ïëàòîé
Çà âåðíîñòü: òèøèíîé ìîãèë.
Òû äîêàçàë íàì, ÷òî âîçìîæíî
Òùåñëàâèå â äóøå íè÷òîæíîé.
(27, ò. II, ñ)
rac Seexeba v. briusovis srul teqsts, aq qveteqsti dedniseuli teqstis

Sesabamisad rodia realizebuli. ai, raSi gamoixateba es: rogorc zemoT
aRvniSnavdiT, nawarmoebis koncepti, realizaciis TvalsazrisiT, kulminacias
mecxramete, anu daskvniT strofSi aRwevs. aq mocemulia antiTeza: `napoleoni _
vaSingtoni~. vaSingtoni, warsulis did pirovnebebTan Sedarebuli, miCneulia
im pirvel da ukanasknel idealur pirovnebad, visTvisac dideba araa
danaSauliT nasazrdoebi (`Where neither gilty glory glows”), romelsac mteric ver
daZraxavs (`Whom envy dared not hate”), da romelmac sakuTari nebiT daTmo
Zalaufleba, anu romelic aris dasavleTis cincinatusi (`The Cincinatus of the
West”).
vaSingtonis didebis fonze, im dros, rodesac qebisa da xotbis Rirsi
vaSingtoni erTaderTia, napoleonic erTaderTia, vis gamoc sircxvili igema
adamianma (“To make man blush there was but one”). v. briusovis intepretaciaSi
bolo striqoni gagebulia ara rogorc napoleonis daxasiaTeba, aramed
rogorc vaSingtonisa: “Ïîçîð äëÿ ïëåìåíè çåìíîãî, ×òî Âàøèíãòîíà íåò
äðóãîãî!”.
daskvniTi strofis Targmans gTavazobT srulad:
XIX
Íî åñòü ëè ìåæ âåëèêèõ âåêà,

Íà êîì ïîêîиòü ìîæíî âçãëÿä,
Êòî âûñèò èìÿ ÷åëîâåêà,
Ïðåä êåì êëåâåòíèêè ìîë÷àò?
Äà åñòü! Îí – ïåðâûé, îí – åäèíûé!
È çàâèñòü ÷òèò òâîи ñåäèíû,
Àìåðèêàíñêèé Öèíöèíàò!
Ïîçîð äëÿ ïëåìåíè çåìíîãî,
×òî Âàøèíãòîíà íåò äðóãîãî!
274
(27, ò. II, c.70)
aqve aRsaniSnavia is detalic, rom XIX strofis pirvelive xazi Seicavs

faqtobrivi informaciis iseT Secvlas, romelic moqmedebs konceptis
transformaciaze: im dros, rodesac òdis~ inglisuri teqsti gvTavazobs mTel
galereas ZlierTa ama qveynisaTa uZvelesi droidan moyolebuli napoleonis
xanamde, da daskvniTi strofi kidev erTxel aCerebs yvela maTganze mzeras:
“Where may the wearied eye repose When gasing on the Great”, v. briusovi wers: “Íî åñòü
ëè ìåæ âåëèêèõ âåêà, Íà êîì ïîêîèòü ìîæíî âçãëÿä”.
amgvarad, nacvlad imisa, rom daskvniTma strofma Seajamos wina
strofebi, aRmoCndeba, rom igi, wina strofebisagan damoukideblad, mzeras
apyrobs mxolod XIX saukunis did pirovnebebze da aqedan gamoyofs jorj
vaSingtons. vaSingtonis mimarT ki briusovi qmnis Semdeg damokidebulebas:
vaSingtoni pirveli da erTaderTia, da sircxvili dedamiwis modgmas, rom mas
meti vaSingtoni ar hyavs _ “Äà åñòü! Îí – ïåðâûé, îí – åäèíûé!.. Ïîçîð äëÿ
ïëåìåíè çåìíîãî, ÷òî Âàøèíãòîíà íåò äðóãîãî” (im dros, rodesac baironTan
vaSingtoni aris erTi _ pirveli _ ukanaskneli _ “one – the first – the last – the
best”).
amgvari intepretaciiT iqmneba qveteqsti axali `vaSingtonisadmi~
miswrafebisa, rac Crdilavs da abaTilebs dedniseul qveteqsts _ miswrafebas
promeTesadmi, miswrafebas, romelic avtoriseulia WeSmaritad.
is, rom strofi “To make man blush there was but one” exeba napoleons,
mtkicdeba XI strofSi moqceuli analogiuri striqonebiT:
Some new Napoleon might arise,

To shame the world again
momavals iqneb kidev eSva sxva Senebr didi,

Tuki sircxvili kacTa modgmas kvlav uweria.
XVI strofi rusul TargmanSi ar gamoricxavs dedniseuli teqstis swor

realizacias, magram misi daCrdilva xdeba aqcentis gadataniT sxva azrsa da
sxva Sinaarsze XIX strofSi. amdenad, qveteqsti Targmanis SemTxvevaSi
aRmoCndeba arasaTanadod realizebuli mxolod imitom, rom gayalbda teqsti
XIX strofSi. es strofi ki, rogorc analizma gviCvena, mTeli nawarmoebis
koncepts itevs.
275
Semdeg magaliTad SemogTavazebT a. puSkinis cnobil patara leqss “Я вас
любил” Sesabamisi qarTuli TargmanebiT.
***
Я вас любил: любовь еще, быть может,

В душе моей угасла не совсем;
Но пусть она вас больше не тревожит;
Я не хочу печалить вас ничем.
Я вас любил безмолвно, безнадежно,
То робостью, то ревностью томим;
Я вас любил так искренно, так нежно,
Как дай вам бог любимой быть другим.
qveteqstis faqizi Sinaarsobrivi niuansi puSkinis leqsisa mdgomareobs bolo

striqonis swor gagebaSi, sakuTriv SemdegSi: konceptualurad leqsi aris
damSvidobeba siyvarulTan (poeti siyvarulis cnebas zmnis saxiT warsul
droSi aTavsebs _ “Я вас любил”). amave dros, leqsi aris siyvarulze amaRlebac
da siyvarulis gagrZelebac. siyvarulis gagrZeleba gvmarTebs gavigoT or
aspeqtSi: pirvel yovlisa, es aris is siyvaruli, romelic poetis sayvarel
qals momavalSi sxvasTan ewveva, radgan poetis gancda man ar gaiziara: “дай вам
бог любимой быть другим”. meore mxriv, es aris siyvarulis gagrZeleba Tavad
poetis gulSi, radgan, rogorc striqoni mowmobs, es gancda masSi jerac ar
Camqrala:
Я вас любил: любовь еще, быть может,

В душе моей угасла не совсем;
rac Seexeba siyvarulze amaRlebas, rogorc leqsis qveteqsts, Cveni

rwmeniT, es motivi aris is ZiriTadi RerZi, risTvisac leqsi Seiqmna da ris
safuZvelzec is iqca genialur qmnilebad. poeti, udavod, maRldeba sakuTar
gancdaze, rodesac sayvarel qals usurvebs sxvasTan bednierebas. leqsis
mTeli qarga mowmobs imas, rom poets ar upasuxes siyvaruliT, ufro metic,
poetis gancdebi SemaSfoTebeli da sevdismomgvreli yofila qalisaTvis: “Но
пусть она вас больше не тревожит; Я не хочу печалить вас ничем”. poeti gamoutyda
qals faqizsa da mTrTolvare gancdebSi. leqsis bolos sakuTar gancdas
mxolod im siyvaruls Seadarebs, romelic surs, rom, RmerTis nebiT, qals
276
sxvasTan ewvios. amiT poeti gulisxmobs imas, rom momavalSi siyvaruli
ormxrivad iqneba gaziarebuli. bunebrivia, aseT siyvaruls meti Zala da xibli
aqvs. iqneb amitomac ori gancdis SemTxvevaSi Sedarebis Rirsad puSkins
swored is siyvaruli miaCnia, romelic qals momavalSi ewveva. amdenad,
Sedarebis obieqti qalis momavali siyvarulia da ara is gancda, romelsac
poeti guliT daatarebs. swored am warmosaxviT siyvaruls is Tavis
warumatebel gancdas adarebs: me Tqven miyvardiT ise gulwrfelad, ise
faqizad, rogorc rom minda, sxvas SeuyvardeT, _ ambobs poeti: “Я вас любил так
искренно, так нежно, Как дай вам бог любимой быть другим”.
CvenTvis cnobilia aRniSnuli leqsis sami qarTuli Targmani: ana
kalandaZis, givi Saxnazaris, lia yifianis. qvemoT samives moviyvanT da Tqven
darwmundebiT, rom yvela SemTxvevaSi Sesadarebel obieqtad gagebulia ara
momavali siyvaruli, rogorc es puSkinTanaa, aramed Tavad poetis gancda.
TargmanebSi iqmneba STabeWdileba, rom poeti Tavis gancdas miiCnevs
aRmatebulad da usurvebs qals, rom momavalSi is aseTive wrfeli siyvaruliT
Seiyvaron.
me Tqven miyvardiT da... SeiZleba,

kvlav vgrZnobde gulze mtanjvel marwuxebs...
nu SegaSfoTebT es siyvaruli,
Tqven igi didad nu SegawuxebT...
o, uimedod me Tqven miyvardiT
(uzenaesis vin uwyis metma!)...
de SegiyvaroT sxvamac Tqven ase:
nazad da wmindad _ inebos RmerTma!
(Targmani ana kalandaZisa)
me Tqven miyvardiT, siyvaruli Tqveni, egebis

minavlul cecxlad sulSi dRemde kidec viTnie,
amieridan mSfoTvar fiqrs nu gadaegebiT,
sulac ar minda damwuxreba Tqveni, riTime.
me Tqven miyvardiT uimedod, ena dadumda

iWviT, simxdaliT ver gasmineT xma saesavi,
277
me Tqven miyvardiT ise wrfelad, ise saTuTad,
rom RmerTma qnas da SegiyvaroT sxvamac CemsaviT.
(Targmani givi Sahnazarisa)
me Tqven miyvardiT da vin icis, gulisguls iqneb

dResac minaTebs wminda sxivi gardasul dReTa,
magram, Zvirfaso, nu ahyvebiT uamur fiqrebs,
mSvidoba sulis moganiWoT mowyale RmerTma.
me Tqven miyvardiT usasoo da uimedo

mtanjavda eWvi, roca gWvretdiT laRs da udardels,
erTi maqvs sulTqma da maRalma RmerTmac inebos,
rom Cemebr wmindad da saTuTad sxvasac uyvardeT.
(Targmani lia yifianisa) 1
miuxedavad mTargmnelTa mimarT Rrma pativiscemisa da madlieri

damokidebulebisa, gaCnda survili puSkinis leqsis zemowarmodgenili
interpretacia sakuTar TargmanSi gamecxadebina, romelic aq mkiTxvelis
samsjavroze gamomaqvs:
me Tqven miyvardiT uimedod, da siyvaruli

am gulSi iqneb samudamod jer arc Camqrala,
nu SegaSfoTebT Cemi sevda da sinanuli,
me Tqven arafriT SegawuxebT, dardsac davfarav.
da siyvarulis didi natvra Tu ar amixda,

eWvi da tanjva ar Caivlis vici, ukvalod,
me Tqven miyvardiT ise wrfelad, ise faqizad,
rogorc rom, netav, RmerTis nebiT sxvam SegiyvaroT.
1a. puSkinis aRniSnuli leqsis aq moyvanili yvela qarTuli Targmani gamoqveynda gaz. `lit.
saq.~-Si puSkinis 200 wlisTavTan dakavSirebiT.
278
meoTxe Tavi
poeturi teqstis Sinaarsobriv-xatobrivi informacia

da misi realizaciis sakiTxi TargmanSi
Sinaarsis zemoT ganxilul aspeqtebTan mimarTebaSi (mxedvelobaSi

gvaqvs faqtobrivi, konceptualuri da qveteqsturi fenebi informaciisa),
xatobrivi informacia maTi SemaerTebeli rgolia, sakuTriv is rgoli,
romlis gareSec teqsti ar gardaiqmneba poeziad _ mxatvrul qsovilad.
amdenad, mxatvrul TargmanSi mas didi funqcia akisria.
zemoT ganxiluli leqsebisa da maTi saTanado Targmanebis magaliTze
davrwmundiT xatobrivi informaciis cvalebadobaSi Targmanidan Targmanamde,
rac, rasakvirvelia, ar gvaZlevs uflebas Sinaarsis am metad mniSvnelovani
fenis swori asaxvis gzebi ar veZioT.
gavixsenoT baironis adreuli leqsi “Fragment Written Shortly after the
Marriage of Miss Chaworth” da misi rusuli da qarTuli Targmanebi, romelTa
analizi winamdebare TavebSi warmovadgineT.
gavixsenoT tabiZis `droSebi Cqara~ da misi SepirispirebiTi analizi
naSromis meore nawilis pirvel TavSi, sadac naCvenebi iyo, rom striqonebi:
`gaTenda. cecxlis mze aenTo, acurda. droSebi Cqara~ ivane qvaCaxias TargmanSi
transformirebuli iyo rogorc “Âîñõîäèò ñâåòèëî â áàãðîâîì íàðÿäå – Âçâåéòå
çíàìåíà!”. rogorc aRvniSneT, rusuli teqstis mixedviT Seqmnil xats _
“ñâåòèëî â áàãðîâîì íàðÿäå” bevri aklia iqamde, rom daitios cecxlovani mzis
gamomsaxvelobiTi Zala, radgan is moklebulia cecxlis mzis simbolikas _
cecxli, e. i. is, rac viTardeba, afrqvevs Suqs, rac gadamdebia. ai, aseTi iyo
leqsSi Cadebuli revoluciuri ganwyoba, romelic cecxliviT unda mosdeboda
qveyanas. es xati darRveulia agreTve vladimer leonoviCis Tavisufal
TargmanSi:
“Áåðåã áàãðîâûé, ëèëîâûé çàëèâ,
Â ñêëàäêàõ òÿæåëûõ ãîðíûå ñêëîíû –
Òàê ïëàìåíåþò çíàìåíà.”
(34, ñ. 34)
Cvenda saamayod, venera uruSaZis TargmanSi es da sxva mravali xati
tabiZisa SenarCunebulia:
279
Let Banners Wave On High
The day has dawned. A sun of fire glides up…

Let banners wave on high!
The soul’s athirst for liberty and right
As wounded deer that seek a streamlet bright,
Glory to those with souls devoid of fear,

Who for the people’s cause did bravely die…
Their names shine bright like torches in the night…
Glory to him who fills our hearts with hope,

Braves foes with matchless worth and fearless eye!
The day has dawned! United let us fight!
Let freedom’s banner o’er us wave on high!
(4, p. 151)
leqsis xatobrivi informaciisadmi saTuTi damokidebulebiTaa

aRniSnuli donald reifildis mier Sesrulebuli Targmanebi galaktion
tabiZis aTi leqsisa. davasaxelebT calkeul striqonebs da Sesityvebebs misi
Targmanebidan:
`mxurvaleba qviSaze kvnesis~ –

“While the heat groams on the sandbanks”;
`midixar...… ise migaqvs wvaleba,

TiTqo zRvis karad Tivas Tibavde~ –
“You’re going… and you carry your distress,
Scything grass by the sea, as it were”;
`vercxlis sabani~
“Covering of silver”;
`cecxli, xavsebiT daxaluls,

mzes aliT SemoamZivebs~ –
“Like strings of red beads,
Moss paths are swept.”
280
(6)
xatebis cocxlad SenarCuneba miviCnieT aucileblad, rodesac vTargmneT

galaktioni inglisurad. am sakiTxze Cven zemoT, meore nawilSi, sityvis
xatisadmi miZRvnil TavSi, visaubreT. qvemoT ramodenime magaliTs davumatebT:
me Zlier miyvars iisfer Tovlis

qalwulebiviT xididan fena.
(`Tovli~)
I’m fond of flakes of violet snow
Like virgins falling from a bridge.
(“Snow” – 38, p. 46-47)
xveulT diadeba
vxedav _ ra uxvia,
drom mas diadema
krZalviT Seuxvia.
.................................................
mzera qarTulia
sivrcis daunjebiT,
Tvali garTulia
frTian faskunjebiT.
(`qebaTa qeba nikorwmindas~)
The grandeur of twines

Is in abundance,
Time wrapped a tiara
In a gentle boundage.
..................................
It looks with a gaze,
That is Georgian true,
With fire-birds are eyes
In mute space amused.
(38, p. 38-89)
281
Tumca, aqve unda aRiniSnos, rom xatis transformacia yvela SemTxvevaSi,
udavod, erTnairad warmatebuli ver iqneba.
am TvalsazrisiT aRsaSnavia agreTve britaneli mwerlisa da

mTargmnelis, d. m. tomasis, moRvaweoba, romelic leqsis TargmanSi erTguli
rCeba Sinaarsobriv-xatobrivi informaciisa.
naTeli suraTis Sesaqmnelad davasaxelebT erT strofs ana axmatovas
leqsidan “Ïåñíÿ ïîñëåäíåé âñòðå÷è” d. m. tomasisa da i. Jeleznovas
TargmanebSi:
Òàê áåñïîìîùíî ãðóäü õîëîäåëà,

Íî øàãè ìîè áûëè ëåãêè.
ß íà ïðàâóþ ðóêó íàäåëà
Ïåð÷àòêó ñ ëåâîé ðóêè.
(25, ñ. 19)
My breast grew cold and numb,

But my feet were light.
On to my right hand I fumbled
The glove to my left hand.
(Targmani d. m tomasisa _ 12, p. 16)
Though I stepped o’er the threshold lightly,

At my heart icy fingers clawed,
And the glove I wore on my right hand
On my left hand belonged, I saw.
(Targmani i. Jeleznovasi _ 2, p. 150)
garkveul SemTxvevebSi, rodesac leqsi SedarebiT naTeli da

gamWvirvalea, arc Sinaarsobriv-xatobrivi informaciis amokiTxvaa Zneli,
mTavaria, is transformaciis procesSi ar daikargos.
aq mogvyavs m. lermontovis cnobili leqsi “Ïàðóñ” da warmatebuli
Targmanis magaliTad qvemoT gTavazobT g. gaCeCilaZiseul Targmans:
Áåëååò ïàðóñ îäèíîêèé

Â òóìàíå ìîðÿ ãîëóáîì!…
×òî èùåò îí â ñòðàíå äàëåêîé?
×òî êèíóë îí â êðàþ ðîäíîì?…
282
Èãðàþò âîëíû – âåòåð ñâèùåò,
È ìà÷òà ãíåòñÿ è ñêðèïèò…
Óâû, – îí ñ÷àñòèÿ íå èùåò
È íå îò ñ÷àñòèÿ áåæèò!
Ïîä íèì ñòðóÿ ñâåòëåé ëàçуðè,

Íàä íèì ëó÷ ñîëíöà çîëîòîé…
À îí, ìÿòåæíûé, ïðîñèò áóðè,
Êàê áóäòî â áóðÿõ åñòü ïîêîé!
(30, ò. I, ñ. 141)
afra
ltolvili afra TeTrad elvarebs,
lurj zRvaze mefobs nislis TareSi!
gana ras eZebs Soreul mxares,
an ra dastova mSobel mxareSi?
qari iwivlebs, talRis Zgereba

daemuqreba anZas daRupviT...…
is ar daeZebs bednierebas.
bednierebas is ar gaurbis!
mis qveS laJvardi Wavli elvarebs,

mze caSi naTel sxivebs aisxams.
is ki, amboxi, moiTxovs qarebs,
TiTqos simSvide moaqvs qariSxals.
(18, gv. 249)
miuxedavad imisa, rom Targmani warmatebulad migvaCnia, urigo ar iqneba

aqve vTqva is, rac wignis redaqtorma, qalbatonma dali fanjikiZem, CemTan
saubarSi aRniSna, sakuTriv is, rom `ltolvilis~ nacvlad mTargmnels
umjobesi iyo exmara sityva èuli~, rac zustad Seesatyviseba lermontoviseul
sityvas `одинокий~. veTanxmebi ra redaqtoris azrs, siamovnebiT davumateb, rom
striqonSi èulis~ xmareba, aliteraciis gziT sityva èlvarebasTan~ erTad
kidev ufro poeturs gaxdida pirvel pwkars:
èuli afra TeTrad elvarebs.~
283
rogorc davrwmundiT, yvela poeturi qmnileba rodia, Tundac mxolod
xatobrivi informaciis TvalsazrisiT, advilad transformirebadi TargmanSi.
xSiria SemTxvevebi, rodesac leqsis Targmani gacilebiT mets moiTxovs
mTargmnelisagan, sakuTriv epoqis, mwerlisa Tu kidev sxva aTasi wvrilmanis
codnas, rom aRaraferi vTqvaT misi konceptisa da qveteqstis amocnobaze, rac
xatobrivi Sinaarsis dekodirebazea aucileblad damokidebuli.
magaliTisaTvis warmovadgenT Seqspiris 130-e sonetis interpretacias
saTanado Targmanebis analiziTurT.
uiliam Seqspiris sonetebis sruli qarTuli Targmani ori variantiTaa
cnobili. es gaxlavT givi gaCeCilaZis versia, romelic ormocdaaTian wlebSi
gamoqveynda da am poetur SedevrTa gadmoqarTulebis pirvel cdas
warmoadgens, da revaz TabukaSvilis Targmani, romelic samocdaaTiani wlebis
bolos daistamba, rogorc Sedegi sami aTeuli wlis Ziebisa da rudunebisa.
orive SemTxvevaSi saqme gvaqvs maRal poetur niWierebasTan, Rrma
inteleqtTan, daxvewil gemovnebasTan, rac mTavaria, mxatvruli Targmanis
WeSmaritad saintereso da Rirssacnob nimuSebTan.
sonetebis erT-erTi gamocemis winasityvaobaSi givi gaCeCilaZe
sagangebod mianiSnebs im dadebiT rolze, romelic Seasrula Seqspiris
sonetebis interpretaciis saqmeSi samuil marSakis mier Sesrulebulma rusulma
Targmanma, rogorc sabWoTa mTargmnelobiTi skolis monapovarma, da rom
aseTi skola didad uwyobda xels Targmanis Teoriisa da praqtikis
gamTlianebas. am ukanaskneli meTodis, e. i. Teoriisa da praqtikis gamTlianebis
erT-erTi sulisCamdgmeli da popularizatori Tavad prof. givi gaCeCilaZe
gaxldaT. Tumc, Cemi azriT, iseTi niWieri mTargmnelebisaTvis, rogorebic
iyvnen s. marSaki ruseTSi da g. gaCeCilaZe saqarTveloSi, sabWoTa skolaze
aqcentis gakeTeba mxolod aucilebeli xarkis moxdiT unda yofiliyo
nakarnaxevi moqmedi ideologiis winaSe, radgan Teoriuli da praqtikuli
gamocdilebis gaerTianeba Targmanis saqmeSi literaturuli meTodis
ganviTarebis kanonzomier Sedegs warmoadgens da ara saxelmwifoebrivi
ideologiisa.
rac Seexeba sabWoTa periodsa da ideologias, man, marTlac, garkveuli
gavlena iqonia saerTod mwerlobaze, da, rogorc Cans, sakuTriv mxatvrul
Targmanze, rogorc mwerlobis ganuyofel nawilze sabWoTa Stampebisa da
stereotipebis Camoyalibebis TvalsazrisiT, rac, pirvel yovlisa, mwerlisa
284
da poetis, rogorc pirovnebis, gaidealebaSi gamoixata. es ukanaskneli
gulisxmobda Semoqmedis, rogorc pirovnebis burusSi gaxvevas, misi
ararealuri, magram idealuri imijis Seqmnas, aqedan gamomdinare, pirovnuli
sisusteebisa Tu xasiaTis Taviseburebebis miCqmalvas. yovelive aman Sedegad
mogvca is, rom biografiuli romani Tu gamokvleva, rogorc epistolarul
memkvidreobasa da saarqivo masalebze agebuli Janri literaturisa,
saqarTveloSi fexmoukidebelia, im dros, rodesac evropaSi igi iyo da rCeba
literaturuli azrovnebis normad.
swored amgvari idealizaciisaken swrafvis Sedegs unda warmoadgendes
Targmanis procesSi mwerlis realuri pirovnebis SeniRbva misTvis
damaxasiaTebeli stilisa da mxatvruli xerxebis ganeitralebiTa Tu
gauCinarebiT. aseT viTarebaSi Sesrulebuli Targmanebi rig SemTxvevebSi,
marTlac, moklebulia avtoriseul siTamames da gabedulebas, rac dedniseuli
teqstis xelaxal analizsa da wakiTxvas saWiroebs.
gTavazobT sonetis teqsts dedanSi:
130
My mistress’ eyes are nothing like the sun;

Coral is far more red than her lips’ red;
If snow be white, why then her breasts are dun;
If hairs be wires, black wires grow on her head.
I have seen roses damask’d, red and white,
But no such roses see I in her cheeks,
And in some perfumes is there more delight
Than in the breath that from my mistress reeks.
I love to hear her speak, yet well I know
That music hath a far more pleasing sound:
I grant I never saw a goddess go;
My mistress when she walks treads on the ground.
And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare
As any she belied with false compare.
(24, Sonnet 130)
aqve mogvyavs sonetis pwkaredi:
Cemi satrfos Tvalebi sul ar hgavs mzes,

marjani gacilebiT ufro wiTelia, vidre mis bageTa siwiTle;
285
Tu Tovli TeTria, ratomaa misi ZuZumkerdi mreSi feris,
Tu Tmebi mavTulebia, Savi mavTulebi amozrdila mis Tavze.
me minaxavs damaskos vardebi, wiTeli da TeTri,
magram aseT vardebs ver vxedav mis Rawvebze,
da zogierT surnelSi meti siamovnebaa,
vidre im amosunTqvaSi (amoxvneSaSi),
Cems satrfos rom myralad amosdis.
me miyvars misi mosmena, Tumc kargad vici,
rom musikas aqvs bevrad ufro sasiamovno xma.
ra Tqma unda, me arasodes minaxavs, rogor dadis qalRmerTi,
Cemi satrfo rodesac dadis, is fexs dedamiwaze abijebs.
da mainc, vficavar zenas, me vfiqrob, rom Cemi siyvaruli
iseTive iSviaTia,
rogorc nebismieri qali, romelic cru SedarebiT moatyues.
cnobilia, rom es soneti warmoadgens parodias Seqspiris Tanamedrove

poetebis leqsebze da g. gaCeCilaZe mas saTanado komentarsac ukeTebs: `dacinva
maRalfardovani stilis mqone poetebisa~. ai, Tavad gaCeCilaZiseuli Targmanic:
mzis Sesadari Cems qalbatons ara aqvs mzera,

mewamul marjans mis bageebs ver Sevadareb.
TovliviT TeTri satrfos mkerdi ar aris ferad,
qera Tqmis nacvlad Sav kululebs satrfo atarebs.
bevri minaxavs sisxlisferi da TeTri vardi,
magram mis Rawvze vardis xilvas ar var Cveuli;
mraval sakmevels ukeTesi surneli asdis, _
maTze uaress afrqvevs Cemi satrfos sxeuli.
me miyvars misi laparaki, Tumc kargad vici,
Seudareblad sjobs musika laparaks misas;
ar vici Tu hgavs qalRmerTis svlas nabiji misi _
is Cveulebriv siarulSi fexs adgams miwas.
magram arc masze naklebia Cemi RvTaeba,
visac tyuili SedarebiT Tvali aeba.
(23, soneti 130)
Seqspiris xanaSi uamravi soneti iqmneboda. aqedan Turme weliwadSi,

sul mcire, xuTasamde soneti ibeWdeboda da ai, am sonetebSi gaismoda
286
gauTavebeli xotba qalisa, romlis Tvalebsac poetebi mzes adarebdnen, bages _
wiTel marjans, Rawvebs _ vardsa da a. S., rac Seqspiris TvalSi
aRmaSfoTeblad gamoiyureboda. swored maT dasacinad da gamosajavrebladaa
mimarTuli 130-e sonetis parodiuli datvirTva.
ismis kiTxva: SeZlo Tu ara g. gaCeCilaZem sonetis am parodiuli
datvirTvis realizacia TargmanSi? pasuxi aq erTia da dadebiTi _ g.
gaCeCilaZem es amocana warmatebiT Seasrula, iseve rogorc s. marSakma,
romlis Targmani mis winamorbed TargmanebTan SedarebiT sagrZnoblad
wingadadgmuli nabijia. gTavazobT am Targmans:
Åå ãëàçà íà çâåçäû íå ïîõîæè,

Íåëüçÿ óñòà êîðàëëàìè íàçâàòü,
Íå áåëîñíåæíà ïëå÷ îòêðûòûõ êîæà,
È ÷åðíîé ïðîâîëîêîé âüåñòÿ ïðÿäü.
Ñ äàìàññêîé ðîçîé, àëîé èëè áåëîé,
Íåëüçÿ ñðàâíèòü îòòåíîê ýòèõ ùåê.
À òåëî ïàõíåò òàê, êàê ïàõíåò òåëî,
Íå êàê ôèàëêè íåæíûé ëåïåñòîê.
Òû íå íàéäåøü â íåé ñîâåðøåííûõ ëèíèé,
Îñîáåííîãî ñâåòà íà ÷åëå.
Íå çíàþ ÿ, êàê øåñòâóþò áîãèíè,
Íî ìèëàÿ ñòóïàåò ïî çåìëå.
È âñå æ îíà óñòóïèò òåì åäâà ëè,
Êîãî â ñðàâíåíüÿõ ïûøíûõ îáîëãàëè.
(31, ò. 3, c. 138)
gavixsenoT isev Seqspirisdroindeli damokidebuleba qalisadmi, misi

mSvenierebis Sefasebisadmi. im dros, da ufro adrec, rodesac Seqspiris
Tanamedroveni qalisadmi miZRvnili sonetebis uricxv raodenobas qmnidnen,
silamazis etalonad mxolod qera qali yofila miCneuli. ufro metic,
Savgvremani uSnod iTvleboda. amas TviT Seqspiric aRniSnavs (ix. mag., soneti
127).
`xalxi lamazad ara sTvlida Savgvremans Zvelad,

arc silamazes erqva Savi feris saxeli;~
(Targ. g. gaCeCilaZisa)
287
mas, visTvisac Seqspiris Semoqmedeba araa ucxo, kargad moexseneba
poetis trfiali Savgvremani qalbatonisadmi, da ara marto trfiali,
Savgvremani qalis eSxi da silamaze Seqspiris mier gansakuTrebul rangSia
ayvanili (ix. mag., 127-e soneti, 131-e soneti). 130-e soneti ki, rogorc parodia
da gamowveva, mimarTulia silamazis SefasebaSi xelovnuri kanonebisgan
ganTavisuflebisaken, rac warmoadgens kidec sonetis qveteqsts.
aRniSnuli qveteqsti sworadaa g. gaCeCilaZis mier gagebuli da misi
Targmanis mTliani Sinaarsic am fenas ar ewinaaRmdegeba. es amocana, Tavis
mxriv, warmatebiT Seasrula s. marSakma.
mivmarToT r. TabukaSvilis Targmans:
Cems satrfos Tvalebs ar gamohyva sxivi mnaTobis

da mis bagesac wiTel marjans ver Sevadareb,
arc gulmkerdi aqvs Tovlisferad gadanaTovi
da mavTuliviT gaSeSebul nawnavs atarebs.
bevrjer minaxavs alisferi da TeTri vardi,
satrfos Rawvebi sul sxvagvarad SeuferiaT,
me isic vici, misi mkerdis surnelis garda,
ufro netari surneleba qveynad bevria.
tkbilia Cangi, me ki satrfos smena mwadia,
misi baasi simis xmaze metad viwame.
arsad minaxavs, qalRmerTebi rogor dadian,
Cemi satrfo ki, vici, dadis dedamiwaze.
vici da mainc Zvirfas ganZad guliT vatareb
da usamarTlod veRaravis ver Sevadareb.
(24, soneti 130)
Seqspiriseuli sonetis Semajamebel nawils misi bolo ori striqoni

warmoadgens. gavixsenoT brZnuli laTinuri gamoTqma: “omne simile claudet” _
`yovelgvari Sedareba moikoWlebs~. es kidev erTxel usvams xazs poetis
dacinvas maRalfardovani stilis leqsebisa, rac imavdroulad silamazis
bunebriobisa da SeuzRudavobis damkvidrebas emsaxureba.
r. TabukaSvilTan sonetis daskvniTi nawili Semdegia: `vici da mainc
Zvirfas ganZad gulSi vatareb da usamarTlod veRaravis ver Sevadareb~.
teqstis amgvari interpretacia gamoricxavs satrfos gaTanabrebas sxva
288
lamazmanebTan, rac mocemulia SeqspirTan. r. TabukaSvilTan mijnuri
ayvanilia `Seudarebel~ kategoriaSi. aseTi intepretacia qarTul andazas
ufro mogvagonebs, vidre Seqspiriseul Sinaarss: `visac vin uyvars, misi
lamazic is aris~. es ganwyoba gansakuTrebiT Rrmavdeba mecxre da meaTe
xazebiT. Tu Seqspiri ityvis `me miyvars misi mosmena, Tumc kargad vici, rom
musikas aqvs bevrad ufro sasiamovno xma~ (pwkaredi), r. TabukaSvili ityvis:
`tkbilia Cangi, me ki satrfos smena mwadia, misi baasi simis xmaze metad viwame~.
mSvenieria, ara? udavod! magram es xom sxva Sefasebaa.
ismis kiTxva: aris Tu ara r. TabukaSvilis teqsti Semcveli parodiuli
Sinaarsisa, romlis qveteqstSi amoikiTxeba Savgvremani qalis silamazis
aRiareba qera qalis gverdiT? pasuxi am SemTxvevaSi erTia. rogori
parodiuli Sinaarsic ar unda CavdoT striqonebSi `Cems satrfos Tvalebs ar
gamohyva sxivi mnaTobis da mis bagesac wiTel marjans ver Sevadareb~ da a. S.
da a. S., erTi ram utyuaria, Targmanis teqsti arafriT ar iZleva imis
saSualebas, rom masSi Savgvremani qalis Sefaseba amovikiTxoT qera qalis
gverdiT. amgvari Sinaarsobrivi garRveva dedansa da Targmans Soris Sedegia
iseTi detalebis ugulebelyofisa, rogoric gaxlavT, magaliTad “her breasts are
dun” _ `misi ZuZu-mkerdi mreSi ferisaa~. sayuradReboa isic, rom aseTi
dapirispirebisaTvis Seqspiri iyenebs uCveulo epiTets _ “dun” (monacisfro-
moyavisfro, rasac qarTulSi ukeT Seesatyviseba `mreSi~ feri), romelic cxenis
jiSis damaxasiaTeblad ufro gamoiyeneba inglisurSi da aq ironiuli
datvirTvisaa. is, rom es aris ZuZu-mkerdi da ara ubralod `mkerdi~ (g.
gaCeCilaZe), an `gulmkerdi~ (r. TabukaSvili), amaze mianiSnebs sityva “breast”-is
mravlobiTi forma. aseTi Sesityvebis xmarebiT sagulisxmoa intimis
gadmocemac, vinaidan imxanad gulmoxsnil samosels qali ar atarebda. rogorc
vxedavT, am SemTxvevaSi konceptisa da qveteqstis araswori realizacia
aRmoCnda Sedegi faqtobrivi informaciis arakoreqtuli asaxvisa.
agreTve ugulebelyofilia Savi feris aRmniSvneli saxeli sonetis
meoTxe striqonSic: `da mavTuliviT gaSeSebul nawnavs atarebs~ (r.
TabukaSvili) _ `Tu Tmebi mavTulebia, Savi mavTulebi amozrdila mis Tavze~
(pwkaredi).
im dros, rodesac es soneti Seiqmna, inglisSi da saerTod evropaSi
modaSi Semosula Tmis varcxnilobis haerovani stili. aseTi varcxniloba Tmis
aCeCviT xerxdeboda da misi SenarCunebis mizniT xmarobdnen oqros an vercxlis
289
specialurad damzadebul dekoratiul wminda mavTuls, romelic, iWerda ra
Tmas, erwymoda qalis Tmis fers da gansakuTrebul elfers matebda mas. am
mavTuls, rogorc samkauls, poetebi Tavad qalis Tmas udarebdnen da amitomac
aris, rom ityvis Seqspiri: `Tu maincdamainc Tma mavTuls unda~ SevadaroT,
maSin Cemi satrfos Tavze Savi mavTulebi amozrdilao, rac absoluturad
dakargulia yvela zemoxsenebul TargmanSi. am striqonis sworad ametyvelebas
ki sWirdeboda im istoriul-yofiTi fonis gaTvaliswineba, romelic aq
warmovadgineT. 1
aseTi codna, romelsac Cven gare teqsts vuwodebT, Cveulebriv,
aucilebelia teqstis swori interpretaciisaTvis.
rogorc vxedavT, sonetis meoTxe striqoni dedansa da TargmanebSi
sruliad gansxvavebuli saxeebiTaa warmodgenili. r. TabukaSvilTan poetis
satrfo `mavTuliviT gaSeSebul nawnavs atarebs~, g. gaCeCilaZesTan igi `Sav
kululebs atarebs~, s. marSakTan _ “÷åðíîé ïðîâîëîêîé âüåòñÿ ïðÿäü”.
esaa sami sxvadasxva xati, romelTagan arc erTi ar emTxveva im saxesa da
xats, romelic SeqspirTanaa mocemuli.
sonetis, rogorc erTi mTlianis, Sinaarsobriv-xatobrivi informacia
iqmneba kidev sxva mravali detaliT, romelTaganac davasaxelebT mag.,
`damaskos vards~ _ `me minaxavs damaskos vardebi, wiTeli da TeTri, magram
aseT vardebs ver vxedav mis Rawvebze~. aseTia mexuTe-meeqvse xazebis pwkaredi.
Seqspiris xanaSi, iseve rogorc momdevno saukuneebSic, qalis Rawvebs
xSirad adarebdnen damaskos vards, romelic cnobili iyo Tavisi
gansakuTrebuli TvisebiT: erTdroulad or fers Seicavda, wiTelsa da
TeTrs, rac qalis TeTr-yirmiz Rawvebs Seefereboda.
rogorc vxedavT, qarTul TargmanebSi damaskos vardi araa
gadmotanili, aq naxmaria `sisxlisferi da TeTri vardi~ (g. gaCeCilaZe) da
àlisferi da TeTri vardi~ (r. TabukaSvili), rac ar gadmoscems dedniseul
xats. rac Seexeba s. marSaks, is xmarobs “ñ äàìàññêîé ðîçîé”, magram gareteqstis
gauTvaliswineblobis gamo ver inarCunebs striqonis Sinaarss da arCevans
akeTebs “àëîé, èëè áåëîé”, es ki, rogorc vrwmundebiT, amsxvrevs dedniseul
1 ix. mag. Ñîíåòû ñîâðåìåííèêîâ Øåêñïèðà, Ì., 1987;

J. W. Hebel, H. H. Hudson, Poetry of the English Renaissance, 1509-1660, New York, 1929;
Shakespeare’s Sonnets, The Arden Shakespeare, edited by Katherine Duncan-Jones, London, 2004, p. 374;
William Shakespeare, The Sonnets and a Lover’s Complaint, Penguin Classics, London, 1999, p. 358;
290
xats. am detalis ugulebelyofa didad ar azianebs leqsis mTlian konceptsa da
qveteqsts, magram misi dakargva sonets Tavisebur xibls ukargavs.
rac Seexeba momdevno or striqons, masSi sonetis gansakuTrebuli
stilisturi waxnagia moqceuli. gTavazobT meSvide da merve striqonebis pwkareds:
`zogierT surnelSi meti siamovnebaa, vidre im amosunTqvaSi (amoxvneSaSi), 1 Cems
satrfos rom myralad amosdis~.
saSinelia, ara? udavod! rogorc Cans, qarTuli poeturi azrovneba
dRemde ver uSvebs amgvar sityvaTa konas qalTan mimarTebaSi, rogori
parodiulic ar unda iyos nawarmoebis daniSnuleba. magram sarkazmi, marili,
gambedaoba da iumori Seqspirisa? es xom faqtia, rameTu zmna “reek” Tavisi
mniSvnelobebiT `yrola~, `cudi sunis dena~, `xrColva~ Seqspiris drosac igive
iyo, rac aris dRes. amas adasturebs semuel jonsonis leqsikoni, romelic
XVIII saukuneSi daistamba inglisSi, da iq aRniSnuli sityva sworedac rom
Seqspiris teqstidan moyvanili magaliTebiTaa ilustrirebuli. 2
amgvarad, merve striqonSi dacinva kulminacias aRwevs da iumori rom
ara, mxolod sarkazmi da ironia aq marTlac autaneli iqneboda.
ase iqmneba miwieri qalis xati, romelic Tavisi silamaziT ar
Camouvardeba modis mixedviT aRiarebul lamazmanebs. geniosma poetma
mSvenivrad icis, rom yalbi SedarebebiT vai-poetebi mxolod cils swameben
qalis mSvenierebas, rameTu mSveniereba Tavadaa Seudarebeli da misi sxva
ramesTan gaigiveba mxolod avnebs da azianebs mas. gavixsenoT, ras ambobda
lord baironi Seqspiris amgvari damokidebulebis Sesaxeb mSvenierebisadmi:
“Shakespeare says, ‘tis silly

To gild refined gold, or paint lily.”
`Seqspiri ambobs, sisulelea

yviTlad dafero bajaRlo oqro,
funjiT SeRebo TeTri lilia.~
(Targmani Cvenia _ i. m.)
i. merabiSvili, Seqspiris axali wakiTxvisaTvis, Jurnali `literatura da xelovneba~, №4, Tb.,

1998, gv. 120-131.
1 saxeli “breath” inglisur enaSi ori mniSvnelobiTaa warmodgenili: 1. sunTqva, 2. amoxvneSa.
2 Dictionary of the English Language by Samuel Johnson in two volumes, London, 1775.
291
poetis satrfo lamazia ara imitom, rom misi rCeulia. poets moswons is
ara rogorc gaidealebuli da aramiwieri, aramed rogorc sicocxliT savse,
fexiT mosiarule mSvenieri arseba, Rirsi dafasebisa da siyvarulis. amiT
Seqspiri gamowvevas esvris Tavis Tanamokalmeebs ara marto nacadi
Sedarebebis dacinviT, aramed miuRebeli garegnobis qalis trfialiT da am
qalTan intimis gamoaSkaravebiT. am dros Seqspiri arc satrfos indobs da
gvarianad dascinis mas. amiT poeti dascinis sakuTar Tavs, raTa gamoricxos
yovelgvari RvarZli da siave Tavis ganwyobasa da damokidebulebaSi.
bunebrivi mSvenierebis aRiareba miwier siyvarulTan erTad erwymis
sonetis parodiul daniSnulebas da qmnis sonetis erTian koncepts, romelic
sonetis qveteqstsa da xatTan erTianobaSi warmoqmnis sonetis mTlian
Sinaarss.
Seqspiris siTamame, gambedaoba, ironia Tu maxvili sityva basri celiviT
xvdeboda maSindel zedmetad kazmul sonetebs. gansakuTrebuli siTamamiT
gamoirCeva 130-e soneti, romelic Cvens xelT arsebul TargmanebSi TviTon aris
damtkbari da moSaqruli, xolo misi moelvare waxnagebi faqtobrivad
CamoTlilia.
imedia, warmodgenili analizi gagebuli iqneba ara rogorc Seqmnilze
Tqmuli umaduri sityva, aramed rogorc mTargmnelTa misamarTiT naTqvami
mowodeba _ Tqvens xelSia Seqspiris, da ara marto Seqspiris, axleburi
wakiTxva. Tqven winaSea SesaZlebloba dainaxoT da sxvasac daanaxoT namdvili
avtori ukvdavi sonetebisa _ didi uiliam Seqspiri.
rac Seexeba Teoriuli analizisaTvis praqtikul xorcSesxmas, aqve
warmovadgenT Seqspiris 130-e sonetis Cemeul Targmans axali redaqciiT.
satrfos TvalebSi mzis sadari sxivi ar sufevs,

mis bageTa fers marjnisferi vici, ar hqvia,
mTis Tovls qaTqaTas ver Sevadri Sav-Sav ZuZu-mkerds
da mavTulebad kupriviT Tma gadaxlarTvia.
mravlad minaxavs TeTr-yirmizi damaskos vardi,
magram Rawvebi Cemi satrfos sul sxva feria,
da verc inanTis surnelebas veRar Sevadri
im usiamo amosunTqvas, mas rom sCvevia.
mosmena misi da baasi marad mwadia,
Tumc kargad vici, rom Cangis xma metad mitacebs,
arsad minaxavs, qalRmerTebi rogor dadian,
292
Cemi mijnuri daabijebs dedamiwaze.
da mainc vTvli, rom rCeulia igi savsebiT,
viTarc yoveli, cils rom swamebT cru mimsgavsebiT.
293
mexuTe Tavi
poetis individualuri stili

rogorc Targmnis problema
stilTan kavSirSi, pirvel rigSi, stendalis cnobili gamoTqma

gagvaxsendeba _ `stili kacia Tavad~. da am SemTxvevaSi kacSi, adamianSi, pirvel
yovlisa, pirovneba igulisxmeba, rameTu kacs, romelic Tavad araa pirovneba,
arc is gamorCeuli iersaxe SeiZleba hqondes, romelsac praqtikulad stils
vuwodebT.
poetSi pirovneba gansakuTrebuli siZlieriTaa gamokveTili da
amitomacaa, rom mas aucileblad Tavisi stili gaaCnia, stili, romelic
gulisxmobs, pirvel rigSi, pirovnebis urTierTobas samyarosTan, ufro zustad
rom vTqvaT, _ poetis damokidebulebas samyarosadmi, garemosadmi, mis irgvliv
myofi adamianebisadmi da a. S. da a. S., rac upirvelesad gamJRavndeba im
moqmedebaSi, romelsac poetis Semoqmedeba hqvia. amdenad, poetis stili _ es mis
mier samyaros xedvis stilia, romelic am samyaros artistul gaazrebaSi
poulobs Tavis gamoxatulebas. ai, erTaderTi gza imisa, Tu rogor iqmneba
Semoqmedis poeturi samyaro, romelic, Tavis mxriv, aucileblad aRniSnulia
individualuri xedviTa da stiliT.
Znelia warmoidgino romelime sistemuri da fundamenturi gamokvleva
TargmanTmcodneobaSi stilis sakiTxebis ganxilvis gareSe. exeba es qarTul
TargmanTmcodneobasac, rameTu qarTveli mTargmneli Tu Targmanis kritikosi
stilis sakiTxs yovelTvis gansakuTrebuli yuradRebiT epyroba. am
TvalsazrisiT aRsaniSnavia g. gaCeCilaZis, 1 d. fanjikiZis, 2 m. naTaZis,3 g.
wibaxaSvilis,4 p. iaSvilisa 5 da sxvaTa Sromebi.
saqarTveloSi stilistika, rogorc lingvistikis dargi, mecnierulad
naklebad Seswavlil disciplinad gamoiyureba, radgan praqtikulad arc
arsebobs saxelmZRvanelo qarTuli enis stilistikaSi. miuxedavad amisa,
1g. gaCeCilaZe, mxatvruli Targmanis Teoriis sakiTxebi, Tb., 1959.

2 d. fanjikiZe, Tanamedrove qarTuli Targmani, `literaturuli saqarTvelo~ #1,2,3, 1983;
d. fanjikiZe, stilis ekvivalentobis problema, Tb., 1995.
3m. naTaZe, inglisur-qarTuli da germanul-qarTuli Targmanis Sepirispirebis lingvo-
stilisturi problemebi, Tb. 1986.
4g. wibaxaSvili, Targmanis stilistikis zogierTi sakiTxi, `kritika~ #2, 1975.
5p. iaSvili, mxatvruli stili da Targmani, Tb., 1990.
294
qarTveli Targmanmcodneebi stilis sakiTxs gansakuTrebuli yuradRebiT
epyrobian.
poeturi Targmani iseTive miswrafebaa individualuri poeturi samyaros
asaxvisadmi, viTarca gare samyaros nebismieri SemoqmedebiTi asaxva, iqneba es
xelovneba, Tu Tanmimdevruli mecnieruli kvleva. am Sedarebam SesaZloa ukeT
mohfinos naTeli Targmanis kritikosTa gulubryvilo gulmodginebas Tu
imperatiul momTxovnelobas, Seiqmnas avtoris sakadrisi stili Targmanis
enaSi, pirvel yovlisa, enis garegani TvalsazrisiT, sadac reproduqciis
saSualeba gacilebiT naklebia, vidre yvela sxva aspeqtSi.
bunebrivia, ismeba kiTxva: ras vgulisxmobT `sxva aspeqtebSi~?
nawarmoebis `sxva aspeqtebSi~, pirvel yovlisa, misi Sinaarsobrivi mxare
igulisxmeba, sakuTriv is, romelic zemoT oTxi Sinaarsobrivi kategoriis
saxiT warmovadgineT, da romelTa urTierToba da erToba teqstSi qmnis
kidec nawarmoebisa Tu poetis individualur saxes, rogorc mis stils.
Znelia warmoidgino galaktionis stili misi Sinaarsobriv-xatobrivi
informaciis gareSe, romlis SeunarCunebloba arRvevs poetisa da nawarmoebis
suls, mis xasiaTs, e. i. mis stils. igive unda iTqvas mis ufaqizes konceptsa da
qveteqstze yovel calkeul SemTxvevaSi. am ukanasknelTa gansakuTrebuli
prevalireba, Tavis mxriv, qmnis baironis poezias, mis individualur stils.
gavixsenoT zemoT ganxiluli patara magaliTi baironis `don Juanidan~:
I wish men to be free

As much from mobs as kings.
(11, p. 758)
gavixsenoT agreTve am striqonebis t. gnediCiseuli Seusabamo da

arakoreqtuli Targmani:
Ìíå õî÷åòñÿ óâèäåòü ïîñêîðåé

Сâîáîäíûé ìèð áåç ÷åðíè è öàðåé.
(27, ò. I, ñ. 366)
gana dedanTan konceptualuri Seusabamobis Seqmna baironis stilis

darRveva ar iyo? gana baironis poeturi stili samyarosTan misi
damoukidebeli stili araa? gana es misi mrwamsis, misi sulis gamoxatulebas
ar niSnavs?
295
anda aviRoT meore Seusabamoba, erT-erT qarTul TargmanSi kuriozad
gacxadebuli:
`kus nabijiT caSi maRla aval~, romelic zemoT, Sinaarsobriv-faqtobriv
informaciasTan kavSirSi ganvixileT.
gamoxatvis rogori formac ar unda movnaxoT dedanTan SepirispirebiT,
iqneba es leqsis metrisa Tu melodiis TvalsazrisiT, Tu Cven poetis suli da
xasiaTi davarRvieT, amiT mTlianad davarRvevT im saZirkvels, romelic
sworedac rom stilis saZirkvlad migvaCnia.
amas mowmobs zemoT warmodgenili yvela magaliTi da maTi saTanado
analizi, iqneba es Seqspiris, baironis, axmatovas Tu galaktionis leqsi.
stilis sakiTxisadmi Cvens damokidebulebas meti damajerebloba rom
SevZinoT, moviSveliebT anton I-is `sami stilis Teorias~, romelic, Tavis mxriv,
dionise areopagelis saxismetyvelebis RvTismetyvelebiT iyo inspirirebuli, da
romelic ver Tavsdeba tradiciul, gramatikul-stilisturi analizis CarCoebSi.
igi warmoadgenda TxzulebaTa dayofas saRvTismetyvelo naazrevis gadmocemisa
da maTi saRvTo sibrZnis donis mixedviT. aRniSnuli Teoria Sesulia anton I-is
`qarTuli Rramatikis~ pirvel redaqciaSi, magram mas igi Tavad amouRia meore
gamocemidan, radgan, rogorc Cans, miaCnda, rom saRvTismetyvelo Sinaarsis
analizi umjobesi iyo ar Seetana gramatikis sakiTxebisadmi miZRvnil naSromSi
imdenad, ramdenadac misTvis cnobili yvela enis gramatikis saxelmZRvaneloSi
msjeloba iyo umTavresad enis formalur-gramatikul movlenebze. maT Soris
iyo m. lomonosovis Teoriac, romelic mxolod wminda enobriv formaTa
analizs gulisxmobda, rogorc gramatikuli kvlevis obieqts. 1
rogorc anton I-is `sami stilis~ Teoria mowmobs, didi qarTveli
swavluli jer kidev ori saukunis win stilis sakiTxs misi Sinaarsobrivi
aspeqtidan gamomdinare ganixilavda. aseT Sinaarss is praqtikulad gramatikis
kvlevis obieqtad miiCnevda. qarTveli swavlulis am sakiTxisadmi midgomis
aqtualurobas dRes adasturebs Tanamedrove teqstis lingvistikis
perspeqtiva, dResdReobiT misi yvelaze progresuli TvalsazrisiT.
yovelive zemoaRniSnuli, imedia, gagebuli iqneba ara rogorc poetis
kompoziciuri da stiluri xelweris uguleblyofa. udavod, yovelive es friad
sayuradReboa, magram reproduqciis TvalsazrisiT naklebad ganxorcilebadi,
1 ix. lia wereTeli, anton I-is `sami stili~ da rusTaveli, `literaturuli saqarTvelo~, #5,
1997, gv. 14.
296
rameTu bgera, sityvaTwarmoeba Tu sintaqsi gansakuTrebiTaa dakavSirebuli
enis matarebeli koleqtivis eTnosTan, mis xasiaTTan da warsulTan, da es
iseve SeuZlebelia, rogori SeuZlebelicaa enaTa kopireba Tavisi mTeli
siRrmiTa da sirTuliT.
amitomac Targmanis procesSi gansakuTrebiT ar daiTmoba is
Sinaarsobrivi kompleqsi, romelic, marTalia, garkveuli formis saSualebiTa
da am formasTan TanamonawileobiT gadmoicema, magram gacilebiT maRla dgas
masze.
vaJa-fSavela fSavuri kiloTi da intonaciiT metyvelebda poeturad im
dros, rodesac am kiloze metyvelebda mTeli fSaveTi. magram mxolod misi
azris sidiadem, misi sulis sifaqizem da siZlierem Seaqmnevina mas is
unikaluri saganZuri, rasac vaJas poezia hqvia. weris manera, sityvis maragi Tu
sityvaTa individualuri wyoba, leqsis erTian kompoziciur simrTeleSi
mowyobili da a. S. mxolod instrumentis rols asrulebs, magram sakmaod
mgrZnobiare instrumentisa, romlis srulyofasa da formirebaSi vaJa TviTon
monawileobda, da romlis gareSe, udavod, misi poezia ar Seiqmneboda.
igive unda iTqvas galaktionze, romelsac, marTalia, kuTxuri kilo
instrumentad ar gamouyenebia, magram, ganaxorciela ra qarTuli leqsis
grandiozuli reforma, TviTon Seqmna misi Tvisebrivad gansxvavebuli forma.
esec xom mxolod instrumentia misi artistuli SemoqmedebisaTvis, rameTu mis
TanamedroveTagan, moyolebuli dRemde qarTveli poetebi galaktionis
leqsiT metyveleben, xolo akakiseul Tu iliaseul riTmebs galaktionisebur
riTmebs upirispireben. es jer ar niSnavs imas, rom am instrumentze
ametyvelebuli poeti galaktionis simaRles wvdeba msoflio poeziaSi.
sayovelTao aRiareba axalgazrda bairons `Caild harold~-is
gamoqveynebam moutana. èrT mSvenier dRes me saxelganTqmulma gaviRviZeo~,
werda Tavad poeti am uecari aRiarebis Sesaxeb. is, rom baironma `Caild
haroldi~ spenseris nacadi strofiT dawera, ar niSnavs imas, rom mis
nawarmoebs individualuri stili ar amCnevia. es Tavad baironsac mSvenivrad
aqvs gacnobierebuli, rasac poemis winasityvaobac mowmobs: `spenseris
strofi... yovelgvari nairsaxeobis saSualebas iZleva..., ... da Tu mas
(nawarmoebs _ i. m.) warmateba ar mohyva, mizezi mxolod Sesruleba iqneba da
ara konstruqcia (design), rac ariostos, tomsonisa da bitis praqtikiTaa
Semowmebuli~ (11, p. 174).
297
da raoden guldasawyvetia, rom vilhelm leviki, uaRresad niWieri
mTargmneli, baironis am sagulisxmo azrs, verc sworad gaigebs, da verc
sworad aametyvelebs rusul TargmanSi: “Åñëè ìîè ñòèõè íå áóäóò èìåòü óñïåõà, ÿ
áóäó óäîâëåòâîðåí ñîçíàíèåì, ÷òî ïðè÷èíà ýòîé íåóäà÷è êðîåòñÿ òîëüêî â
èñïîëíåíèè, íî íå в çàìûñëå, îñâåùåííîì èìåíàìè Àðèîñòî, Òîìñîíà è Áèòòè” (29,
ñ. 22), – wers leviki.
ismis kiTxva: romel `Canafiqrzea~ (“çàìûñåë”) aq laparaki? gana
ariostos, tomsons, bitisa da bairons raime saerTo gaaCniaT poemis
CanafiqrTan, mis fabulasTan Tu Sinaarsobriv konceptTan kavSirSi?
rasakvirvelia, ara. baironTan aseTze araa laparaki, radgan sityvaSi “design”
baironi leqsis wyobasa da sazoms gulisxmobda, im sazoms, romelic
CamoTvlili poetebis mier ukve kargad iyo nacadi. `kus~ SemTxvevis ar iyos,
mTargmnelma aq sityva “design”-is mxolod erTi mniSvneloba iwama, sakuTriv
`Canafiqri~, da meores yuradReba ar miaqcia. gTavazobT baironis teqsts:
“The stanza of Spencer, according to one of our most successful poets, admits of every
variety…satisfied that if they are unsuccessful, their failure must be in the execution, rather than
in the design, sanctioned by the practice of Ariosto, Thomson, and Beattie.” (11, p. 174).
mxolod zedapiruli formiT gataceba leqsis stilis SenarCunebis mizniT
marcxis tolfasi rom iyo, amas odiTganve mSvenivrad grZnobda maxvili Tvali,
magram Targmanis am urTules gzaze arcTu ise iSviaTad mosdiodaT Secdomebi
sityvis gamorCeul ostatebs. gavixsenoT a. fetis gataceba sakuTari leqsebis
Targmanis saqmeSi: “Ôåò ñòàðàëñÿ î ñîõðàíåíèè âåðíîñòè ñâîåãî ïåðåâîäà ñ
ïîäëèííèêîì. Íî êàê îí ïîíиìàåò ýòó âåðíîñòü? Îí õëîïî÷åò òîëüêî î òîì, ÷òîáû
ñîõðàíèòü áóêâàëüíóþ âåðíîñòü è ñîñòàâèòü ïÿòèñòîïíûé ÿìá... Îñòàëüíîå æå âñå
äî íåãî, ìîæíî ñêàçàòü, íå êàñàåòñÿ” 1. – werda d. mixailovski jer kidev 1859
wels. garegani forma, udavod, metad mniSvnelovani mxarea mTlianad leqsis
fenomenSi, da amitomac, Targmanis procesSi mas gansakuTrebuli sifaqiziT unda
moveqceT. es araviTar SemTxvevaSi ar gulisxmobs mis xelovnur kalkirebas,
mTargmnelisagan igi saTuTsa da gonivrul midgomas saWiroebs. magaliTisaTvis
gTavazobT viliam bleikis cnobil leqss “The Tyger” (`vefxvi~) da mis
balmontiseul Targmans.
The Tyger
1ix. Ðóññêèå ïèñàòåëè î ïåðåâîäå, Ì., 1960, ñ. 455-456.
298
Tyger! Tyger burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?
In what distant deeps or skies

Burnt the fire of thine eyes?
On what wings dare he aspire
What the hand dare seize the fire?
And what shoulder, and what art

Could twist the sinews of thy heart?
And when thy heart began to beat,
What dread hand? and what dread feet?
What the hammer? what the chain?

In what furnace was thy brain?
What the anvil? what dread grasp
Dare its deadly terrors clasp?
When the stars threw down their spears,

And water’d heaven with their tears,
Did he smile his work to see?
Did he who made the Lamb make thee?
Tyger! Tyger! burrning bright

In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Dare frame thy fearful symmetry?
(9, p. 172)
Tèãð
Òèãð, òèãð, æãó÷èé ñòðàõ,

Òû ãîðèøü â íî÷íûõ ëåñàõ.
×åé áåññìåðòíûé âçîð, ëþáÿ,
Ñîçäàë ñòðàøíîãî òåáÿ?
Â íåáåñàõ èëü ñðåäü çûáåé

Âñïûõíóë áëåñê òâîèõ î÷åé?
299
Êàê äåðçàë îí òàê ïàðèòü?
Êòî ïîñìåë îãîíü ñõâàòèòü?
Êòî ñêðóòèë è äëÿ ÷åãî

Íåðâû ñåðäöà òâîåãî?
×üåþ ñòðàøíîþ ðóêîé
Òû áûë âûêîâàí – òàêîé?
×åé áûë ìîëîò, öåïè ÷üè,

×òîá ñêðåïèòü ìå÷òû òâîè?
Êòî âçìåòíóë òâîé áûñòðûé âçìàõ,
Óõâàòèë ñìåðòåëüíûé ñòðàõ?
Â òîò âåëèêèé ÷àñ, êîãäà

Âîççâàëà ê çâåçäå çâåçäà,
Â ÷àñ, êàê íåáî âñå çàæãëîñü
Âëàæíûì áëåñêîì çâåäíûõ ñëåç, –
Îí, ñîçäàíèå ëþáÿ,

Óëûáíóëñÿ ëü íà òåáÿ?
Òîò æå ëü îí òåáÿ ñîçäàë,
Êòî ðîæäåíüå àãíöó äàë? 1
cnobilia, rom uiliam bleikis poezia didxans rCeboda gaugebari

TanamedroveTaTvis, magram rogorc misi Semoqmedebis mkvlevari d. v.
hardingi 2 aRniSnavs, leqsi “The Tyger” gamonaklisis saxiT Zalze popularuli
yofila jer kidev me-18 saukunis damlevs.
kargadaa cnobili uiliam bleikis,ÿrogorc mxatvris talanti. misi
poeziis gverdiT saTanado adgili ukavia mis ferweras. mis tiloebs Soris
cnobilia `vefxvi~.
aq ar movyvebiT bleikis am leqsis garCevas, magram erTs ki aRvniSnavT,
rom vefxvis mrisxane mSvenierebis srulyofili warmosaxvisaTvis poeti mas
kravs, rogorc siwmindis, Tvinierebisa da uwyinarobis simbolos adarebs
(mexuTe strofi), rac kidev ufro gamomsaxvelobiTs qmnis leqsis emociur
JReradobas.
1citirebulia wignidan: Ìàñòåðñòâî ïåðåâîäà, Ì., 1975, ñ. 301.

2D.W. Harding, William Blake, In: “From Blake to Byron”, vol. 5, Pelican Guide to English Literature, London,
Penguin Books, 1969, p. 67.
300
leqsi oTxtaepiani qoreiTaa Sesrulebuli da mas umTavresad wyvili
aliteracia axasiaTebs: “burning bright”, “frame thy fearful”, “distant deeps”, “what
wings”, “began to beat”, “dread grasp dare its deadly”, “stars… spears”, “smile... to see”, “made
the Lamb make thee.”
rogorc vxedavT, aliteraciis gziT aqcentirebuli bgerebi umTavresad
idumalebisa da dramatizmis gamoxatvas emsaxurebian. amasTan erTad pirvelive
xazSi [b] bgeris aqcentireba kidev ufro eqspresiuls xdis aRniSnuli bgeris
Semcvel sityvaTa semantikas, rac, Tavis mxriv, aZlierebs xatobriv informacias da,
amgvarad, iqmneba xati Tvalebmoelvare, cecxliviT mZinvare vefxvisa Ramis tyeSi.
balmonti kvaldakval mihyveba uiliam bleiks da leqss imave sazomiT Targmnis
rusul enaze. balmonti cdilobs TargmanSi dedniseuli teqstis kvaldakval
bgerwerac aametyvelos, magram mis mier aqcentirebuli bgerebi [c] (“ñòðàõ”, “ëåñàõ”,
“áåññìåðòíûé”, “ñîçäàë”, “ñòðàøíîãî”) da [ç], [æ], [õ] (“æãó÷èé”, “âçîð”, “ñîçäàë”,
“âçìàõ”, “ñòðàõ...”), romlebic TargmanSi xSirad [í] da [ð] bgerebs enacvlebian,
gansxvavebuli Sinaarsis realizacias emsaxurebian. sakuTriv, iqmneba nervuli
dabneuloba, aforiaqeba, SiSi (“ñòðàõ”, “ñòðàøíîãî òåáÿ”, “ñòрàøíîþ ðóêîé”,
“ñìåðòåëüíûé ñòðàõ”), romelic aseTi siZlieriT araa dedanSi gacxadebuli. gaismis
ucnauri Wriali, zuzuni im dros, rodesac dedanSi RamiT vefxvis naxtomis Sedegad
warmoqmnili xmauri odnav dayruebuli da dramatulad eqspresiulia.
samuil marSaks, inglisuri poeziis did mcodnesa da Cinebul
mTargmnels, balmontis Targmani ar akmayofilebda, ai, ras werda igi am
Targmanis Sesaxeb: “Òàëàíòëèâûé ïîýò Ê. Ä. Áàëüìîíò ïåðåâåë çíàìåíèòûå ñòèõè
âåëèêîãî àíãëèéñêîãî ïîýòà âòîðîé ïîëîâèíû XVIII è íà÷àëà XIX âåêà Âèëüÿìà
Áëåéêà. Ñòèõè ýòè – î òèãðå – íàïèñàíû ÷åòûðåõñòîïíûì õîðååì. Áàëüìîíò
ñîõðàíèë â ñâîåì ïåðåâîäå ýòîò ðàçìåð, íî ó Áëåéêà õîðåé çâó÷èò âåñêî,
âåëè÷àâî, äàæå ãðîçíî:
Tyger! Tyger! burning bright

In the forest of the night…
À ó Áàëüìîíòà ïîëó÷èëîñü:
Òèãð, òèãð, æãó÷èé ñòðàõ,

Òû ãîðèøü â íî÷íûõ ëåñàõ…
Ïî÷òè:
×èæèê, ÷èæèê, ãäå òû áûë?

Íà Ôîíòàíêå âîäêó ïèë…
301
Òàê áûë óïðîùåí è îãðàáëåí â ïåðåâîäå íå îäèí âåëèêèé ïîýò” 1
s. marSakis azri balmontis Targmanis Sesaxeb gansakuTrebiT

sainteresoa im TvalsazisiTac, rom s. marSaki TviTon gvTavazobs v. bleikis
aRniSnuli leqsis Targmans da, amdenad, sakuTar interpretacias upirispirebs
balmontiseuls. gTavazobT s. marSakis variants:
Òèãð
Òèãð, î òèãð, ñâåòëî ãîðÿùèé

Â ãëóáèíå ïîëíî÷íîé ÷àùè,
Êåì çàäóìàí îãíåâîé
Ñîðàçìåðíûé îáðàç òâîé?
Â íåáåñàõ èëè ãëóáèíàõ

Òëåë îãîíü î÷åé çâåðèíûõ?
Ãäå òàèëñÿ îí âåêà?
×üÿ íàøëà åãî ðóêà?
×òî çà ìàñòåð, ïîëíûé ñèëû,

Ñâèë òâîè òóãèå æèëû
È ïî÷óâñòâîâàë ìåæ ðóê
Ñåðäöà ïåðâûé òÿæêèé ñòóê?
×òî çà ãîðí ïðåä íèì ïûëàë?

×òî çà ìëàò òåáÿ êîâàë?
Êòî âïåðâûå ñæàë êëåùàìè
Ãíåâíûé ìîçã, ìåòàâøèé ïëàìÿ?
À êîãäà âåñü êóïîë çâåçäíûé

Îðîñèëñÿ âëàãîé ñëåçíîé, –
Óëûáíóëñÿ ëü, íàêîíåö,
Äåëó ðóê ñâîèõ òâîðåö?
Íåóæåëè òà æå ñèëà.
Òà æå ìîùíàÿ ëàäîíü
È ÿãíåíêà ñîòâîðèëà
È òåáÿ, íî÷íîé îãîíü?
1Ñ. ß. Ìàðøàê, Ïîýçèÿ ïåðåâîäà, ñîáð. ñî÷. â âîñьìè òîìàõ, Ì., 1971, ò. 6, ñтр. 374.
302
Òèãð, î òèãð, ñâåòëî ãîðÿùèé
Â ãëóáèíå ïîëíî÷íîé ÷àùè!
×üåé áåññìåðòíîþ ðóêîé
Ñîçäàí ãðîçíûé îáðàç òâîé?
(31, ñ. 417)
s. marSaki ar eTanxmeba k. balmonts leqsis sazomis SenarCunebis sakiTxSi,
radgan miaCnia, rom mcirericxovanmarcvliani inglisuri striqoni marcvalTa
SedarebiT meti raodenobiT unda yofiliyo gadmotanili rusulSi. amdenad,
nacvlad oTxi marcvlisa, s. marSakma rvamarcvliani striqoni SemogvTavaza,
romlis zemoqmedebis Zala SeuZlebelia ar SeniSno da ar daafaso.
rac Seexeba marcvalTa raodenobas da mis SenarCunebas TargmanSi,
gvmarTebs pirdapir vTqvaT, rom marcvals nu davTvliT, davTvaloT sityva,
rogorc ZiriTadi da umciresi erTeuli teqstisa da Sinaarsis planisa, miT umetes
rom sxvadasxva enaSi sityvaSi Semaval marcvalTa raodenoba gansxvavdeba.
magaliTad, Tu inglisuri sityva xSirad erT an ormarcvliania, qarTuli sityva
mravalmarcvliania.
magram aqve unda aRiniSnos isic, rom s. marSakTan [î] Sorisdebulis
SemotaniT, marTalia, gaizarda leqsis JReradobis simZime, striqonma, samwuxarod,
dakarga uSualoba da sisadave.
mivaqcioT yuradReba saerTod [î] bgeras marSakis TargmanSi, romelic
leqsSi, aRmoCndeba, rom 52-jer aris naxmari, xolo aqedan mxolod naxevars
maxvili moudis.
“Ñîçäàí ãðîçíûé îáðàç òâîé”.
rac Seexeba balmonts, misi Targmani ZiriTadad “à” xmovnis
aqcentirebazea gawyobili, sadac maxvilis qveS is umTavresad Semdeg sityvebSi
aRmoCndeba warmoCenili:
ñòðàõ, ñòðàøíîãî _ I strofi
ñòðàøíîþ – III strofi
âçìàõ, ñòðàõ – IV strofi
÷àñ, âîççâàëà… çâåçäà; – V strofi
ñîçäàë, àãíöó, äàë – VI strofi
rogorc vxedavT, [à] bgeris aqcentireba erwymis leqsis saerTo
ganwyobas, rameTu balmontTan SiSi, daZabuloba, TviT nervuli aRgzneba da
gaRizianeba mkveTradaa gamosaxuli. aq did rols asrulebs ara marto
303
sityvaTa semantika, aramed bgerwera. magram gana yovelive es bleikiseulia?
an bleikiseulia TviT marSakis sazomis sidarbaisle da simZime? bunebrivia,
ismis kiTxva: romeli Targmani ufro axlos dgas bleikis teqstTan, Tundac
stilis tradiciuli gagebiT, aseTi SekiTxva Cven migviyvans kidev erTi sxva
sakiTxis dayenebamde, da am sakiTxs mTargmnelis individualuri stili hqvia.
bleikis leqsi da misi ori rusuli Targmani naTlad gvarwmuneben imaSi,
rom samive leqsi Tavisi garegnuli stiliT sxvadasxva bunebisaa. Tu bleikis
dedniseuli teqsti romantizmis monapovaria, balmontis varianti
simbolisturia, xolo marSakis _ aucileblad klasikuri, romliskenac is
Tavad mTeli SegnebiT miiswrafoda.
am SemTxvevaSi laparakia mxolod garegnul stilze, Torem Sinaganad,
Tavisi ZiriTadi konceptualuri SinaarsiT, balmontic da marSakic sakmaod
erTgulni rCebian dednisa da misi SemoqmedebiTi asaxvisaken miiswrafian.
aseTia Tavad marSakis Teoriuli kredoc Targmanis sakiTxebTan mimarTebaSi.
“Íàñòîÿùèé õóäîæåñòâåííûé ïåðåâîä ìîæíî ñðàâíèòü íå ñ ôîòîãðàôèåé, à ñ
ïîðòðåòîì, ñäåëàííûì ðóêîé õóäîæíèêà. Ôîòîãðàôèÿ ìîæåò áûòü î÷åíü
èñêóñíîé, äàæå àðòèñòè÷åñêîé, íî îíà íå ïåðåæèòà åå àâòîðîì”. 1
rac Seexeba `vefxvis~ balmontiseul da marSakiseul portretebs, maT
saTanado adgili daikaves bleikis Semoqmedebis popularizaciaSi da axali
sicocxle STaberes mis poetur memkvidreobas.
stilis sakiTxTan dakavSirebiT warmodgenili masala da zemoT
Catarebuli analizi uflebas gvaZlevs vimsjeloT nawarmoebis Sinaarsobriv
informaciaze, rogorc poetis stilis garkveul safuZvelze da sworedac rom
misi transformacia warmogvidgenia poeturi Targmanis erT-erT mniSvnelovan
problemad. amdenad, mizanSewonilad migvaCnia, poeturi nawarmoebis Targmnis
sakiTxis ganxilvisas SemovitanoT stilis Sinaarsobrivi aspeqtis cneba da
ganvsazRvroT is Semdegnairad: poetis stilis Sinaarsobrivi aspeqti gaxlavT
poetis individualuri da unikaluri damokidebuleba samyarosadmi,
aucileblad artistulad gancdili da gacxadebuli teqstSi, romelic ama Tu im
nawarmoebis erTobliv SinaarsSi gamovlindeba.
1 Ñ. Ìàðøàê, Ïîðòðåò èëè êîïèÿ? собр. соч. â восьми òîìàõ, Ì., 1971, ò.7, ñтр. 208.
304
daskvnebi
1. Targmanis lingvistikas, rogorc enaTmecnierebis axal dargs, gaaCnia

didi perspeqtiva TargmanTmcodneobisaTvis, rameTu is efuZneba teqstis
lingvistikas, romelsac gamohyavs literaturaTmcodneoba izolirebisa da
karCaketilobisagan.
miuxedavad imisa, rom Targmani mWidrodaa dakavSirebuli

enaTmecnirebasTan, lingvistebs sakmaod didi dro dasWirdaT imisaTvis, rom
yovelive es gulwrfelad eRiarebinaT. sosiuri, iesperseni, sapiri Tu
blumfildi mxolod Zalze iSviaTad Tu moixseniebdnen Targmanis process
sakuTar naSromebSi, xolo Tu isini amas akeTebdnen, isic mxolod imitom, rom
meore enis fenomeni gamoeaSkaravebinaT.
yovelive amis fonze fasdaudebelia iujin naidas Rvawli, romelmac

SeZlo Targmani axal relsebze gadaeyvana, sakuTriv iseTze, rodesac
mkvlevari mxolod tradiciuli lingvistikis meTodebiT veRar
dakmayofildeboda da Targmani kulturaTa gadakveTaze amozrdil
sociolingvistur movlenad iqneboda gaazrebuli. naida agrZelebs sapirisa
da malinovskis kvals, rodesac acxadebs, rom efeqturi komunikacia ar
SeiZleba iyos mxolod lingvisturi elementebis Sedegi, radgan farTo
gagebiT aranairi ori ena ar SeiZleba warmoadgendes erTsa da imave
realobas.
amgvarad, formisa da Sinaarsis dapirispireba, romelic, Cveulebriv,

binarul opozicias warmoadgens, dRes gadasinjvas saWiroebs, miT umetes, rom
Sinaarsis cneba ukve diferencirebadi kategoriaa rogorc sityvis, aseve
teqstis doneze. am ukanasknelSi igulisxmeba teqstis informatuloba, romelic
Cven dakvirvebisa da kvlevis obieqtad miviCnieT.
i. r. galperinis Teoriis Tanaxmad, gamoiyofa: Sinaarsobriv-

faqtobrivi informacia, romelic Seicavs cnobebs im faqtebis, movlenebisa da
procesebis Sesaxeb, romelTac adgili aqvT rogorc realur, ise warmosaxviT
sinamdvileSi, Sinaarsobriv-konceptualuri informacia, romelic gadmoscems
mkiTxvels movlenaTa Soris arsebul urTierTobaTa individualur-
305
avtorisieul gagebas da Sinaarsobriv-qveteqsturi informacia, romelic
aucileblad axasiaTebs poetur teqsts. es ukanaskneli, rogorc faruli
informacia, ayvanili unda iqnes faqtobrivi informaciidan Tanaxmad enis
niSanTa Tvisebebisa, warmoSvan rogorc asociaciuri, ise konotaciuri
mniSvnelobani. i. r. galperini am informacias subieqtur kategoriad
warmoadgens.
i. r. galperinis mier SemoTavazebuli Teoria da gramatikul

kategoriaTa saTanado sistema faseulia imdenad, ramdenadac masSi mocemulia
sakmaod sruli suraTi teqstis, rogorc mofiqrebuli dokumentis ZiriTadi
mamoZravebeli parametrebisa. misi sistema SesaniSnavi bazaa teqstis zogadi da
specialuri gamokvlevisaTvis. mis mier gamoyofil gramatikul kategoriaTa
rigs miekuTvneba: 1. informatuloba, rogorc teqstis ZiriTadi kategoria,
romelic Cveulebriv axlisa da ucnobis gadmocemas gulisxmobs; 2. teqstis
danawevrebadoba (÷ëåíèìîñòü), rogorc garkveuli Sinaarsis matarebeli
kompoziciuri mxare; 3. kohezia, rogorc teqstis calkeul elementTa
gramatikuli, semantikuri da leqsikuri SekavSireba; 4. kontinuumi, rogorc
droisa da sivrcis maCvenebeli kategoria; 5. retrospeqcia da prospeqcia,
rogorc diskontinuumis formebi; 6. avtosemantia, rogorc teqstis Sinaarsis
mimarT mis calkeul monakveTTa damokidebulebisa da SefardebiTi
damoukideblobis formebi; 7. teqstis modaloba; 8. teqstis pragmatuloba; 9.
partituroba, rogorc teqstSi moqmed personaJTa erToba; 10. integracia,
rogorc teqstis calkeuli nawilebis umTavresad fsiqologiuri gaerTianeba
maTi erTobliobis Seqmnis mizniT.
i. r. galperinis mier gamoyofili kategoriebi mivuyeneT poetur

teqsts. aRmoCnda, rom yoveli maTgani aucilebeli niSan-Tvisebaa poeturi
teqstisa, magram am saxis teqstSi isini mravali axali parametriT
xasiaTdebian. esenia: metri, ritmi, riTma, melodika, bgeraTa simbolizmi,
musikaloba. es is parametrebia, romelTa gareSe ar arsebobs leqsi da
romelTa gareSe momajadoebel poetur formas verasodes SeiZens xatovani
azrovneba.
2. Tavad teqstis lingvistikis mizania axsnas is movlenebi, romelzec

pasuxs ver scemen lingvistikis sxva sferoebi, iqneba es fonologia,
306
morfologia, leqsikologia, sintaqsi Tu stilistika, rac ZiriTadad erTiani
teqstis kategoriaTa sistemis SemuSavebaSi gamoixateba.
magram amave dros irkveva, rom poeturi teqstis met-naklebad sruli

interpretaciisaTvis teqstis lingvistikam aucilebelia mouxmos
enaTmecnierebis sxva dargebis gamocdilebas, xolo kvlevis obieqtad
gamoacxados rogorc erTiani teqsti, aseve misive sxva elementebi. kvlevis
procesSi es, SedarebiT vrclad, sityvis magaliTze ganvaxorcieleT.
3. sityva realurad warmoCindeba rogorc teqstis ZiriTadi erTeuli.
kargadaa cnobili is faqti, rom sadReisod ar arsebobs SeTanmxebuli

da sayovelTaod aRiarebuli azri imis Sesaxeb, Tu ra aris sityvis
mniSvneloba.
sityvis mniSvnelobis sakiTxTan dakavSirebiT SeuZlebelia gverdi

avuaroT im sakmaod gavrcelebul Sexedulebas, romlis Tanaxmad sityvis
mniSvneloba aris sityvis garegani formis, masSi asaxuli cnebisa da
realuri samyaros elementis, rogorc asasaxi sagnis erToba. aRniSnul
Sexedulebas, cnobilia, safuZvlad daedo meoce saukunis ocian wlebSi
ogdenisa da riCardis mier wamoyenebuli niSnis, azrisa da referentis
samkuTxedi.
denotatis, igive referentis Seswavlam ufleba mogvca mogvexdina misi

diferenciacia da gamogveyo ori saxis denotati: enobrivi denotati, rogorc
saganTa klasi da sametyvelo denotati, rogorc sityviT aRsaniSni
sinamdvilis sagani metyvelebis konkretul aqtSi. enobrivsa da sametyvelo
denotatebs Sesabamisad aRvniSnavT D da D1 pirobiTi niSnebiT.
enobrivi da sametyvelo denotatebis damokidebulebaTa Seswavlam

sityvis SigniT moTavsebul signifikatTan mimarTebaSi gamoavlina saintereso
suraTi: erTsa da imave sityvaSi enobrivi da sametyvelo denotati
SesaZlebelia Tvisebrivad gansxvavebul odenobebs warmoadgendnen imisda
mixedviT, naxmaria sityva uzualuri Tu okazionaluri mniSvnelobiT.
uzualuri mniSvnelobiT naxmar sityvaSi sametyvelo denotati aris enobrivi
denotatis, rogorc klasis erT-erTi elementi, rasac Cven pirobiTad
tolobis niSniT aRvniSnavT (D=D1), xolo okazionaluri mniSvnelobiT
307
naxmar sityvaSi enobriv da sametyvelo denotatebs Soris kavSiri
darRveulia (D ≠ D1), rac iwvevs kidec Sesabamis cvlilebebs sityvis
signifikatSi.
denotatis diferencirebulma Seswavlam migviyvana im daskvnamde, rom

denotati, iqneba es realuri sinamdvilis sagani Tu saganTa mTliani klasi, ar
SeiZleba miviCnioT sityvis mniSvnelobis Semadgenel nawilad sityvis
garegani formisa da masSi asaxuli cnebis gverdiT.
zemoaRniSnulis safuZvelze vsvamT kiTxvas: rogoria sityvis

mniSvnelobis semantikuri struqtura, rogorc adamianis cnobierebis gziT
sinamdvilis adekvaturi asaxvis Sedegi?
4. sityvis mniSvnelobaSi aucileblad moqceulia garesamyaros

grZnobadi anabeWdi, romelsac Cven ganvsazRvravT rogorc sityvis
lingvistur xats.
lingvisturi xatisa da cnebis, rogorc azrobrivi xatis, Tanaarsebobas

erTi sityvis SigniT Cven sityvis, rogorc lingvisturi, socialuri Tu
fsiqologiuri fenomenis arsebobis pirobad miviCnevT. lingvisturi xati da
cneba yovelTvis dialeqtikur kavSirSi imyofebian erTi meoresTan, vinaidan
sityvaSi isini sinamdvilis erTsa da imave obieqtis asaxvis Sedegs
warmoadgenen.
5. lingvisturi xati gaxlavT sityvis is komponenti, romlis moqmedeba

da aqcentireba qmnis sityvis mxatvrul efeqts da, amdenad, ganapirobebs
erTiani teqstis mxatvrulobas.
6. sityvis mniSvneloba, rogorc enis, ise metyvelebis TvalsazrisiT,

aris xatis, cnebisa da saxelis, rogorc misi garegani formis, sakmaod rTuli
da idumali kavSiri.
aRniSnuli sami komponentis urTierTobas sityvis mniSvnelobis SigniT

grafikulad isev samkuTxedis saxiT gamovxatavT:
308
I S
7. nominacia, anu saxeli uSualo monawilea sityvis mniSvnelobisa, da

poeziaSi misi es Tviseba gansakuTrebul moqmedebaSia moyvanili.
8. poetur teqstSi sityvis virtualuri polisemanturoba xdeba misi

aqtualuri polifoniurobis piroba.
9. sityvis lingvisturi statusis dadgenam SesaZlebeli gaxada

gamogvevlina teqstis aqamde sruliad ucnobi kategoria, romelic Cvens mier
ganisazRvra rogorc xatobriv-Sinaarsobrivi kategoria.
xati sityvaSia, viTarca jini WurWelSi, oRond mas Tavisi jadoqari

sWirdeba, raTa is sinaTleze gamoiyvanos da aucileblad axal-axali
saxeebiT warmoaCinos. rac Seexeba poetur saxes, mas ukve poeti sityvasTan
WidiliT ayalibebs yovel calkeul SemTxvevaSi. poeziaSi es Cveulebrivi
movlenaa da amas TiTqos arc mtkiceba sWirdeba, magram, meore mxriv, faqtia,
rom xatebis siWarbe da simravle, ufro zustad uCveulo xatebiT azrovneba
enigmatursa da amoucnobs xdis poetur qmnilebas. am TvalsazrisiT, rogorc
zemoT aRvniSnavdiT, gansakuTrebiT meoce saukunis poezia gamoirCeva.
qarTul poetur azrovnebaSi enigmaturi poeziis magaliTad galaktioni
rCeba.
galaktionis poeziasTan urTierTobisas normad damkvidrda misi

striqonebis gaugebrobaze laparaki. moviyvanT nawyvets erT-erTi msjelobidan: `...
am leqss (laparakia galaktionis leqsze àm bneli RamiT~ _ i. m.) mainc axasiaTebs
specifikuri simbolisturi niSan-Tviseba, romelic anaTesavebs iseTi bneli
stiliT daweril leqsTan, rogoricaa `saubari edgarze~. ufro metic, zogjer
laparakia ara mxolod `bnel stilze~, an `leqsiko-gramatikul qaosze,~ aramed
srul gaugebrobaze: `SeuZlebelia avxsnaT Tu ras niSnavs èlvare saRamov almas
sayureTa~, `ciuri Tanadi~ an `foTlebs isroda sifiTre baraTis~. am frazebis
efeqti emyareba azris ara gaSlas, aramed mis malvas, miniSnebas logikurad raRac
gamouTqmelze.~
sakiTxavia visgan malavs galaktioni saTqmels, vis umalavs leqsis azrs?

an rogor gavigoT `miniSneba logikurad raRac gamouTqmelze~. iqneba am
ukanasknelSi avtorma is cnobili movlena igulisxma, rodesac sityvebi azrs
309
bolomde ver gamoxataven? rogorc f. tiutCevi ityoda “ìûñëü, èçðå÷åííàÿ åñòü
ëîæü”, da sxv. magram poezia xom odiTganve logikurad SeTavsebads arasodes
emorCileboda. amaSia mxatvruli teqstis Taviseburebac da Zalac. maS, raRas
malavs poeti? Cveni pasuxi am SemTxvevaSi sul sxvagvaria.
leqsiko-gramatikuli normebis darRveva sulac ar niSnavs qaoss

poeziaSi, piriqiT, is simravlisa da mravlismetyvelebis pirobaa, es ki ar
unda iyos gagebuli rogorc `qaosi~.
rac Seexeba `malvas~, galaktioni ki ar malavs azrs, aramed, piriqiT,

sityvaSi Camalul idumal niSnebsa da xatebs Searxevs da axal sicocxles
STaberavs maT. es Tavad poets emaleba saTqmeli da igi, Tavisi sityviT azrs
adevnebuli, am sityviTve ayalibebs mas da aCuqurTmebs leqsSi saukunod. aseT
SemTxvevaSi xdeba ara raimes damalva an dakargva, aramed, piriqiT, sityvaSi da
sityvaTa kavSirebSi Cadebuli azris gazrda da gafarToeba, Tundac gaidumaleba,
rogorc signifikaturi mniSvnelobiT, ise xatebiT, anu xatovani SinaarsiT, rac
Tavad sityvas aucileblad polifoniursa da mravalwaxnagovans xdis. amgvarad,
sityva TiTqosda jebirebidan gadmodis da Tavad aRelvebuli gvaRelvebs
mkiTxvelsac, xolo idumaleba mxatvrul sityvaSi ki ar malavs saTqmels, aramed,
piriqiT axali Sinaarsis aRmocenebisaken ubiZgebs mas. ai, ase iqmneba teqsti,
rogorc integrali, romelic TargmanSi reintegraciis axal process moiTxovs.
10. i. r. galperinisgan gansxvavebiT davadgineT, rom poeturi teqstis

qveteqsti, rogorc Sinaarsobriv-qveteqsturi kategoria, aris umTavresad
obieqturi movlena, rameTu igi lingvistur masalazea agebuli da misi
gamovlenac lingvistur niadagze xerxdeba.
11. Camoyalibda teqstis informatulobis kategoriaTa axali sistema,

romelmac saSualeba mogvca mogvexdina teqstis Sinaarsobriv kategoriaTa
diferenciacia da aRwera.
12. Sinaarsobriv kategoriaTa gamovlenam da aRweram gansazRvrebadi

gaxada Sinaarsis cneba, romelic formisa da Sinaarsis tradiciul binarul
opoziciis pirobebSi gaurkveveli rCeboda. amgvarad, gamovlinda teqstis
Sinaarsis oTxi kategoria: 1) Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi; 2) Sinaarsobriv-
konceptualuri; 3) Sinaarsobriv-qveteqsturi; 4) Sinaarsobriv-xatobrivi.
310
13. sityvis polisemanturoba xSir SemTxvevaSi xdeba teqstis
polifoniurobis piroba, rac, pirvel yovlisa, konceptisa da qveteqstis
kontrapunqtul moqmedebaSi aisaxeba.
14. Targmanis procesSi gansakuTrebiT relevanturi aRmoCndeba teqstis

Sinaarsobrivi parametrebi, rameTu maTi realizaciiT TargmanSi mtkicdeba
leqsis ZiriTadi daniSnuleba.
15. teqstis Sinaarsobriv kategoriaTa TargmanSi reproduqciis mizniT

gansakuTrebulad gasaTvaliswinebelia sityva Tavisi lingvisturi
parametrebiT.
16. Tu leqsi poetis mieraa Seqmnili, Targmanis Sesrulebas mxolod

poeti ar yofnis, saWiroa rom poeti-mTargmneli amave dros iyo
gulmodgine mkvlevari da teqstis interpretaciis saTanado eqsperti.
17. irkveva, rom mTel rig TargmanebSi ufro xSirad SenarCunebulia

koncepti da dakargulia qveteqsti, xolo ufro iSviaTad xerxdeba orives
erTad transformacia. rogorc Cans, qveteqsti gacilebiT ufro rTuli
amosakiTxia dedniseul teqstSi, rac aferxebs mis reproduqcias TangmanSi.
aRniSnuli ar gulisxmobs imas, rom qveteqsti ar unda iqnes SenarCunebuli, an
misi amokiTxvis sirTule raime gamarTlebaa mTargmnelisaTvis. piriqiT,
kvleva gamoavlens im faqts, rom qveteqsti aucileblad gadmosatania Targ-
manSi, da uiSviaTesi gamonaklisebis garda, rac enis unikalurobiT aris
ganpirobebuli, qveteqstis gadmotana warmatebulad xerxdeba im SemTxvevaSi,
Tu aris mTargmnelis mxridan amis danaxvis unari da amave dros niWi da
survili misi reproduqciisa.
qveteqstis swori realizacia aris piroba teqstis siRrmisa da

idumalebis ametyvelebisa.
18. rac Seexeba teqstis Sinaarsobriv-faqtobriv informacias, misi

SenarCuneba damokidebulia ara marto mTargmnelis mondomebasa da
niWierebaze, aramed Tavad mis ganswavlulobaze im enebis socialur-
kulturuli normebis aspeqtiT, romelTac mTargmneli exeba, agreTve TviT
poetis cxovrebisa da Semoqmedebis codnis TvalsazrisiT.
311
19. Sinaarsis xatobrivi fena aRmoCndeba yvelaze naklebad aRbeWdili
TargmanebSi, rac, udavod, ukargavs nawarmoebs did xibls, da amasTan erTad
zemoqmedebas axdens konceptisa da qveteqstis realizaciaze. aRsaniSnavia
calkeul poetTa Tu mTargmnelTa miswrafeba xatobrivi informaciis
SenarCunebis mxriv, rac gansakuTrebulad nayofieria.
20. poetis individualuri stili ZiriTadad SinaarsSi aRibeWdeba, rac

niSnavs poetis individualur damokidebulebas samyarosadmi. es saSualebas
gvaZlevs SemovitanoT poetis individualuri stilis Sinaarsobrivi aspeqtis
cneba, romelic, Tavis mxriv, exmianeba anton I kaTalikosis `sami stilis
Teorias~.
21. naSromSi gaxsnilia ZiriTadad baironisa da galaktionis

individualuri stilis Sinaarsobrivi aspeqtebi maTi Semdgomi
eqstrapolaciiT Targmanebis magaliTze. agreTve miniSnebulia Seqspiris
axleburi wakiTxvis gzebi misi sonetebis analizis mixedviT.
22. dabolos, poeturi Targmani poetur teqstTan dinamikuri

ekvivalentobis mimarTebaSi aRmoCndeba ara dedniseuli yvela niuansisa da
waxnagis ametyvelebiT, an zusti kopirebiT, aramed Sinaarsis Zireuli da
wamyvani komponentebis SemoqmedebiTi asaxviT.
am principiT Sesrulebuli Targmani aRar ganixileba rogorc

dednisadmi mibaZva da mimsgavseba, aramed, rogorc kvleva da Semoqmedeba. am
ukanaskneli ori aspeqtis erToblivi da erTdrouli moqmedeba
aTavisuflebs dednis teqstSi moqceul azrs enis borkilebisagan da is
sulier substanciaSi gadahyavs.
magram, imisaTvis, rom es azri xelSesaxebi da misawvdomi gaxados sxva

enis matarebeli koleqtivisaTvis, mTargmneli kvlav sicocxles STaberavs mas,
amjerad ukve axali enobrivi samoseliT.
Tu Targmans ase mivudgebiT, maSin Tavad Targmanis fenomenisadmi

skeptikuri damokidebulebis niSanwyalic umalve gaqreba da gaifanteba.
312
23. winamdebare monografiaSi ganviTarebuli koncefcia xels Seuwyobs
mxatvruli Targmanis kritikis ganviTarebas, rac axal qarTul Targmans
waadgeba.
313
Linguistics of Poetic Translation
Summary
314
Literature is the only branch of art that is enclosed within its own linguistic limits and is
accessible to the bearers of a definite language only.
But any estimable piece of literature, and especially poetry, contains a powerful charge that
encourages an appreciative translator to bring the masterpiece to the notice of other nations thus
making it dear and important for them.
Therefore the translator’s work and the act of translation itself appear to be caused by an
inner compulsion that what is felt and reasoned in one language should pass the linguistic
boundaries of one tongue and become the property of as many nations as possible.
This very point emphasizes the function of translation and permits us to declare it to be a
sample of art.
At present we see an increase in international relations. As a result there is a growing

awareness and interest in cultural matters but particularly in literature. Foreign literature is made
more accessible thanks to successful translations.
Translatology, as well as the history of translation vividly testify to the fact that in every
period and in every country, translation has been an echo of the lore and culture a certain nation has
obtained towards the phenomenon of language, on the one hand, and in the matter of interpreting a
text as a whole, on the other.
Translatology and especially linguistics of translation as a new branch of science call for
further development in accordance with text linguistics.
Text linguistics offers new dimensions for the further research of a poetic text.
Therefore any analysis of translation implies the analysis of the source text and is realized in
close connection with it. Thus dealing with poetic translation, we shall deal with a poetic text,
which, due to its great informative capacity, is declared to be the object of our research.
315
The linguistic characterization of a global text, the selection of its separate features, the
disclosure of linguo-stylistic and psycholinguistic mechanism of a text as a whole is now offered by
the science of text lingustics.
Applying the results gained by contemporary text lingustics to poetic translation, we aim to
study the act of translation and its perspective.
In spite of the variety of investigations in the field of the theory of translation, the
aforementioned attitude to translation appears to be new and perspective.
The present work aims to discover the mechanism of the content of a poetic text, to define
the ways and means of its interpretation, to develop a comparative analysis of a source text and an
appropriate translation in order to reveal further characteristics of a successful translation.
It also aims to reveal the individual style of a poet as based on the purport of the text,
especially in the works of Lord Byron and the great Georgian poet Galaktion Tabidze (1892-1959),
to find appropriate ways for reproducing their styles in translation.
An English poetic text with its appropriate Georgian and Russian translations represents
the essential source for the research. The works of Lord Byron appear to be of special
importance due to our interests and the lore obtained on Byron that is a result of the continued
work in this field.
The text of Galaktion Tabidze also deserves great interest. His text is investigated and
compared to its Russian and English translated versions. In connection with Galaktion Tabidze’s
works, our research can be considered to be of relevance when his poetry that is still regarded as
indecipherable is exposed together with our interpretation and this may be helpful for future
translators.
In connection with the aforementioned, we have to state that the works of Lord Byron are
exceptionally dear and popular in Georgia due to his spiritual aspirations. And this is in spite of the
fact that Byron’s poetry has yet not been entirely translated into the Georgian language and that the
Georgian readers have learned his works mostly in the Russian language. It should also be taken
into consideration that the Byron Society of Georgia has been functioning since 1988, as a member
of the International Byron Society and that its activities encourage a most dynamic and fruitful
approach to the study of Byron’s works.
316
Besides the works of Byron and Galaktion, we study works of Shakespeare, Yeats,
Kipling, Amy Lowell, Pushkin, Lermontov, Akhmatova and others, thus making the analysis
more varied and interesting.
We mainly base our research on the material of short poetic texts, as the most convenient
for any kind of analysis. According to R. Jacobson 1 a short text vividly influences us as a whole
and at the end of it we well remember its beginning.
The present monograph consists of a foreword, three parts with twelve chapters,
conclusions, bibliography and sources for the illustrative material.
1 Р. Якобсон, Работы по поэтике, М., 1987, с. 83-84.
317
I Part
The first part of the work aims to describe the main goals of text linguistics, to expose a
new system of grammatical categories of a text. The term “grammar” is interpreted as a general
regularity of the language function when its sphere implies not only morphology and syntax, as
is done traditionally, but phonetics, lexicology and text linguistics as well.
Text categories are revealed on the basis of a system of grammatical categories worked
out by Professor I. R. Galperin for all kinds of written texts 1.
The system of grammatical categories and the whole study of a text offered by Prof. I.R.
Galperin is valuable in as far as it comprises a complete picture of a text as a carefully
considered document with all its generative parameters. His system represents a wonderful basis
for any general or special study of a text. I. R. Galperin distinguishes the following text
categories:
Informativeness as an essential textcategory, which is intended to show what is new and
unknown.
Text division, as an aspect of composition but bearing certain meaning of content.
Cohesion as a grammatical, semantic or lexical linkage of separate elements of a text.
Continuum as an indicator of time and space.
Retrospection and prospection as forms of discontinuum.
Autosemanty, as forms of dependence or independence of separate parts of the text
towards its content.
Modality of a text.
Pragmaticallity of a text.
Orchestrality as a union of text characters.
Integration as mainly a psychological unification of the text components aiming to
create one as a whole.
All the grammatical categories exposed by I. R. Galperin are applied by us to a poetic
text. As a result of our research, we were convinced that each category is a necessary and
characteristic feature of a poetic text. But the poetic text is characterized by other parameters as
well, such as metre, rhythm, rhyme, melody, sound symbolism, and musicality. These are
parameters that create in essence poetry with all its magic and imaginative power.
Rhythm, melody and sound symbolism are characteristics not only of poetry but of
fiction as well. However in poetry they acquire maxim
um relevance and are of a different register.
1 И. Р. Гальперин, Текст как объект лингвистического исследования, М., 1981.
318
As for the metre and rhyme, they belong to poetry only as far as they are created
together with it. Each of these categories is broadly described in poetics, but the linguistic
analysis of a whole text invites us to reveal its semantic basis.
Text linguistics needs to take advantage of all the achievements of poetics and to consider
them in the new light of linguostylistics. This will enable us to unite into one object of research
the two spheres of language studies at the begining of XXth century were considered to be of
different branches. For example, according to V. Zhirmunski 1 the rhythm of a poem is created
due to the interrelation of a metric task with the lingual material.
This kind of approach is certainly correct and real, but in our opinion, the rhythmic nature
is formed as a result of inner content and design that is an essence of each poem. But the design
itself, even subconsciously, appears to be realized by means of a whole complex of grammatical
categories. Rhythm is a powerful echo of informativeness on the way to creating the content of
any poem.
Thus the confrontation of form and content as a binary opposition certainly needs re-
estimation, especially now when a word is treated from the point of view of semantic
decomposition and the content of a text may be differentiated. Both a word and a text are objects
of our research.
According to I. R. Galperin we distinguish the following types of informativeness of
content of any text:
1. Factual information that comprises data on facts, phenomena and processes of the
present world or the imaginary reality.
2. Conceptual information, which implies the author's individual estimation of life and
the relation between its phenomena.
3. Subtextual information that is always present in fiction (novels, short stories, etc.) but
is a permanent con-comitant of poetic texts.
Subtextual information is characterised as hidden information drawn from a factual one
due to the capability of lingual signs to form associative and connotative meanings. But this kind
of information is appreciated by I. R. Galperin as a subjective phenomenon that permits him to
regard it as a complimentary one. According to him, the subjectivity of a subtext implies the
reader’s appreciation of a concrete text and offers different versions of its interpretation.
When we apply to I. R. Galperin's system of categories not only from the point of view of
a source text but also from the point of view of a target text, we touch the linguistics of
translation with its aims and perspectives and its correlation with the theory of translation.
1 В. Жирмуский, Теория стиха, М., 1975.
319
In spite of the fact that translation is so closely connected with linguistics, it took linguists a
long period of time to admit such a relationship. “De Saussur, Jespersen, Sapir and Bloomfield only
rarely mentioned the translation process in their writings, and when they did, it was to illustrate
other language phenomena.”1
In this regard, special is the contribution of E. Nida who succeeded in giving new life to the
phenomenon of translation, that is interpreted as a sociolinguistic phenomenon based on cultural
crossroads. E. Nida followed in the intellectual footsteps of Sapir and Malinovski in the belief that
effective communication does not result from the linguistic element only, as in a wider setting no
two languages can ever fully represent the same reality, whether that reality be material, social,
ecological or religious.
1
See: Christian Balliu, Foreword to Eugene A. Nida’s “The Sociolinguistics of Interlingual Communication”, Editions
du Hazard, Brussels, 1966, p. 17.
320
II Part
Contemporary Linguistics of the second half of the twentieth century is marked not only by
a new and systematic approach which regards text as a whole, but with a deep, thorough and
scrupulous study of a word and its meaning. Due to the latter, the lexical meaning of a word is
represented as a kernel sema surrounded by a number of secondary semas, i.e. smallest units of a
lexical meaning.
We can compare this process with the decomposition of an atomic nucleus, especially when
it encourages new waves of research. Linguists now realize the perspective of uncovering the
mechanism of word relations that seemed very obscure before. In this aspect we have to note a
poetic word and its generative power.
But at the same time it appears that the word is left without due attention in as far as
linguists seem to be carried away by perspectives of text linguistics when they investigate a text as a
whole and do not declare the word as a text component.
Moreover, scholars concerned with semantic studies never strive to find a due place for the
word in text linguistics, to investigate its relation with textcategories. Even worse, they desperately
protect a word from text linguistics and its perspectives as if trying to preserve its traditional image.
Both attitudes seem to be far from the real perspective of linguistic analysis.
Several decades later some linguist spoke in defence of a word against text linguistics.
We well remember the article by an outstanding Russian scholar R. S. Budagov: “In Defence of
the Concept Word” 1. R. A. Budagov convincingly speaks of a word as a linguistic category, also
of the importance of its investigation. He defends it as a very important and artistic element of
the text, with informative power, etc. but unfortunately isolates the word from the text because
he himself only sceptically appreciates the aims of contemporary text linguistics.
R. Budagov’s attitude is correct in as far as text linguistics really does neglect the word that
is actually its basic element. But unfortunately R. A. Budagov cannot anticipate the perspectives of
any collaboration between the two branches of semasiology and translatology (text linguistics), a
collaboration that seems so fruitful to us not to mention the further perspective of their relation with
the linguistics of translation.
We dedicate the second part of our work to the study of the meaning of a word, to its
description and definition.
We aim to investigate a word as a linguistic phenomenon on the basis of contemporary
semasiology. At the same time we plan to study the word in connection with communicative,
1 Р. С. Будагов, В защиту понятия слово, Вопросы Языкознания, М., 1983, №1, с. 16-30.
321
social, psychological and creative aspects as part of poetic word-combinations in order to expose
and explore it in the smallest context of poetic activities.
As Federico Garcia Lorca mentioned, a poem is a result of an unexpected combination of
two words, the effect of which, we trust, is always perceivable to a proficient reader. But it was
made known as a subject of research comparatively later.
In 1931, L. V. Shcherba wrote the following on the regularities of combining words: “I
mean not only rules of syntax, but what is far more significant – rules for adding meanings,
resulting not in summation, but in the creation of new meanings, rules that are unfortunately
scarcely studied by scholars, though intuitively known to all skilled stylists”.1
In spite of the tendency to compile an individual text grammar for each poet, the study of
peculiarities of conjoining words or meanings assembles a huge phalanx of linguists.
We dedicated a special thesis2 to the investigation of occasional word-combinations and the
ascertainment of their lexico-semantic parameters.
Though the present work does not aim to study further occasional word-combinations, in the
matter of describing the mechanism of connections between words, occasional word-combinations
represent the most vivid type of their class where both the realization of the meaning and its
transformation are especially well observed.
In regard to the investigation of a word, we need to express our attitude towards the
problem of meaning. We are well aware of the fact that there is no agreed or universally
acknowledged idea about the meaning of a word.
In connection with the problem of meaning, we cannot help considering the opinion
according to which the meaning of a word is represented as a relation between the sound form of
a word, its concept and a referent as an object of the real world. This point of view was based on
a famous semantic triangle suggested by C. K. Ogden and I. A. Richards as early as in 1923. 3
In our works we aimed to describe and investigate each component of this semantic
triangle in order to uncover the essential mechanism of relations between the meanings of words.
A study of the referent or denotatum permits us to distinguish two types of denotatums: a
denotatum of language as a system when we deal with a class of objects each word implies in
the lexicon of a language, and a denotatum of language as speech that means a definite object
of reality designated by a word in a concrete context.
1 Ùåðáà Ë. Â., Î òðîÿêîì àñïåêòå ÿçûêîâûõ ÿâëåíèé è îá ýêñïåðèìåíòå â ÿçûêîçíàíèè, Èçä.

ÀÍÑÑÑÐ, Îòäåëåíèå îáùåñòâåííûõ íàóê, N1, 1931, с. 68.
2 Ìåðàáèøâèëè È. Â., Ñåìàíòè÷åñêèå ïàðàìåòðû îêêàçèîíàëüíûõ ñëîâîñî÷åòàíèè (íà ìàòåðèàëå
ñîâðåìåííîãî àíãëèéñêîãî ÿçûêà), Êàíä., Äèññ., Òá., 1978.
3
C. K. Ogden, I. A. Richards, The meaning of Meaning, London, 1923.
322
We offer to mark them as a general denotatum and a concrete denotatum indicating
them by means of the following two signs respectively: D and D1.
A study of the relationship between each of the two denotatums and the concept or
significatum reveals an interesting picture. In one and the same word, the two denotatums may
be of different qualities. It depends upon whether the word is used in its usual or occasional
meaning.
When the word is used in its usual meaning, it represents one of the elements of the class
of objects that function as a general denotatum of the word. We indicate this phenomenon by the
following formula: D=D1.
As for the occasional meaning, we observe a different relation when the two referents are
not of equal quantities: D≠D1. This results in certain changes in the significatum of a word.
The differential study of denotatums leads us to conclude that any of them (it makes no
difference whether it is a general denotatum or a concrete denotaum) cannot be deemed as a
constituent part of the meaning of a word alongside its nomination or its significatum. In any
case, a denotatum is an object of reality but never a linguistic phenomenon.
As a result of the aforementioned, we bring up the following question for discussion:
what is the semantic structure of the meaning of a word as an adequate reflection of reality by
means of human consciousness?
According to I. P. Pavlov’s theory on two signal systems of reality, the word represents a
second signal system that has great power of generalisation and abstraction. The first signal
system implies all that we have in the form of impressions, feelings and ideas that we receive
from the outer world besides words that we hear or see.
A word as the second signal system represents a signal of the first signal system or “the
signal’s signal”, that forms our additional and particularly human advanced reasoning. Due to the
latter or the second signal system, the human being differs from the animal.
According to I. P. Pavlov, the first and second signal systems are indivisible and the
excitation of the first signal system that is caused by signals of objects and phenomena of the
outer world passes on to the second signal system. This brings us to further questions for
discussion:
What is the form of the changes when the first signal system is transformed into a word?
Is a word the result of abstract reasoning, the final product of which is concept only?
Can our knowledge on an object or phenomenon, as that reflected in a word, be equated
with the concept of that object or phenomenon?
I. P. Pavlov was certainly bound to note the sensuous and objective aspect of a word that
is placed in it due to the human consciousness that exists beyond concept and makes the word
323
concretely real and emotionally charged in certain instances of speech. Therefore he noted the
following. “If you want to use a word, every time imply reality beyond words”. 1
Could the word in speech realize any kind of relation to sensuous impressions even in an
indirect way, such as when it does not contain the imprint from impressions of sensuous
cognition? The latter implies the imprints of audio, visual or other kinaesthetic impressions that
each person receives from the outer world during the process of sensuous cognition of this
world.
We trust that the imprint of sensuous impressions is constantly present in each word as a
kind of standard. Otherwise we would never control what kind of reality could be meant by the
use of this or that word that is unimaginable from the point of view of language as a social
phenomenon. The objective nature of that sensuous imprint in each word certainly implies the
presence of a subjective factor that, as a result of individual perception is permanently
characteristic for the author of the speech on the one hand and its receiver (receptor) on the other.
We now draw your attention to the following and final question: In what form is the
sensuous imprint represented in each word?
“The imprint” that is worked out in the reflective apparatus of animals and human beings,
in philosophy is used to substitute objects of reality.
In contrast to animals, in human speech the “imprint” belongs to the first signal system
and takes part in the formation of a word as a second signal system. For living systems of high
organization, the meaning of a signal usually exists in the form of an ideal image, by means of
which only the reflected object is presented as a real one.
In gnosiology, the image is a fundamental category and is used in connection with
sensuous reflection and with abstract thinking as well. Sensuous and conceptual images differ
according to the level of reflection – sensuous or conceptual.
The presence of a conceptual image in a word is beyond doubt. As for the
acknowledgement of the sensuous image in a word, it is only intuitively noted by scholars.
The fact that the denotatum was placed in the semantic triangle as its constituent part,
also speaks of the intuitive acknowledgement of a sensuous image. When realizing any meaning
of a word, the image preserves its primary air and determines the figurativeness.
When realizing metaphorical meaning, we can observe a number of changes in the
significatum.
The image on the one hand acts in contrast to the new contextual meaning, but on the
other hand it presents the former air of the word as a whole, that greatly adds to an emotive
impressiveness of the information implied in the word.
1 Павловские среды, т. III, М., 1949, с. 163.
324
Thus the sensuous image existing in a word is regarded by us as a linguistic image.
The co-existence of the linguistic image and the significatum as a conceptual image
within the limits of one word is a precondition of creating a word as a linguistic, social or
psychological phenomenon.
The linguistic image and significatum (concept) are always dialectically connected with
each other in as far as they represent the results of reflecting one and the same object of reality
within one word.
The acknowledgment of a linguistic image in a word permits us to present the meaning of
a word as a correlation of three main components:
the sound form of a word or its nomination;
the significatum or concept;
the linguistic image;
Graphically, we present this correlation still in the form of a triangle, where “I” –
indicates “image”, “N” – “nomination” and “S” – significatum.
N
I S
As far as a word in each concrete case of its contextual realization can never develop any
relation to the concrete denodatum (D1) without considering the general denodatum (D), and the
general denodatum can never exist in our imagination beyond perceiving separate concrete
denodatums. Thus we regard the word to be always in constant and simultaneous relation with
the two types of denodatums. The aforestated can be expressed graphically in the form of a
triangle as well, where “D” – indicates a general denodatum, “D1” – indicates a concrete
denodatum, “W” – indicates a word.
D D1
325
An image as an imprint and reflection of a general denodatum is actually reincarnated in
the hands of a writer, especially a poet. In ordinary speech its presence is imperceptible and
unostentatious, in non-fictional but expressive speech the speaker touches the bottom of the
meaning, calling for expressive and figurative power to gain enough informativeness for the
word he uses. A similar process is observed in poetry but in contrast to the aforementioned there
the image that is in deep slumber on the bottom suddenly appears to be called forth by a master
of words and due to his gift, talent and skill, miracles are created. No wonder Bodler called
poetry “a magic spell” and A. Losev spoke about the magic nature of a word in his “Philosophy
of a Name” 1.
We trust that the magic power of a word, its inexhaustible source of influence, is caused
mainly by the powerful image enclosed in every word for all time, the activity of which creates
real figurativeness.
As for the significate or concept of a word, the popular method of componential analysis
permits us to decompose it into minimal units of meaning that are of different weight when all
leads to analyse a newly produced meaning.
In his work “On Several Characteristic Features of the Plane of Content in Poetic Texts”,
I. Levin 2 outlined the perspective of grouping occasional word-combinations or
atopoconstructions as he calls them, announcing their description and classification as a matter to
be dealt with in the future. His research is based on I. Tinyanov’s work “Problems of a Poetic
Language” 3 where for the first time the meaning of a word was represented as that consisting of
different characteristic features.
According to I. Levin, the meaning of a word consists of different semas and each of
them has its own definite weight in the plane of content.
Semas of maximum weight create the kernel of the meaning. The other semas are of less
weight and surround the kernel as secondary features.
In poetic texts, especially in occasional word-combinations, we observe the
decomposition of the meaning into different semas where under the influence of context they are
newly rearranged. Therefore a new kernel and new secondary semas are formed and their
combination creates a new contextual meaning.
1 А. Ф. Лосев, Битие, Имя, Космос, М., 1993.

2 Ëåâèí Þ. È., Î íåêîòîðûõ ÷åðòàõ ïëàíà ñîäåðæàíèÿ â ïîýòè÷åñêèõ òåêñòàõ. – Â êí.:
Ñòðóêòóðíàÿ òèïîëîãèÿ ÿçûêîâ, Ì., 1966.
3 Òûíÿíîâ Þ., Ïðîáëåìà ñòèõîòâîðíîãî ÿçûêà, Ë., 1924.
326
The uncovering of the basis of their creation permitted us to classify the occasional word-
combinations thus practically revealing the ways of their interpretation as early as in 1978 in our
first dissertation thesis 1.
It is worth noting that a year earlier, a book was published in Tbilisi by an outstanding
Georgian scholar, M. Kveselava, entitled “Poetic Integrals”. Many occasional word
combinations from poetic texts were presented in the research as indecipherable. On the
contrary, our research as based on componential analysis permits us to explain the mechanism of
an occasional connection of poetic words.
Describing the struggle of dawn with night, an American poetess Amy Lowell attributes
“tiger” to “sun”, creating this way an occasional word-combination “the tiger sun”.
Night Clouds
The white mares of the moon rush along the sky
Beating their golden hoofs upon the glass Heavens;
The white mares of the moon are all standing on their hind legs
Pawing at the green porcelain doors of the remote Heavens.
Fly, mares!
Strain your utmost,
Scatter the milky dust of stars,
Or the tiger sun will leap upon you and destroy you
With one lick of his vermillion tongue.
From the point of view of language as a system the noun “sun” comprises the leading
lexical sema “the luminous celestial body, around which the earth and other planets revolve,
from which they receive heat and light”. This sema can be presented as a kernel sema that is
surrounded by a number of different secondary semas, such as semas of colour: “golden”,
“yellow”, “red”, etc., temporal semas: “winter”, ”spring”, “summer”, “autumn”, or “dawn”,
“morning”, “afternoon”, “of sunset”, “twilight”, etc. Among secondary semas are many others,
such as “bright”, “powerful”, “destructive”, “active”, etc.
The presence of secondary semas certainly implies the increase of their relevance in
active speech that leads to their transformation from the surrounding into the kernel of the lexical
meaning. Therefore the noun “sun” can be attributed by a number of words, the lexical meaning
of which corresponds to the aforementioned secondary semas such as “golden”, “hot”, “warm”,
“strong”, “powerful”, “destructive”, “active”, etc. This way the secondary semas enlarge the
1 И. В. Мерабишвили, Ibid.
327
kernel of the lexical meaning, but the latter appears to be more concrete and precise, e. g. “hot
summer sun”, “cold winter sun”, etc.
This is the way in which usual word-combinations are created and realized in speech.
In the word-combination “the tiger sun” by Amy Lowell, “sun” is used to designate sun
as a luminous celestial body, i. e. it is used in its usual and direct meaning. But in contrast to the
aforementioned usual attributes, it is defined by an absolutely unusual word “tiger”. What is the
reason and the basis for their connection?
Investigating the poem “Night Clouds” we conclude that the poetess strives to express the
destructive power of the rising sun towards the night clouds, trying at the same time to depict the
colourful scene of that mysterious change in nature. And this is done artistically in the most
impressive and laconic form that poetry admits by choosing the word “tiger” as an attribute to
“sun”, as far as the significatum of “tiger” comprises the whole number of qualities that are to
characterise the rising sun, but in an artistic way. The unexpected contrast adds to the impressive
power of the word-combination.
From the point of view of language as a system the lexical meaning of the noun “tiger”
comprises the following kernel sema: “a large Asiatic carnivorous mammal of the cat family
having a tawny coat transversely striped with black”. The kernel of the meaning is surrounded by
a number of secondary semas, such as “wild”, “fierce”, “active”, “destructive”, etc. In the word-
combination “the tiger sun” the noun “tiger” does not designate the animal, but it is meant to
designate certain characteristic features of the sun such as “strong”, “active”, “destructive”.
These semas appear to be common for the both nouns of the word-combination “the tiger sun”
that leads to their activization in the kernels of the meanings.
Thus the kernel of the meaning of the word “tiger” is changed due to the transformation
of the former kernel sema into the surrounding and the secondary semas into the kernal.
The illustrated word-combination is interesting from the point of view of a linguistic
image that is realized due the presence of an image in each word.
The presence of the image of tiger is easily proved by the further development of the
metaphor: “with one lick of his vermillion tongue”. “Vermillion tongue” on the one hand adds to
the image of the animal but on the other hand – to the colour of the rising sun.
We observe similar cases in many word-combinations though the presence of common
semas does not represent the only basis for unusual combinations.
As for the linguistic image of each word, it is bound to be emphasized by an unusual
meeting of words in poetic speech.
This phenomenon creates serious problems for a translator who does not always succeed
in realizing the new significative meaning and the enclosed image together.
328
Alongside with the concept and image, one of the chapters is devoted to the analysis of
nomination as a constituent part of a word’s meaning. The present paper claims that the sound
form of any word participates in the creation of a lexical meaning both on the level of language
and on the level of speech and therefore the meaning of any word is a complex and enigmatic
unit of all three components of image, nomination and significatum.
In poetic texts, alliteration comes to emphasize certain sounds that appear to overflow the
poem but they add to the lexical meaning of the words.
Alliteration that was always a characteristic of English poetry as well as the folklore is a
reliable means in Lord Byron’s poetry.
His poem “Farewell, if ever fondest prayer” can serve as an example:
Farewell! If ever fondest prayer

For other’s weal avail’s on high,
Mine will not all be lost in air,
But waft thy name beyond the sky.
‘T were vain to speak, to weep, to sigh
Oh! More than tear of blood can tell
When wrung from guilt’s expiring eye,
Are in that word – Farewell! – Farewell!
These lips are mute, these eyes are dry;
But in my breast and in my brain,
Awake the pangs that pass not by,
The thought that ne’er shall sleep again.
My soul nor deigns nor dares complain,
Though grief and passion there rebel;
I only know we loved in vain –
I only feel – Farewell! – Farewell!
The poem abounds in various alliterations.
E. g.: 5th line [w] – were – weep

[s] – speak – sigh
6th line [t] – tears – tell

10th line [m] [b] – my breast and my brain
329
11th line [p] pangs that pass not by
13th line [n] [d] nor deigns nor dares
But the most effective is [f] in the 1st, 8th and 16th lines, where the sound speaks of the
dramatic effect of parting. Let us compare “Farewell! If ever fondest prayer” with the other lines
from Lord Byron’s domestic piece “Fare Thee Well”:
Fare thee well! and if for ever,

Still for ever, fare thee well:
Even though unforgiving, never
‘Gainst thee shall my heart rebel.
When speaking of the sounds that correspond to their lexical meanings in the English
language, which is so rich in symbols, L. Bloomfield in his work “Language” mentions the
sound “f” among others.
The present phenomenon differs in different languages and certainly creates real
problems in the matter of translation. In spite of this, gifted translators never miss such chances
of expression and, as has been observed, they try to revive the sounds of the source text in their
own individual ways in the target texts.
In the Russian translation from Byron, the poem “Farewell! If Ever Fondest Prayer” is
popular in M. Lermontov’s version. The great Russian poet revives the power of the farewell
sound [f] by means of Russian sounds [c], [т] that match the Russian equivalent for “Farewell” –
“Прости” [prosti]. The Russian sounds [c] and [т] are spread over the whole poem:
Прости! Коль могут к небесам

Взлететь молитвы о других,
Моя молитва будет там,
И даже улетит за них!
Что пользы плакать и вздыхать,

Слеза кровавая порой
Не может более сказать,
Чем звук прощанья роковой!..
Нет слез в очах, уста молчат,
330
От тайных дум томится грудь,
И эти думы вечный яд, –
Им не пройти, им не уснуть!
Не мне о счастье бредить вновь, –

Лишь знаю я (и мог снести),
Что тщетно в нас жила любовь,
Лишь чувствую – прости! прости!
Analogous is the solution of the problem of reviving the informative power of the sound
[f] from Lord Byron’s “Fare Thee Well” in the Russian version by I. Koslov.
Прости! И если так судьбою

Нам суждено – навек прости!
Пусть ты бесжалостна – с тобою
Вражды мне сердца не снести...
In the Georgian version of Byron’s “Farewell! If ever Fondest Prayer” by G.

Gachechiladse, this task is implemented by means of sounds [c] ([ts]) and [s] ([s]) that are
presented in the Georgian words denoting “prayer”, “others”, “sky”, etc., that well emphasize the
dramatic effect of farewell:
mSvidobiT! Tu ki mxurvale locva,

locva sxvaTaTvis, miaRwevs Rrublebs,
ar daabrkolebs cis garemocva
da Cemi locvac cas daiuflebs.
amao aris cremlebi, oxvra

sulSi bindian uamindobiT
mets ambobs, vidre tiriliT moRla
es ori sityva: iyav mSvidobiT!
sduman bageni. Tvalni mSraloben.

tkivilni mZime da Semparavni
sulSi mwuxared idumaloben –
331
mas daamSvidebs aw veRaravin.
maTrTolebs isev janyi faruli

gulSi grZnobaTa Cumi ridobiT.
amao iyo is siyvarulic –
iyav mSvidobiT! iyav mSvidobiT!
The aforementioned can be approved by means of A. Blok’s quotation: “Each poem is a

kind of coverlet spread over the spikes of several words. These words sparkle like stars. It is due
to them that a poem exists”.
332
Part III
As has been stated, the third part of the present thesis aims to describe the categories of
content, especially when the concept of content remains undefined in the theory of translation.
On the other hand text linguistics offers a vast scope for analysing content of any text.
Our research has revealed that all three categories of content determined by I. R. Galperin
(factual, conceptual, subtextual) are characteristic of a poetic text. All of them are equally
significant but differ according to the complicacy of interpretation. In this aspect we have to
mark the subtextual information. This is the most hidden stratum of content and is disclosed only
by means of the special literary skill and keen artistic flair of the reader.
I. R. Galperin presents subtextual information as a subjective category and therefore
admits its interpretation as that based on an individual approach to the text and on its individual
estimation. The present appreciation of a subtext is easily justified by freedom of fancy on the
one hand and polysemy of poetic information on the other.
The research enables us to conclude that any subtextual stratum of content stands on its
objective axis and this implies objectivity of the linguistic means by which it is expressed.
As a hidden stratum, it is in close propinquity with the other categories of content and
helps to bridge the author’s design with the reader’s intellectual and artistic thesaurus.
The objective axis as a basis of subtext is disclosed through a very profound reading into
the text, its thorough investigation from the point of view of language as a system, as well as
from the point of view of speech.
The disregard of the objectivity of subtextual information may lead to a false freedom of
judgement and a final misinterpretation of the whole text.
Moreover it appears that subtextual information is a focus of content that leads to the
realization of conceptual information. On the other hand it is realized as a result of interrelation
with factual and conceptual strata of content.
Besides the three categories described above, we argue in favour of distinguishing a
fourth category of content, one based on the linguistic image enclosed in each word. This
stratum of content is realized in a poetic text as a result of artistic correlation of separate words
containing appropriate linguistic images.
We propose to call this stratum of information an “image-bearing category of content”.
The disclosure of this category leads to the uncovering of hidden ways of text
interpretation that appear to be extremely valuable in the matter of translation.
In poetic translation, factual information cannot be rendered in a consecutive order. This
never means voluntarism of self-willed changes in the text.
333
On the other hand, the disregard of certain details of the source text in the process of
reproduction may garble the factual information of the target text and lead to unfavourable
changes of other categories of content.
In contrast to factual information that actually represents the superficial tissue of the text,
conceptual information appears to be of an ideological nature. It is planned by the author as the
main point of the text and as a model of his attitude towards the world.
At the first sight one cannot feel the difference between the factual and conceptual strata
of content. Moreover it seems imperceptible and incomprehensible, and therefore its disclosure
is even more urgent and interesting.
As for the reproduction of conceptual information in translation, it appears to be far more
easily realizable when compared with other strata.
The research aims to develop ways of reproducing each category in translation as a
constituent part of the whole.
This, we trust, will help to improve and promote the art of translation in future.
To illustrate the aforementioned we offer the following examples:
In “Don Juan” Byron chooses to emphasize the Georgian origin of the beauties of Juan’s
harem companions. Juan himself, clad in female attire, is compared to a Georgian maid:
But no one doubted on the whole, that she

Was what her dress bespoke, a damsel fair,
And fresh, and “beautiful exceedinglly”,
Who with the brightest Georgians might compare.
(Canto VI, 3 6)
Unfortunately in Russian version in contrast to the source text a Georgian maid is

compared to Juan that absolutely changes the factual information and certainly affects all other
levels of content:
Никто не сомневался, что она
По платью судя, – дева молодая,
Шепталась, что грузинка ни одна
Сравниться с ней красою не могла.
(Translated by T. Gnedich)
Однако же все согласись в том,
Что новая пришелица прекрасна;
334
Что в Грузии красивее лицом
Отыскивать невольницу напрасно.
(Translated by P. Kozlov)
Here is another example of the informative loss in translation that comes as a result of the
loss of subtext.
A simple way of life I've learned and wise:

I watch the sky, and pray to God, and daily,
To tire distress, with promptitude unfailing
Take long, long walks before the evening dies.
When burdocks stir and sigh in the ravine

And rowans droop and bow their branches meekly,
I make up cheerful verses and serene
Of life, sweet life that passes all too quickly.
At home, the cat licks at my hand and fills

The quiet room with pleased and happy purring.
Up in the tower of the sawing mill
A single bright and steady light is burning.
A stork nests on the roof; its cry is queer

And rends the pregnant hush, deep and bewitching.
If at my door you knock, I will not hear:
The sound will die away and never reach me.
This text represents an English translation done by Irina Zheleznova, a well-known

Russian translator, from the following poem by Anna Akhmatova:
Я научилась просто, мудро жить,

Смотреть на небо и молиться Богу,
И долго перед вечером бродить,
Чтоб утомить ненужную тревогу.
335
Когда шуршат в овраге лопухи
И никнет гроздь рябины желто-красной,
Слагаю я веселые стихи
О жизни тленной, тленной и прекрасной.
Я возвращаюсь. Лижет мне ладонь

Пушистый кот, мурлыкает умильней,
И яркий загорается огонь
На башенке озерной лесопильни.
Лишь изредка прорезывает тишь

Крик аиста, слетевшего на крышу.
И если в дверь мою ты постучишь,
Мне кажется, я даже не услышу.
The poet’s decision to begin a new way of life so simple and wise that is full of faith in
God after turbulent and passionate green years, can be defined as the concept of the poem. This
kind of information as derived from the original Russian text or the source text as we can call it,
is correctly transformed into English by I. Zheleznova. The poem is also endowed with certain
subtextual information that acts as if in contrast to the concept: it is the readiness to love again,
that love may come any time in spite of her rational efforts to free herself from it. The presence
of such readiness is shown in the original text, but not the translated one. In the Russian original
variant the last two lines of the text word for word mean the following: ”And if you knock at my
door, it seems to me I won’t hear it.” “It seems to me” (“мне кажется”) is the phrase that
becomes the focal point for the subtext as for the whole information of the text which was
unfortunately ignored in the Russian version. This kind of subtextual information is implied in
the last line of the text that is strengthened by means of the words “Я научилась”(“I’ve
learned”) in the very first line of the poem that confirm the struggle of one’s mind with one’s
feelings.
The analysis permits us to speak of the objective character of subtext as far as its essence
derived from the text.
Our analysis reveals that out of all categories of content an image-bearing level is the one
most neglected by translators. And this happens not as a result of its inability to be realized, but
due to a lack of its appreciation by a translator.
336
Sonnet 130 by William Shakespeare cannot be regarded as correctly translated neither in
the Russian Language, nor in the Georgian. And this happens first of all due to the
incompatibility of the image-bearing levels of the source text with its translated versions.
337
CONCLUSIONS
The results of the research can be summarized into the following conclusions:
1. The linguistics of translation as a new branch of philology has a great potential for the
study of translation. It is based on text linguistics that can actually save literary criticism from
isolation and insularity.
2. Text linguistics claims to interpret the phenomena that are beyond the spheres of other
branches such as phonology, morphology, lexicology, syntax or stylistics. But the interpretation
of any poetic text urgently requires the application of the results of these disciplines.
3. A word is the basic unit of a text.
4. The meaning of a word certainly comprises a sensuous imprint of the outer world and
is defined by us as a linguistic image.
5. A linguistic image, as one of the components of the meaning of a word, when

accentuated, creates an artistic effect thus determining the artistic power of a whole text.
6. The meaning of a word both in language and in speech is a complex and enigmatic
connection of image, name and concept.
7. The name of a word or its nomination certainly participates in the formation of its
meaning. This potency becomes especially relevant and active in poetry.
8. The virtual polysemy of a word preconditions polyphony of its meanings in poetry.
9. The determination of a linguistic image permits one to distinguish a new stratum of

content defined by us as an image-bearing level.
10. The following categories of content are elicited: factual, conceptual, subtextual,
image bearing. Thus a new system of text categories is established that permits us to differentiate
and describe each category separately.
338
11. The ascertainment and description of the aforementioned categories lead to a concept
of content that remained elusive under the condition of binary opposition of form and content.
12. The subtext of any piece of poetry is an objective phenomenon as far as it is built up
by linguistic means that are themselves endowed with objective significances.
13. In the process of translation, each parameter of content appears to be of special

relevance as far as the character of their existence and relevance proves the significance of each
poetic work.
14. The polysemy of a word determines the polyphony of a text that is primarily reflected
in the contrapuntal correlation of concept and subtext.
15. The reproduction of categories of content in translation is predetermined by the

realization of linguistic parameters of a word.
16. Though each piece of poetry is composed by a poet, poetic translation cannot be done
by a poet only but by a meticulous explorer and an expert of text interpretation at the same time.
17. In most poetic translations, we observe the reproduction of concept but the loss of
subtext. In rare cases we note their simultaneous realization. The subtext proves to be the most
elusive category of content. The aforementioned never means its disregard in the matter of
translation. The difficulty of its interpretation is no justification for the translator who fails to
reproduce the subtle subtext of a poem. The research proves the necessity of the presentation of
the subtext as well as the possibility of its reproduction except in the few cases of linguistic
incompatibility.
18. The correct reproduction of factual information is not a result of the literary and
poetic skill of a translator but of a thorough knowledge of the life and works of the poet to be
translated.
19. The category, which in translation suffers most, is the image-bearing level of content.
That certainly leads to a loss of the charm that is in the source text. The loss of the image-bearing
level badly influences the realization of the concept or subtext in translations. In spite of this, we
note a number of translations where this category of content is realized successfully.
339
20. The research reveals that the individual style of a poet is carried out primarily by the
significative aspect of a text as a reflection of the poet’s attitude towards the world. The
aforementioned permits us to distinguish the significative aspect of an individual style.
21. The research permits us to declare that a poetic translation is in the relation of
dynamic equivalence with the source text not due to a reproduction of all the facts and shades or
their exact copies but thanks to an artistic realization of all the categories of content of the
original text.
Translation done according to this principle can never be considered to be an imitation of
the original text. On the one hand it is a profound and meticulous research but on the other, a
creative work. Due to the joint and simultaneous action of these two aspects, the thoughts
enclosed in the source text cast off their linguistic fetters and change into spiritual substance. In
order to make the thoughts conceivable and perceptible for other nations, the translator
reincarnates them but by means of new linguistic material. The aforementioned interpretation of
translation leads us to release the phenomenon of translation from all the hints of scepticism or
doubt with which it is usually met.
340
miTiTebuli literaturis sia
1. aristotele, ritorika, Tb., 1981.

2. anton I, qarTuli grammatika, Tb., 1885.
3. gaioz reqtori, qarTuli grammatika, Tb., 1970.
4. gaCeCilaZe g., mxatvruli Targmanis Teoriis sakiTxebi, Tb., 1959.
5. dodaSvili s., Txzulebani, Tb., 1961.
6. doiaSvili T., Tanamedrove poeturi enis Seswavlis istoriidan,
krebulSi: qarTuli leqsTmcodneoba. Tb., 1985.
7. enuqiZe r., droul-sivrcobriv mimarTebaTa lingvisturi organizacia
mxatvrul teqstSi, Tb., 1984.
8. enuqiZe r., lingvisturi pragmatika da mxatvruli teqstis procesualoba,
Tb., 1990.
9. vasaZe a., poeziis principebi, Tb., 1987.
10. Targmanis leqsikoni, redaqtori g. wibaxaSvili, Tb., 2001.
11. ianqoSvili m., sityvis mniSvnelobis birTvuli struqtura, ùcxouri
enebi skolaSi~, #3, Tb., 1972.
12. iaSvili p., mxatvruli stili da Targmani, Tb., 1990.
13. kakabaZe z., filosofiuri saubrebi, Tb., 1988.
14. kartozia a., ena, teqsti, Targmani, sadoqtoro disertaciis
avtoreferati, Tsu, 1995.
15. kekeliZe k., mTargmnelobiTi meTodi Zvel qarTul literaturaSi da
misi xasiaTi, literaturuli Ziebani, t. VII, 1951.
16. kenWoSvili ir., galaktion tabiZe da evropuli literatura, Tb, 1974.
17. kveselava m., poeturi integralebi, Tb., 1977.
18. kobaxiZe T., tomas eliotis poemis qarTulad Targmanis gamo, `kritika~,
#3, 1986.
19. merabiSvili i., qveteqstis lingvisturi statusis Sesaxeb, ùcxouri enebi
skolaSi~, #2, 1984.
20. merabiSvili i., poeturi teqstis gramatikuli kategoriebis
aRwerisaTvis, Tbilisis universitetis Sromebi, t. 262, enaTmecniereba,
#9, Tb., 1985.
21. merabiSvili i., baironi da saqarTvelo, gaz. `literaturuli
saqarTvelo~, #11, 1991.ÿ
341
22. merabiSvili i., leqsi _ warsulis gamoZaxili, gaz. `literaturuli
saqarTvelo~, #16, 1991.
23. merabiSvili i., `baironi qarTulad~, Tb., 2002.
24. merabiSvili i., galaktionis enigmebi, Tb., 2003.
25. merabiSvili i., sityvis mniSvnelobis sakiTxisaTvis enisa da cnobierebis
TvalsazrisiT, Jurnali ùcxouri enebis skolaSi~, #2, Tb., 1982.
26. merabiSvili i., sityvis lingvisturi xatis sakiTxisaTvis dedansa da
TargmanSi, ix. sadoqtoro disertacia `poeturi teqsti da misi Targmani
rogorc lingvisturi kvlevis obieqti~, Tb., 1997.
27. merabiSvili i., Seqspiris axali wakiTxvisaTvis, Jurnali `literatura
da xelovneba~, #4, Tb., 1998.
28. merkvilaZe g., galaktionis poeturi stili, `mnaTobi~, #4, 1974.
29. naTaZe m., inglisur-qarTuli da germanul-qarTuli Targmanis
Sepirispirebis lingvostilisturi problemebi, Tb., 1986.
30. ramiSvili g., ena da pasuxismgebloba, `burji erovnebisa~, #5-10, 1996.
31. sayvareliZe n., Targmanis komunikaciur-pragmatuli ekvivalenturobis
problema, Tb., 1996.
32. sergia v., teqstis lingvistika, Tb., 1989.
33. fanjikiZe d., Tanamedrove qarTuli Targmani, `literaturuli
saqarTvelo~ #1, 2, 3, 1983.
34. fanjikiZe d., Targmanis Teoria da praqtika, Tb., 1988.
35. fanjikiZe d., stilis ekvivalentobis problema, Tb., 1995.
36. fanjikiZe d., qarTuli Targmanis istoriis sakiTxebi, Tb., 2001.
37. fanjikiZe d., ena, Targmani, mkiTxveli, Tb., 2002.
38. furcelaZe v., teqsti rogorc enobrivi moRvaweobis werilobiTi
gancxadeba, Tb., 1998.
39. qarTveliSvili i., qarTuli enis grammatika, Tb., 1814.
40. Sengelia n., enobrivi doneebi da teqsti, Tsu Sromebi, t. 262,
ènaTmecniereba~, #9, Tb., 1985.
41. `ciskari~, #11, Tb., 1982.
42. wereTeli l., anton I-is `sami stili~ da rusTaveli, `literaturuli
saqarTvelo~, #5, 1997.
43. wibaxaSvili g., Targmanis stilistikis zogierTi sakiTxi `kritika~, #2,
1975.
342
44. wibaxaSvili g., Targmanis Teoriisa da praqtikis sakiTxebi, Tb., 2002.
45. CxeiZe p., ivane maCablis mTargmnelobiTi moRvaweoba Targmanis
Tanamedrove Teoriis prozmaSi, sakandidato disertacia, Tb., 2003.
46. WavWavaZe i., oriode sityva Tavad revaz Salvas Zis erisTavis mier
kazlovis `SeSlili~-s Targmanzeda, rCeuli nawarmoebebi 5 tomad, t. 3,
Tb., 1986.
47. WavWavaZe i., qarTuli Teatri, werili mexuTe, rCeuli nawarmoebebi 5
tomad, t. 3, Tb., 1986.
48. WumburiZe z., qarTuli saxelebi, misive wignSi: dedaena qarTuli, Tb., 1987.
49. Àíòè÷íûå òåîðèè ÿçûêà è ñòèëÿ, Ì.-Ë. 1936, ñ. 183-184.
50. Àðóòþíîâà Í. Ä., Ïðåäëîæåíèå è åãî ñìûñë, Ì., 1977.
51. Àðóòþíîâà Í. Ä., Äèñêóðñ, â êí.: Ëèíãâèñòè÷åñêèé ýíöèêëîïåäè÷åñêèé
ñëîâàðü, Ì., 1990.
52. Àõìàíîâà Î. Ñ., Ñëîâàðü ëèíãâèñòè÷åñêèõ òåðìèíîâ, М., 1969.
53. Áàéðîí Äæîðäæ Ãîðäîí, Ïàëîìíè÷åñòâî ×àéëüä-Ãàðîëüäà. Ïåðåâîä ñ àíã-
ëèéñêîãî Âèëüãåëüìà Ëåâèêà, Ì., 1978.
54. Áàéðîí Äæîðäæ Ãîðäîí – Áèáëèîòåêà âåëèêèõ ïèñàòåëåé, ïîä ðåäàêöèåé
Ñ. À. Âåíãåðîâà, Èçäàíèå Áðîêãàóç-Åôðîí, Ñ-Ïåòåðáóðã, ò. I, 1904.
55. Áàëëè Ø., Ôðàíùóçñêàÿ ñòèëèñòèêà, Ì., 1961, ñтр. 28.
56. Áàðõóäàðîâ À. Ñ., ßçûê è ïåðåâîä, 1975.
57. Áàõòèí Ì. Ì., Âîïðîñû ëèòåðàòóðû è ýñòåòèêè, Ì., 1975.
58. Áåëèíñêèé Â., Ïîëíîå ñîáð. ñî÷. ò. 10, 1956.
59. Áåíâåíèñò Ý., Îáùàÿ ëèíãâèñòèêà, Ì., 1974.
60. Áëóìôèëüä Ë., ßçûê, Ì., 1968, ñ. 162.
61. Áðþñîâ, Ôèàëêè â òèãåëå. Ñîáð. ñî÷. â 7-è òîìàõ, Ì., 1975.
62. Áóäàãîâ Ð. À., Â çàùèòó ïîíÿòèÿ ñëîâî. Âîïðîñû ÿçûêîçíàíèÿ, N 1, Ì.,
1983.
63. Âàíäðèåñ Æ., ßçûê, Ì., 1937.
64. Âèíîêóð Ã. Î., Î çàäà÷àõ èñòîðèè ÿçûêà. Ó÷. çàï. Ìîñê. Ãîñ. Ïåä.
èíñòèòóòà èíîñòðàííûõ ÿçûêîâ, ò. 5, âûï. 1, 1947.
65. Âåéíðåèõ Ó., Î ñåìàíòè÷åñêîé ñòðóêòóðå ÿçûêà â ñá.: Íîâîå â
ëèíãâèñòèêå, âûï. 5, Ì., 1970.
66. Âîïðîñû òåîðèè ïåðåâîäà â çàðóáåæíîé ëèíãâèñòèêå, Ì., 1978.
67. Âûãîòêñêèé Â., Ìûøëåíèå è ðå÷ü, Ì.-Ë., 1934.
343
68. Ãàê Â. Ã., Âûñêàçûâàíèå è ñèòóàöèÿ, Â êí.: Ïðîáëåìû ñòðóêòóðíîé
ëèíãâèñòèêè, Ì., 1972.
69. Ãàê Â. Ã., Ê ïðîáëåìå ñîîòíîøåíèÿ ÿçûêà è äåéñòâèòåëüíîñòè, “Âîïðîñû
ÿçûêîîçíàíèÿ”, 1972.
70. Ãàëüïåðèí È. Ð., Î ïîíÿòèè “òåêñò”, Â. ß. N6, 1974.
71. Ãàëüïåðèí È. Ð., Èíôîðìàòèâíîñòü åäèíèö ÿçûêà, Ì., 1974.
72. Ãàëüïåðèí È. Ð., Ãëóáèíà ïîýòè÷ñêîãî òåêñòà. Â êí.: Òåîðèÿ ÿçûêà.
Àíãëèñòèêà. Êåëüòîëîãèÿ, Ì., 1976.
73. Ãàëüïåðèí È. Ð., Ãðàììàòè÷åñêèå êàòåãîðèè òåêñòà, Èçä. ÀÍÑÑÑÐ, ÎËß,
N6, т. 36, 1977.
74. Ãàëüïåðèí È. Ð., Òåêñò êàê îáúåêò ëèíãâèñòè÷åñêîãî èññëåäîâàíèÿ, Ì.,
1981.
75. Ãàëüïåðèí È. Ð., Ïðîáëåìû ëèíãâîñòèëèñòèêè, Âñòóïèòåëüíàÿ ñòàòüÿ â
êíèãå: “Íîâîå â çàðóáåæíîé ëèíãâèñòèêå”, Âûï. 9, Ì., 1980.
76. Ãâàðäæàëàäçå Â., ßçûêîâûå ìàðêåðû êàê ïëàí âûðàæåíèÿ êàòåãîðèè
ïàðòèòóðíîñòè òåêñòà (íà ìàòåðèàëå àíãëèéñêîãî ÿçûêà), Êàíä. äèññ., Òá.,
1983.
77. Ãâåíöàäçå Ì., Ïðàãìàòè÷åñêèå àñïåêòû êëàññèôèêàöèè è ñòðóêòóðèðîâàíèÿ
òåêñòîâ, ÀÄÄ, Òá., 1986.
78. Ãèíäèí Ñ. È., Ñîâåòñêàÿ ëèíãâèñòèêà òåêñòà. Íåêîòîðûå ïðîáëåìû è
ðåçóëüòàòû, Èçâåñòèÿ ÀÍÑÑÑÐ, Ñåðèÿ ëèòåðàòóðû è ÿçûêà, ò. 36, 1977.
79. Ãèíçáóðã Ë., Â ïîèñêàõ ñâÿòîãî Ãðààëÿ, â êí.: Ïîýòèêà ïåðåâîäà, Ì., 1988.
80. Ãîí÷àðåíêî Ñ., Ñòèõîâûå ñòðóêòóðû ëèðè÷åñêîãî òåêñòà è ïîýòè÷åñêèé
ïåðåâîä, â êí.: “Ïîýòèêà ïåðåâîäà”, Ì., 1988.
81. Ãîöèðèäçå Ä., Ôðàççîâûå òåêñòû è èç ñïåöèôèêà, ix. Tsu krebuli
ènaTmecniereba~, #9, 1985.
82. Ãóðñêèé Ñ. Å., Ïîðîæäàþùàÿ ìîäåëü çíà÷åíèÿ ñëîâà è ñåìàñèîëîãè÷åñêèé
òðåóãîëüíûê “Iíîçåìíà ôèëîëîãiÿ” âûï. II, 1967.
83. Äåéê Âàí À. ßçûê, ïîçíàíèå, êîììóíèêàöèÿ, Ïåðåâîä ñ àíãëèéñêîãî, Ì.,
1989.
84. Äåìóðîâà Í., Î ïåðåâîäàõ Áàéðîíà â Ðîññèè, – â êí.: Selections from Byron,
М., 1979.
85. Åôðåìîâ Ë. Ï., Ê âîïðîñó î ëåêñè÷åñêîé ñî÷åòàåìîñòè ñëîâ,
Ôèëîëîãè÷åñêèé ñáîðíèê, Âûï. 6-7. Àëìà-Àòà, 1967.
344
86. Æèðìóíñêèé Â. Ì., Òåîðèÿ ñòèõà. Ì., 1975.
87. Çàðóáèíà Í. Ä., Ñâåðõôðàçîâîå åäèíñòâî êàê ëèíãâèñòè÷åñêàÿ åäèíèöà.
ÀÊÄ, Ì., 1973.
88. Çàðóáèíà Í. Ä., Ê âîïðîñó î ëèíãâèñòè÷åñêèõ åäèíèöàõ òåêñòà. Â êí.:
Ñèíòàêñèñ òåêñòà, Ì., 1979.
89. Êàíò È., Êðèòèêà ñïîñîáíîñòè ñóæäåíèÿ, ÑÏá, 1898.
90. Колшанский Г. В., Соотношение субъективных и объективных факторов в языке,
М., 1975.
91. Êîìèññàðîâ Â. Í., “Ñëîâî î ïåðåâîäå”, Ì., 1973.
92. Êîìèññàðîâ Â. Í., Ïåðåâîä êàê îáúåêò ëèíãâèñòè÷åñêîãî èññëåäîâàíèÿ
(Âñòóïèòåëüíàÿ ñòàòüÿ) â êí.: Âîïðîñû òåîðèè ïåðåâîäà â çàðóáåæíîé
ëèíãâèñòèêå, Ì., 1978.
93. Êîììóíèêàòèâíûå åäèíèöû ÿçûêà, Âñåñîþçíàÿ íàó÷íàÿ êîíôåðåíöèÿ,
Òåçèñû äîêëàäîâ è ìàòåðèàëû ñîîáùåíèé, ÌÃÏÈÈß èì. Ìîðèñà Òîðåçà,
Ì., 1984.
94. Êóëåøîâ Ë. Â., Èñêóññòâî êèíî, Ìîé îïûò, Ì., 1929.
95. Êóëåøîâ Ë., Õîõëîâà À., 50 ëåò â êèíî, Ì., 1975.
96. Êóëèêîâà Å. Ç., Çíà÷åíèå ñëîâà è ñëîâîñî÷åòàíèÿ, Àâòîðåô. êàíä. äèññ.
Ì., 1974.
97. Êóðñ Ëåêöèé ïî òåîðèè ïåðåâîäà, ÌÃÏÈÈß, Ì., 1983.
98. Ëàí÷èêîâ Ê., Ëè÷íîñòü àâòîðà è ëè÷íîñòü ïåðåâîä÷èêà. Ñáîðíèê íàó÷íûõ
òðóäîâ ÌÏÈÈß èì. Ìîðèñà Òîðåçà, “Ñìûñë òåêñòà êàê îáúåêêò ïåðåâîäà”,
âûï. 278, Ì., 1986.
99. Ëåâèí Þ. È., Î íåêîòîðûõ ÷åðòàõ ïëàíà ñîäåðæàíèÿ â ïîýòè÷åñêèõ
òåêñòàõ. – Â êí.: Ñòðóêòóðíàÿ òèïîëîãèÿ ÿçûêîâ, Ì., 1966.
100. Ëåâûé È., Ìàñòåðñòâî ïåðåâîäà Ì., 1974.
101. Ëåêëåð Ñ., Áåññîçíàòåëüíîå: Èíàÿ Ëîãèêà. Ïàðèæñêèé óíèâåðñòèòåò. – â
êí.: Áåçñîçíàòåëüíîå. ò. III, Òá., 1978.
102. Ëåîíòüåâ À. Í., Äåÿòåëüíîñòü, ñîçíàíèå, ëè÷íîñòü. Ì., 1975.
103. Ëåîíòüåâ À. Í., Çíàê è äåÿòåëüíîñòü, Âîïðîñû ôèëîñîôèè, N10, Ì.,
1975.
104. Ëåîíòüåâ À. Í., Ãèïïåíðåéòåð Þ. Á., Î äåÿòåëüíîñòè çðèòåëüíîé ñèñòåìû
÷åëîâåêà. “Ïñèõîëîãè÷åñêèå èññëåäîâàíèÿ”, Ì., 1968.
345
105. Ëèíãâèñòèêà òåêñòà, ìàòåðèàëû íàó÷íîé êîíôåðåíöèè ÌÃÏÈÈß èì.
Ìîðèñà Òîðåçà, Ì., 1974.
106. Ëîçèíñêèé Ì. Ë., Áàãðîâîå ñâåòèëî, Ì., 1974.
107. Ëîñåâ À. Ô., Áûòèå, Èìÿ, Êîñìîñ, Ì., 1993.
108. Ëîòìàí Þ. Ì., Ñòðóêòóðà õóäîæåñòâåííîãî òåêñòà, Ì., 1970.
109. Ìàðøàê Ñ., Ñî÷èíåíèÿ â ÷åòûðåõ òîìàõ, Ì., 1960.
110. Ìàðøàê Ñ., Ñî÷èíåíèÿ â âîñüìè òîìàõ, Ì., 1965.
111. Ìàð÷åíêî À., Çàìåòêè î ïîýòèêå À. Âîçíåñåíñêîãî Â. ß. N9, 1978.
112. Ìàñòåðñòâî ïåðåâîäà, Ì., 1975.
113. Ìàÿêîâñêèé Âë., Êàê äåëàòü ñòèõè, Ñîáð. ñî÷., ò. 13, Ì., 1971.
114. Ìîñêàëüñêàÿ Î. È., Ãðàììàòèêà òåêñòà, Ì., 1981.
115. Ìåðàáèøâèëè È., “...Íåâîçìîæíî îòêàçàòüñÿ îò ýòîé ìå÷òû”, Çàìå÷àíèÿ
ïî ïîâîäó ðóññêèõ ïåðåâîäîâ äâóõ ñòèõîòâîðåíèé Äæ. Ã. Áàéðîíà,
Ëèòåðàòóðíàÿ Ãðóçèÿ, N3, 1985.
116. Ìåðàáèøâèëè È. Â., Ñåìàíòè÷åñêèå ïàðàìåòðû îêêàçèîíàëüíûõ
ñëîâîñî÷åòàíèè (íà ìàòåðèàëå ñîâðåìåííîãî àíãëèéñêîãî ÿçûêà), Êàíä.,
Äèññ., Òá., 1978.
117. Ìåðàáèøâèëè È. Â., Ê âîïðîñó î êàòåãîðèè èíôîðìàòèâíîñòè, – â ñá.:
Äèàëåêòèêà ôîðìû è ñîäåðæàíèÿ â ÿçûêå è ëèòåðàòóðå, 1986.
118. Ìåñõè À. Í., Ñåìàíòè÷åñêèå è ôóíêöèîíàëüíûå îñîáåííîñòè íàó÷íî-
òåõíè÷åñêèõ òåðìèíîâ â õóäîæåñòâåííûõ òåêñòàõ, êàíä. äèññ. Òá., 1990.
119. Íèêîëàåâà Ò. Ì., Ëèíãâèñòèêà òåêñòà, Âñòóïèòåëüíàÿ ñòàòüÿ â êíèãå:
“Íîâîå â çàðóáåæíîé ëèíãâèñòèêå”, 8, Ì., 1978.
120. Íèêîëàåâà Ò. Ì., Àêòóàëüíîå ÷ëåíåíèå – êàòåãîðèÿ ãðàììàòèêè òåêñòà, –
Â. ß. N2, 1977.
121. Íîâîå â ëèíãâèñòèêå, âûïóñê 8, Ì., 1978.
122. Íîâîå â ëèíãâèñòèêå, âûïóñê 9, Ì., 1980.
123. Ïàâëîâ È. Ï., Èçáðàííûå òðóäû, Ì., 1950.
124. Ïàâëîâ È. Ï., Ïîëí. ñîáð. ñî÷., Èçä. 2-å ò. III, ò. IV. Ì.-Ë., 1951.
125. Павловские среды, т. III, М., 1949.
126. Ïàóëü Ã., Ïðèíöèïû èñòîðèè ÿçûêà, Ì., 1960.
127. Ïî Ý., Ôèëîñîôèÿ òâîð÷åñòâà, Ñîáð. ñî÷. ò. 2, Ì., 1913.
128. Ïðîáëåìà çíà÷åíèÿ â ëèíãâèñòèêå è ëîãèêå, Ì., 1963.
346
129. Ïóøêèí À. Ñ., Î Ìèëüòîíå è ïåðåâîäå “Ïîòåðÿííîãî Ðàÿ” Øàòîáðèàíîì.
Ñîáð. ñî÷. â øåñòè òîìàõ, ò. 6, Ì., 1969.
130. Ðàçãîâîðû ñ Ãåòý, ñîáðàííûå Ýêêåðìàíîì, èçä., 2-å, ÑÏá., 1905.
131. Ðåôîðìàòñêèé À. À., Ââåäåíèå â ÿçûêîçíàíèå, Ì., 1967.
132. Ðåöêåð ß., Òåîðèÿ ïåðåâîäà è ïåðåâîä÷åñêàÿ ïðàêòèêà”, Ì., 1974.
133. Ðîëëàí Ð., Æàí Êðèñòîô, Ñîáð. ñî÷. ò. 4. Ì., 1965.
134. Ðóññêèå ïèñàòåëè î ïåðåâîäå, Ì., 1960.
135. Ñåâáî È. Ï., Ñòðóêòóðà ñâÿçíîãî òåêñòà è àâòîìàòèçàöèè
ðåôåðèðîðâàíèÿ, Ì., 1969.
136. Ñåðâàíòåñ Ì., Íàçèäàòåëüíûå íîâåëëû, ñîáð. ñî÷. ò. 2. Ì.-Ë., 1935.
137. Ñîëãàíèê Ã. ß., Ñèíòàêñè÷åñêàÿ ñòèëèñòèêà, Ì., 1973.
138. Ñîññþð Ô. Êóðñ îáùåé ëèíãâèñòèêè, Ì., 1933.
139. Сыромятникова И. С., История прически, М., 1983.
140. Òåîðèÿ ÿçûêà, Àíãëèñòèêà, êàëüòîëîãèÿ, Ì., 1976.
141. Òîëñòîé Ë. Í., Ïîëí. ñîáð. ñî÷. â 90 òîìàõ, ò. 62, Ì., 1953.
142. Òóðàåâà Ç. ß., Êàòåãîðèÿ âðåìåíè, Âðåìÿ ãðàììàòè÷åñêîå è âðåìÿ
õóäîæåñòâåííîå, Ì., 1997.
143. Òþõòèí Â., Êèáåðíåòèêà, Ôèëîñîôñêàÿ ýíöèêëîïåäèÿ, ò. 2, Ì., 1962.
144. Òþõòèí Â., Îáðàç, Ôèëîñîôñêàÿ ýíöèêëîïåäèÿ, ò., 4, Ì., 1979.
145. Òûíÿíîâ Þ., Ïðîáëåìà ñòèõîòâîðíîãî ÿçûêà, Ë., 1924.
146. Óñïåíñêèé À., Ñòðóêòóðíàÿ îáùíîñòü ðàçëè÷íûõ âèäîâ èñêóññòâà íà
ìàòåðèàëå æèâîïèñè è ëèòåòàðóðû, â êí.: Researches sur les Systemes
Signifiants. Symposium de Vesorili, 1968. The Hague-Paris, 1973.
147. Óôèìöåâà À. À., Ëåêñèêà, â êí.: Îáùåå ÿçûêîçíàíèå, Ì., 1971.
148. Óôèìöåâà À. À., Òèïû ñëîâåñíûõ çíàêîâ, Ì., 1972.
149. Ôåäоðîâ À., Èñêóññòâî ïåðåâîäà è æèçíü ëèòåðàòóðû, Ë., 1983.
150. Õðàï÷åíêî Ì. Á., Òåêñò è åãî ñâîéñòâà, â êí.: Êîíòåêñò, Ì., 1985.
151. Õàíïèðà Ýð., Îêêàçèîíàëüíûå ýëåìåíòû â ñîâðåìåííîé ðå÷è, – â ñá.
“Ñòèëèñòè÷åñêèå èññëåäîâàíèÿ”, Ì., 1972.
152. ×åðíóõèíà È. À., Ê âîïðîñó îá åäèíèöàõ ñâîäíîãî òåêñòà, â êí.:
Ëèíãâèñòèêà òåêñòà. Ìàòåðèàëû íàó÷íîé êîíôåðåíöèè ÌÃÏÍÈß èì.
Ìîðèñà Òîðåçà, ÷. 2, Ì., 1974.
153. ×åðíÿõîâñêàÿ Ë. À., Ïåðåâîä è ñìûñëîâàÿ ñòðóêòóðà, Ì., 1976.
347
154. ×åðíÿõîâñêàÿ Ë. À., Ñîäåðæàòåëüíàÿ ñòðóêòóðà òåêñòà è ïåðåâîä, â
ñáîðíèêå íàó÷íûõ òðóäîâ “Ñìûñë òåêñòà êàê îáüåêò ïåðåâîäà”, âûï. 278,
Ìîñêîâñêèé ïåä. èíñòèòóò èíîñòðàííûõ ÿçûêîâ èìåíè Ìîðèñà Òîðåçà, Ì.,
1981.
155. ×óêîâñêèé Ê., Âûñîêîå èñêóññòâî, Ì., 1968.
156. Øàìîòà À. Í., Ïåðåíîñíîå çíà÷åíèå ñëîâà, Êàíä. äèññ. Êèåâ. 1966.
157. Øâåéöåð À. Ä., Ïåðåâîä è ëèíãâèñòèêà, Ì., 1973.
158. Ùåðáà Ë. Â., Î òðîÿêîì àñïåêòå ÿçûêîâûõ ÿâëåíèé è îá ýêñïåðèìåíòå â
ÿçûêîçíàíèè. Èçä. ÀÍ ÑÑÑÐ. Îòäåëåíèå îáùåñòâåííûõ íàóê, N1, 1931.
159. Ùåðáà Ë. Â., Èçáðàííûå ðàáîòû ïî ÿçûêîçíàíèþ è ôîíåòèêå, ò. 1, Ë.,
1958.
160. ßçыêîâà Þ. Ñ., Îñîáåííîñòè ïîýòè÷åñêîãî ñëîâà. Âåñòíèê Ëåíèíãðàäñêîãî
Óíèâåðñèòåòà. Ñåðèÿ “Истории, ÿçûêà è ëèòåðàòóðû”, Вып. 2, ¹ 8, 1963
161. ßêîáñîí Ð., “Ïîýçèÿ ãðàììàòèêè è ãðàììàòèêà ïîýçèè”, â êí.: Ñåìèîòèêà.
Ì., 1983.
162. ßêîáñîí Ð., Ðàáîòû ïî ïîýòèêå, Ì., 1987.
163. Aczel Tamas, Illuminations, In: George Stone Saussy III, The Penguin Dictionary of
Curious and Interesting Words, London, 1996.
164. Baker M., In Other Words (a course book on translation), Routledge, 2005.
165. Breal Michael, Essai de sémantique, Paris, 1897.
166. Barthes R., Introduction a I’analyze structurale des recits, “Communications”, 8, 1966.
167. Bickerton D., Prolegomena to a Linguistic Theory of Metaphor. Fundamentals of
Language, 5, 1969.
168. Boyes Megan, Queen of a Fantastic Realm, A Biography of Mary Chaworth, J. M.
Tatler and Son, Ltd, Derby, 1987.
169. Buckley W. F., Stained Glass, Garden City: Doubleday, 1978.
170. Burges Anthony, Enderby, New York, Norton, 1968.
171. Butters R., On the Interpretation of “Deviant Utterances,” Journal of Linguistics, No 6,
1969.
172. Lord Byron, Childe Harold’s Pilgrimage, Preface to the First and Second Cantos, The
Works of Lord Byron, The Wordsworth Poetry Library, p. 174.
173. Carroll Lewis, Through the Looking-Glass, ch. 6, Penquin Books, 1985.
174. Coseriu E., Determination y Entorno, – Romanistisches Jahrbuch, v. 7; Hamb., 1955-56.
175. Discourse and Communication, edited by T. Van Dy’k N. Y., 1985.
176. Dressler W., Schmidt S., Text linguistic, Kommentierte Bibliographie, Münch, 1973.
348
177. Eco U., Mouse or Rat? Translation as Negotiation, Phoenix, London, 2004.
178. Empson W., Seven Types of Ambiguity, London, 1965.
179. English Literature, Penguin Books, London, 1969.
180. Finoochiaro A., Galileo and the Art of Reasoning, London, 1980.
181. Firth John R., Linguistic Analysis and Translation, In: “For Roman Jakobson”, The
Hague, 1956.
182. Franzosische and Deutche Übersetzungskunst, Tübingen, 1958.
183. Halliday M. A., The Place of Functional Sentence Perspective, Prague, 1974.
184. Handbook of Discourse analysis, ed. by T. van Diyk, v 1-4 L. 1985.
185. Harding D. W., William Blake. In: From Blake to Byron, vol. 5, Pelican Guide to
English Literature, 1962.
186. Harris Z., Discourse analysis, “Language”, 1952, v. 28, No 1.
187. Hartmann, Textlinguestische Tendenzen in der Sprachwissenshaft, – Foli Linguestica, v.
8, The Hague, 1975.
188. Hatim Basil, and Mason Jan, Discource ans the Translator, London and New York,
1990. Longmans; Pergnier, Maurice, Les Fondements Sociolinguistiques de la
Traduction, Lille, 1993.
189. Hatim B., Communication Across Cultures: Translation Theory and Contrastive Text
Linguistics, Exterer: University of Exterer Press, 1997.
190. Hatim B., “Translation Quality Assessment: Setting and Maintaining, Trent”, The
Translator 4, 1998.
191. Hatim B., Teaching and Researching Translation, London, Longman, 2001.
192. Hebel J. W., Hudson H. H., Poetry of the English Renaissance, 1509-1660, New York,
1929.
193. Hendricks N. O., Three Models for the Description of Poetry. Journ. of Ling. No 1,
1966.
194. Hertzler J. O. Sociology of Language, N. Y., 1965.
195. Hill A. A., Introduction to Linguistic Structures, Hacourt Brace, New York, 1958.
196. Hill A. A., A program for Definition of Literature, In: University of Texas Studies in
English, 37, 1958.
197. Hummboldt W., See a letter to A. W. von Schlegel, 23 July, 1796.
198. Hymes D. H., Phonological Aspects of Style: Some English Sonnets. In: “Style and
Language, L., 1960.
199. Jäger Gert, Translation und Translationslinguistik, Haale, 1975.
200. Jakobson R., Linguaistics and Poetics. – In: “Style in Language”, 1960.
349
201. Jakobson R., On Linguistic Aspects of Translation, In; R. A. Brower (Ed), “On
Translation”, New York, Oxford University Press, 1966.
202. Jespersen S. O., Language, Chapter XX – Sound and Symbolism, L., 1954.
203. Ilys M., Editor, The Life, Writings, Opinions and Times of the Right Hon. G. G. Noel
Byron, Lord Byron, in three volumes, v. III, London, 1825.
204. Katz J. J. and Fodor J., The Structure of a Semantic Theory, v. 39, No 2, Part I, 1963.
205. Koch W. A., Einige Probleme der Textanalyse, In: Vom Morphem zum Textem,
Hildesheim, 1969.
206. Landers Clifford E., Literaty Translation, a Practical Guide, New Jersey City
University, Multilingual Matters LTD, Clevedon, 2001.
207. Loodspeed E. I., Problems of New Testament Translation, Chicago, 1995.
208. Lord Byron, Selected Prose, Penguin Books, 1972.
209. Lyons G., Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics, Cambridge, 1971.
210. Malmkjær K., Linguistics and the Language of Translation, Edinburgh University Press,
2005.
211. Marchand Leslie A., Byron, A Portrait, Pimlico edition, 1993.
212. Mason, I. Discourse, Ideology and Translation in R. de Beuagrande, A. Shunnaq and
M. Heliel (eds), Language, Discourse and Translation in the West and Middle East,
Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 22-34, 1994.
213. Merabishvili I., A note on Byron and Georgia, – Byron Journal, London, 1997.
214. Merabishvili I., Byron, Greece and Georgia, Proceedings of the 20th Byron Symposium,
Athens, 1995.
215. Merabishvili I., Liberty and Freedom and the Georgian Byron, in: “The Reception of
Byron in Europe”, Toemme Continuum, London – New York, 2005.
216. Merabishvili I., Towards the Category of Informativeness in Poetical Translation,
Abstracts of the International Symposium, Linguistic Foundations of Translation,
September, Liverpool, 1995.
217. McFarlane James, Ibsen and Meaning, Norwich, England, 1989.
218. Mounin G., Les problemes theoriiiques de la traduction, Paris, 1963.
219. Mounin G., Die Übersetzung, Geschichte, Theorie, Anwendung, München, 1967.
220. Munday J., Introducing Translation Studies, Theories and Applications, Routledge,
London and New York, 2005.
221. Newmark Peter, Paragraphs on Translation, Multilingual matters LT, D, Clevenden,
Philadelphia, Adelaide, 1995.
222. Newmark Peter, About Translation, University of Surrey, 1991.
350
223. Nida E., Towards a Science of Translation (with special reference to principles and
procedures involved in Bible translating), Leiden, 1964;
224. Nida E. and Reyburn W. D., Meaning across Cultures, Orbis Books, Maryknoll, N. Y.
1981;
225. Nida E., Taber Ch., The Theory and Pactice of Tranlation, Lieden, 1969.
226. Nida E., Translating meaning, California, 1984.
227. Nida E., The Sociolinguistics of Interlingual Communication, Editions du Hazard,
Bruselles, 1996.
228. Nida E. and Jin Din, On Translation (with special reference to Chinese and English),
1984.
229. Ogden C. K., Richards I. A., The Meaning of Meaning, London, 1923.
230. Phillips I. B., Some Personal Reflections on New Testament Translation, B.T.U., 1953.
231. Rachel M., the Translator in the Test: On Reading Russian Literature in English,
Evanston, IL, Northwestern University Press, 1994.
232. Readings in Modern English Lexicology, Leningrad, 1965.
233. Ritchie G. R. L. and James Moore M., Translation from the French, Cambridge, 1918.
234. Russell Bertrand, Logical Positivism, Revue Internationale de Philosophie, IV, 1950.
235. Reiß Katharina, Möglichkeiten und Grenzen der Übersetzungskritik, München, 1971.
236. Steiner G., After Babel: aspects of language and translation, Oxford, 1998.
237. Stern Peter, The Violet and the Crucible, Cambridge Journal, III, 7 (April), 1950.
238. The Poetical Works of Lord Byron, Complete in one volume, New York, 1869.
239. Thorne G. P., Stylistics and General Grammars, Journal of Linguistics, 1, 1965.
240. Ullmann S., Semantics. An Introduction to the Science of Meaning, In: Readings in
Modern English Lexicology, Leningrad, 1965.
241. Ullmann St., Words and their Use, L., 1951.
242. Venuti L., The Translation Studies Reader, Second Edition, Routledge, London and New
York, 2004.
243. Voegelin Ch. F., Multiple Staged Translation, International Journal of American
Linguistics, vol. 10, No 4, Oct. 1954.
351
sailustracio mxatvruli literaturis sia
mxatvruli literatura, rogorc kvlevis wyaro, naSromSi miTiTebulia

im rigiTi nomriT, romliTac is warmodgenilia qvemoT darTuli mxatvruli
literaturis siaSi.
1. An Anthology of English and American Verse, M., 1972.

2. “And poetry is born... “ Russian Classical Poetry, (Bilingual edition), compiled and
Translated by Irina Zheleznova, M., 1984.
3. Anna Akhmatova, Selected poems, translated by D. M. Thomas, Penguin Books, 1988.
4. Anthology of Georgian Poetry, Translated by Venera Urushadze, Tb., 1958.

5. Contemporary American Poetry, Penguin Books, 1964.
6. Galaktion Tabidze, Ten Poems, Translated by D. Reifield, Tb., 1975
7. D. H. Lawrence, The Trespasser, Penguin Books, 1969.
8. The Complete Works of Lord Byron in One Volume, Paris: Baudry’s European Library, A.
and W. Galignani and Co.., 1837.
9. William Blake, Selected Verse, M., 1982.
10. The Poetical Works of Lord Byron, Complete in One Volume, New York: D. Appleton
and Company, 1869.
11. The works of Lord Byron, The Wordsworth Poetry Library, Wordsworth Edition, 1994.
12. Thomas Pynchon, Gravity’s Rainbow, Bantam Books, New York, 1980.
13. Yeats’s Poems, Edited and Annotated by Norman Jeffers, Macmillan Publishers, London,
1991.
14. baironi, leqsebi, Targmna inglisuridan givi gaCeCilaZem – wignSi: g.
gaCeCilaZe, baironi, Tb., 1938.
15. jorj gordon baironi, lirika, Tb., 1965.
16. galaktion tabiZe, Txzulebani Tormet tomad, Tb., 1966.
17. galaktion tabiZe, rCeuli, Tb., 1982.
18. g. gaCeCilaZe, rCeuli Targmanebi, Tb., 1974.
19. inglisuri da amerikuli poeziis mcire anTologia, (inglisuridan
Targmna da SeniSvnebi daurTo giorgi niSnianiZem), Tb., 1985.
20. radiard kiplingi, leqsebi, baladebi, Targmna inglisuridan murman
lebaniZem, Tb., 1967.
21. literaturuli almanaxi `liaxvi~, Tb., 1968.
352
22. lord baironi, oda napoleon bonapartisadmi, inglisuridan Targmna da
komentarebi daurTo inesa merabiSvilma, Tb., 1996.
23. uiliam Seqspiri sonetebi, inglisuridan Targmna givi gaCeCilaZem. Tb.,
1956.
24. uiliam Seqspiri, sonetebi.Oorenovani gamocema, inglisuridan Targmna
rezo TabukaSvilma, Tb., 1979.
25. Анна Ахматова, Лирика, Поэтическая библиотека: Класcики и современники, M.,
1989.
26. Áàéðîí, Áèáëèîòåêà Âåëèêèõ Ïèñàòåëåé, èçäàíèå Áðîêãàóç – Åôðîí, â
òðåõ òîìàõ, Ñ. Ïåòåðáóðã, 1904.
27. Джордж Гордон Байрон, Собрание сочинений в четырех томах, М.,1981.
28. Джордж Гордон Байрон, Лирика, М., 1988.
29. Джордж Гордон Байрон, Паломничество Чайльд-Гарольда, М., 1973.
30. Лермонтов М. Ю., Собр. Соч. В двух томах, М., 1990.
31. Маршак С., Избранные переводы, Собр. соч. в четырех томах, т. 3, М., 1958.
32. Галактион Табидзе, Лирика, перевод с грузинского, Тб., 1987.
33. Табидзе Г., Луна Мтацминды, Переводы Ив. Квачахия, Тб.,1982.
34. Галактион Табидзе, Стихи, Вольный перевод с грузинского Владимира
Леоновича, Тб., 1979.
35. Галактион Табидзе, Осины, Перевод Лилианы Чхиквишвили, Тб., 1996.
36. Ñîíåòû ñîâðåìåííèêîâ Øåêñïèðà, Ì., 1987.
37. Пушкин А. С., Собр. Соч. в шести томах, М.,1969.
38. Galaktion Tabidze, Poems, Translated by Innes Merabishvili, Tb., 2005.
39. Уильям Шекспир, Сонеты, М., 1984.
40. William Shakespeare, King Lear, Penguin Popular Classics, 1994.
41. uiliam Seqspiri, tragediebi, or wignad, II, Tb., 1987.
teqstis analizis dros veyrdnobodiT Semdegi

leqsikonebisa da enciklopediebis monacemebs:
1. inglisur-qarTuli leqsikoni, rveulebad, gamomcemeli TinaTin

margalitaZe, Tb., 1995 da Semdgom.
2. inglisur-qarTuli leqsikoni, Sedgenili Tamar da isidore
gvarjalaZeebis mier, Tb., 1975.
353
3. qarTuli enis ganmartebiTi leqsikoni, erTtomeuli, Tb., 1986.
4. qarTuli enis ganmartebiTi leqsikoni rva tomad, Tb., 1950.
5. sulxan-saba orbeliani, leqsikoni qarTuli, or wignad, Tb., 1966.
6. qarTuli sabWoTa enciklopedia, Tb., 1975-1987.
7. Dictionary of the English Language by Samuel Johnson in Two Volumes, 1775 (SJD).
8. Webster’s new Twentieth Century Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged,
Second Edition, New York, 1963 (WU).
9. The Universal Dictionary of the English Language Edited by Henry Cecil Wild, RKP,
Toppan, London, 1982.
10. Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary of the English Language, 1975 (WSN
CD).
11. Horby A.S., Oxford Advanced Lerner’s Dictionary of Current English, Oxford, 1977.
12. Encyclopaedia Britannica in twenty-three volumes, Inc, 1973.
13. The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and Interesting Words, George Stone Saussy III,
Penguin Books, 1984.
14. Signs & Symbols in Christian Art by George Ferguson, Oxford University Press, London,
Oxford, New York, 1971.
15. Большой Англо-Русский Словарь под общим руководством проф. И. Р. Гальперина,
в двух томах, М., 1972 (БАРС).
16. Словарь Русского языка в четырех томах, М., 1957.
17. Лингвистический Энциклопедический словарь, М., 1990.
18. Большая Советская Энциклопедия, Москва, 1970-1978.
19. Философская энциклопедия, М.,1967.
20. Ахманова О. С., Словарь лингвистических терминов, М., 1969.
354
inesa merabiSvili _ Tbilisis saxelmwifo universitetis profesori,
enebisa da Targmanis kaTedris gamge, saqarTvelos baironis sazogadoebis
prezidenti, baironis saerTaSoriso asociaciis direqtorTa sabWos wevri,
Tbilisis baironis skolis direqtori, napoleonis saerTaSoriso asociaciis
namdvili wevri, britaneTis qarTuli sazogadoebis sapatio wevri.
misi kvlevis Sedegebi sistematurad aisaxeba saerTaSoriso

publikaciebsa da gamosvlebSi:
aRsaniSnavia Semdegi pubkikaciebi:
• lord baironi, oda napoleon bonapartisadmi (orenovani gamocema),

winasityvaoba, Targmani da komentarebi inesa merabiSvilisa, Tb., 1996;
• inesa merabiSvili, baironi qarTulad, Tb., 2002;
• inesa merabiSvili, galaktionis enigmebi, Tb., 2003;
• Innes Merabishvili, Liberty and Freedom and the Georgian Byron, In: The Reception
of Byron in Europe, Continuum Press, London-New York, 2005;
• Galaktion Tabidze, Poems, Translated by Innes Merabishvili, Edited by Professor
Richard A. Cardwell, Tb., 2005;
• inesa merabiSvili, poeturi Targmanis lingvistika, Tb., 2005;
• inesa merabiSvili, Targmani _ kulturaTa dialogi, Tb., 2005.
amerikulma biografiis institutma mas mianiWa `2004 wlis qalis~

nominacia, xolo 2005 wels _ `saerTaSoriso elCis~ tituli _ H. E.
355
(ukan ydaze:)
Tqven SeZeliT CagexedaT poeturi teqstis struqturul da semantikur

siRrmeTa mravalferovnebaSi da ise mogexdinaT maTi mniSvnelovani sinTezi.
iujin naida
bibliis amerikuli sazogadoeba
Tqveni gamokvleva aris mdidari da rTuli. did siamovnebas maniWebs

Catarebuli analizi.
piter niumarki
didi britaneTis
lingvistikis institutis
prezidenti
maqvs yvela safuZveli ganvacxado, rom inesa merabiSvilis naSromi

Rirebul wvlils Seitans Cvens codnasa da warmodgenaSi.
norman peiji
notingemis universitetis profesori
òbieqturi RerZi~ qveteqstisa marTlac brwyinvale mignebaa. axali

sistemis dadgena aris uaRresad mniSvnelovani miRweva Targmanis
ganviTarebis saqmeSi.
maikl gasenmaieri
duisburgis universitetis profesori
356

Poeturi Targmanis Lingvistika 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Poeturi Targmanis Lingvistika 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Poeturi Targmanis Lingvistika 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

m e s a m e n a w i l i

poeturi teqstis Sinaarsi

Targmanis Teoretikosebi tradiciulad msjeloben TargmanSi

1 ix. nawili I, Tavi III.

1È. Ìåðàáèøâèëè, Ê âîïðîñó î êàòåãîðèè èíôîðìàòèâíîñòè, – Â ñá.: Äèàëåêòèêà ôîðìû è

rogorc ukve iyo aRniSnuli, Sinaarsobriv-faqtobrivi informacia

aneslis mTao, civo da berwo,

me veRar gnaxav da nuRar meli,

giorgi niSnianiZis Targmanis mixedviT, Tu mkiTxveli leqss dedanSi ar

Îòðûâîê, íàïèñàííûé âñêîðå ïîñëå

Áåñïëîäíûå ìåñòà, ãäå áûë ÿ ñåðäöåì ìîëîä,

Íåò ïðåæíèõ ñâåòëûõ ìåñò, ãäå ñåðäöå òàê ëþáèëî

rogorc zemoT aRvniSneT [z], bgeris aliteracia SesityvebaSi “Hills of

I would I were a careless child

The cumbrous pomp of Saxon pride

Fortune! take back these cultured lands,

Place me among the rocks I love,

Which sound to Ocean’s wildest roar;

Few are my years, and yet I feel

Once I beheld a splendid dream,

I loved – but those I loved are gone;

Though gay companions o’er the bowl

How dull! to hear the voice of those

Give me again a faithful few,

And woman, lovely woman! thou,

Without a sigh would I resign

Fain would I fly the haunts of men –

Oh! that to me the wings were given

netav uzrunvel bavSvad maqcia,

Tavisufali sulis qomagma

bedo! amas gTxov, waiRe ukan

iq damasaxle, sadac wylis Tqafuns

gamaxsendeba sizmari wrfeli,

vinc me miyvarda, visac Zmad vTvlidi,

Tumc gamiqarwylebs dRes wamiT Rvino

saubedurod lxinis dros vismen

veRirsebode kvlavac im wamebs,

Sen ki mSvenebiT savse diaco,

mzad var davtovo daufiqreblad

frTebi rom momca gareul mtredis,

leqsSi ZiriTadad ori Temaa gamokveTili da urTierTdakavSirebuli.

1 ix. i. merabiSvili, baironi qarTulad, gv. 22-24.

To fly from, need not be to hate, mankind:

aqve mogvyavs pwkaredi: `moSorde aqaurobas, ar niSnavs gZuldes kacTa

siamiT davTmob xalxis samyofels,

leqsis bolo strofi, romelic Seicavs Cven mier ganxilul frazas,

da vambob: `vin momcems frTas, viTarca mtreds?~

Tu SevadarebT fsalmunis zemoT warmodgenil redaqcias, vnaxavT, rom

o, ufalo, Tu gansacdels mravals

esoden kuriozuli cnebis SemotaniT mTargmnelma mTeli strofis

aluziis SemTxveva am TavSi CvenTvis saintereso Seiqna ara TviT im

Fare thee well! and if for ever,

pirveli strofis bolo ori striqoni ase SeiZleba warmovadginoT

gemSvidobebi, morCa yoveli,

baironis rusul TargmanSi faqtobrivi informaciis araswori

But no one doubted on the whole, that she

Íèêòî íå ñîìíåâàëñÿ, ÷òî îíà,

rogorc vxedavT, rusul TargmanSi darRveulia Sesabamisoba Sedarebis

Îäíàêî æå âñå ñîãëàñèëèñü â òîì,