Methodology of cognitive-discursive modelling of literary translation (case study of Ukrainian retranslations of W. Shakespeare's tragedies of the 19th-21st centuries)

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Kyiv National University of Technologies and Design

METHODOLOGY OF COGNITIVE-DISCURSIVE MODELLING OF LITERARY TRANSLATION (case study of Ukrainian retranslations of W. Shakespeare's tragedies of the I9^th-21^st centuries)

YANA BOIKO Doctor of Science in Philology,

Associate Professor, Philology and Translation Department

Анотація

У статті надано теоретико-методологічне обґрунтування поетапного конструювання когнітивнодискурсивної моделі діахронної множинності перекладу часовіддаленого першотвору, яка постає інструментом розкриття внутрішніх механізмів перекладу літературного твору і визначення критеріїв адекватності оригіналу і перекладу. Матеріалом дослідження слугували трагедії В. Шекспіра як часовіддалені першотвори Англії кінця XVI - початку XVII ст. та їх різночасові українські ретрансляції XIX--XXI ст.

Алгоритм комплексної методології когнітивно-дискурсивного моделювання художнього перекладу, яка інкорпорує методи дискурсології і когнітивної транслятології, передбачає п'ять етапів конструювання трьох модулів: дискурсивного, когнітивного і ретрансляційного.

Побудова дискурсивного модуля, метою якого є розкриття об'єктивних і суб'єктивних факторів, які впливають на процес і результат інтерпретації перекладачем часовіддаленого першотвору, передбачає конструювання трьох складників -- екстралінгвального, лінгвального та інтерпретаційного, що відбувається на трьох перших етапах.

Четвертий етап - це побудова когнітивного модуля, який розкриває внутрішні механізми перекладацького процесу, зумовлені когнітивним консонансом (гармонійною тотожністю мисленнєвого процесу автора і перекладача) чи когнітивним дисонансом (гносеологічним, ідеологічним і культурно-естетичним), які спричинені попередньо визначеними у дискурсивному модулі подібностями і відмінностями у контекстах створення першотвору і ретрансляцій. Прийняття перекладачем рішення щодо вибору тієї чи іншої перекладацької стратегії та локальної тактики в умовах когнітивного консонансу чи когнітивного дисонансу зумовлює різну ступінь когнітивної близькості оригіналу і перекладу: когнітивну еквівалентність, когнітивну аналогічність і когнітивну варіантність.

П'ятий етап - це конструювання ретрансляційного модуля, який розкриває вплив когнітивного консонансу та когнітивного дисонансу на вибір перекладачем стратегії (модернізації чи архаїзації, доместикації чи форенізації) і тактики (репродуктивної чи адаптивної) трансформаційного перекладу.

Ключові слова: діахронна множинність ретрансляцій, когнітивний консонанс/ дисонанс, конотативно / культурно забарвлений контекст, вербалізований концепт оригіналу / перекладу, трансформаційний переклад.

Annotation

METHODOLOGY OF COGNITIVE-DISCURSIVE MODELLING OF LITERARY TRANSLATION (case study of Ukrainian retranslations of W. Shakespeare's tragedies of the 19^th-21^st centuries)

Yana V. Boiko, Kyiv National University of Technologies and Design (Ukraine)

Key words: diachronic plurality in translation, cognitive consonance / dissonance, connotative / culturally coloured context, verbalized concept of the original / translation, transformational translation.

The article provides theoretical and methodological substantiation for the step-by-step construction of a cognitive-discursive model of the diachronic plurality in translation of a time-remote original work, which appears as a tool for revealing the internal mechanisms of translating a literary work and determining the criteria for the adequacy of the original and translation. This is a case study of W. Shakespeare's tragedies as time-remote original works of England of the late 16^th - early 17^th centuries and their Ukrainian retranslations of the 19^th-21^st centuries. translation cognitive discursive original

The algorithm of the complex methodology of cognitive-discursive modelling of literary translation, which incorporates the methods of discourse analysis and cognitive translation studies, involves five stages of construction of three modules: discursive, cognitive, and retranslation.

The construction of a discursive module, the aim of which is to reveal the objective and subjective factors that influence the process and result of the translator's interpretation of a time-remote original work, involves the construction of three components - extralingual, lingual, and interpretation, which takes place in the first three stages.

The fourth stage is the building of a cognitive module, which reveals the internal mechanisms of the translation process caused by cognitive consonance (harmonious identity of the mental processes of the author and the translator) or cognitive dissonance (epistemological, ideological, and cultural-aesthetic). Cognitive consonance and cognitive dissonance result from the similarities and differences in the contexts of original creation and retranslations, which are previously defined in the discursive module. The translator's decision to choose one or another translation strategy and local tactic in conditions of cognitive consonance or cognitive dissonance determines different degrees of cognitive proximity of the original and the translation: cognitive equivalence, cognitive analogy, and cognitive variance.

The fifth stage is the construction of a retranslation module, which affirms that the translator's choice of strategy (modernization or archaization, domestication or foreignization) and tactic (reproductive or adaptive) of transformational translation is conditioned by cognitive consonance or dissonance.

The relevance of the research is determined by its appeal to the leading cognitive-discursive paradigm of modern translation studies and by the tendency of cognitive translation studies for the translation process modelling, according to which not only the translation result is the subject of study, but also the prerequisites that determine the translator's approach to the reproduction of the original text in one way or another. Analysis and comparison of retranslations of a time-remote original text in the course of modelling the process of literary translation allows following the influence of discursive and cognitive factors on the process and result of translation. The creation of the cognitive-discursive model of the diachronic plurality in translation of the time-remote original text explains the translation decisions regarding the choice of the general strategy and local tactic of retranslations and, respectively, the diachronic plurality in translations of a time-remote original text.

The main text

The cognitive-discursive approach to literary translation postulates that the translator's specific decisions depend on his / her adequate interpretation of the verbal constructions of the original work [Dicerto, 2018; Lewandowska-Tomaschuk, 2010; O'Brien, 2013]. To determine the adequacy criteria, a new and productive theory appears to be the theory of plurality in translation as an idea of the non-deterministic nature of translation due to the possibility of several different retranslations of the same source text.

The phenomenon of plurality in translation has been studied since the second half of the 20^th century. Plurality in translation means the presence of several translations of one foreignlanguage literary work in a given national literature, which in the original has, as a rule, one textual embodiment [Farahzad, 2024; Hermans, 2006; Ortega y Gasset, 2004; Rebrii, 2018]. Western researchers [Brownlie, 2006; Pym, 2007; Gur^aglar, 2008; Venuti, 2003] refer to the term “re-translation”, indicating that each new translation of a work of art tends more and more to the original text [Berman, 2000]. Linguists consider the evolution of translation requirements and the translators' desire to meet the requirements of the times to be the main factors in the emergence of retranslation.

The plurality in the translation of a literary text is not only a consequence of external causes, but is organically inherent in art. The factors that determine the possibility of plurality in translation and create the problem of choosing a translation strategy are the redundancy of information in the original text and its entropy. The term “entropy”, which was scientifically based in physics as a measure of system chaos, in translation, means the degree of information uncertainty about the object of translation (the translator's lack of information), which leads to making erroneous decisions about translation at any level of the translation self-organization system [Vanroy, De Clercq, Macken, 2019]. Entropy can occur at all levels of communication [Dorofeieva, Andrushchenko, 2019] - addresser, context, message, code or addressee, and its degree depends not only on the type of text to be translated but also on the translator's personality. Therefore, the translator has paramount influence on interpretations of the original work in the target language culture.

The diachronic plurality in translation is considered as repeated translations of a time-remote original work, occurring during a specific historical period or several periods [Kaiser, 2002; Koskinen, Paloposki, 2003; Rebrii, 2018; Ситар, 2014]. Diachronic retranslations of the original literary text can differ significantly. Therefore, modern translation theory needs a theoretical and methodological tool to determine the nature of these differences, including the factors that lead to their emergence. Since the study of the literary text translation presupposes the knowledge of the entire experience of human existence, which is reflected in this literary text, a systematic approach in the scientific cognition of the literary text translation contributes to the formation of a multi-level structure of theoretical and empirical study, which involves adequate research methods, one of which is modelling.

The objective of the study is theoretical and methodological substantiation and implementation of the cognitive-discursive model of the diachronic plurality in translation of a time-remote original text (hereafter CDM), constructed on the material of Ukrainian retranslations of W. Shakespeare's tragedies of the 19^th-21^st centuries, as a tool for revealing the internal mechanisms of retranslations of a time-remote original text.

Achieving the outlined objective requires solving the following tasks: to substantiate a theoretical foundation of the CDM in terms of the anthropocentric paradigm of translation studies; to create a methodological foundation for the construction of the CDM by using the methods of discourse analysis and cognitive translation studies; to construct a discursive module in the structure of the CDM, which is represented as a unity of extralingual, lingual, and interpretation components; to highlight cognitive consonance and cognitive dissonance of the author's and translator's mental activity, which form the basis in construction of a cognitive module in the structure of the CDM; to construct a retranslation module in the structure of the CDM, taking into account the choice of general strategy and local tactic by translators while retranslating the time-remote original text.

This is a case study of W. Shakespeare's 9 tragedies totalling 1,468 pages and their 38 retranslations performed by 22 Ukrainian translators during the 19^th-21^st centuries. The units of analysis are culturally marked and connotatively loaded lexical and phraseological units selected from 5,364 connotatively / culturally coloured contexts of W. Shakespeare's tragedies and their Ukrainian retranslations.

In addition to general scientific methods of analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, observation, interpretation, description, generalization, systematization, classification and comparison, the methodology of discourse analysis and cognitive translation studies is also used in the investigation. Discourse analysis, aimed at researching the macroand microstructure of the discourse of the time-remote original text and Ukrainian retranslations of the 19^th-21^st centuries, involves the use of such methods as: cultural and historical method and comparative-linguistic-cultural (for comparative analysis of the historical-cultural contexts of the time-remote original text and retranslations), biographical, comparative, and interpretive-textual (to determine the features of the literary styles of the epochs of the original text and its chronologically distant Ukrainian retranslations, which affect the translators' idiostyles and, accordingly, the plurality in translation), contextual, descriptive, semantic, and stylistic (for analysis and differentiation of the semantic structure of connotative components of the units of analysis). The methodology of cognitive translation studies includes methods of conceptual analysis, in particular concept identification (to reconstruct the verbalized concepts of the original and translation), frame modelling (to identify the conceptual content of the verbalized concepts of the original and translation in terms of frame semantics) and frame mapping (to establish the degree of cognitive proximity between the conceptual contents of the verbalized concepts of the original and translation according to five information constituents), as well as methods of translation analysis, in particular transformational (to reveal the influence of cognitive consonance and cognitive dissonance on the translator's choice of an effective translation strategy and tactic for adequate reproduction of the units of analysis in retranslation) and contrastive translation (for comparative analysis of translation solutions in the diachronic plurality of Ukrainian retranslations). Quantitative calculation procedures are used at all stages of the study to determine the frequency of the analyzed phenomena.

Modelling as an effective and universal method of cognition has a long history and consists in studying objects, processes and phenomena of the surrounding world by constructing models, since a model is a presentation of a concrete object, process or phenomenon of reality through abstract ones.

Modelling has gained prominence in the humanities, particularly in the last decade of the 20^th century. It is recognized as a universal tool of human cognition and acquires the interdisciplinary status. A model came to be understood as a tool that describes schematically objects, phenomena and processes that are inaccessible to direct observation. The development of taxonomy of models in scientific knowledge is carried out according to various criteria, such as: the object of modelling, the output variable, the class of signs used in models, the correlation of models with real objects or processes, the way of presentation, etc. According to the type of model, the modelling process consists of four stages, namely: construction, investigation, verification, and implementation.

In linguistics, a wide spread of the modelling method is associated with the occurrence of mathematical linguistics in the 1950^s and 1960^s, although the term “model” was introduced by Z. Herris in 1944. The effectiveness of modelling in linguistics is determined by its explanatory power, especially in relation to such a complex object of research as language [Hocket, 1954; Chomsky, 1956], as well as the possibility of solving practical problems of linguistics related to information retrieval and machine translation, localization of knowledge from text, etc.

In translation studies, three main linguistic models of translation have been formed: transformational [Nida, 1975], semantic [Catford, 1965], and I. Revzin's and V. Rosenzweig's situational (denotative) [Ребрій, 2016]. Communicative models of translation proposed by O. Kade, V. Komisarov, L. Latyshev, R. Minyar-Beloruchev, A. Popovych, and A. Schweitzer [Ребрій, 2016] aim to take into account the communicative situation along with the meanings of individual language units. More modern communicative models also focus on the purpose of the text, its wide real environment (O. Selivanova's communicative-discursive model [Селіванова, 2012]). The advantage of communicative models is that they consider the genuine circumstances in which a text is created and perceived, but cannot explain the inner essence of translation as an activity.

A cognitive translation study changes the traditional understanding of the translation process as a reproductive textual activity and determines other tasks for the translator. Instead of looking for differences between the original text and the translated one, the investigators try to find out the reasons that cause these differences. The translator becomes a “creator” who carries out a complex psycholinguistic activity [Засєкін, 2020] in the conditions of bilingual communication, and the translated text becomes more significant and relevant to the study of repeated translations of the same original.

Modelling the translation process in terms of the cognitive-discursive approach [Андрієнко, 2015; Gopo, 2015] is justified by the complex nature of this approach in linguistics. Modelling literary translation, which considers the assets of the cognitive-discursive paradigm, becomes an effective tool for understanding the literary text and the degree of completeness of the author's worldview representation in translation and, therefore, allows tracking of those phenomena that affect the process and result of translation. T. Hermans [Hermans, 2006] has investigated the norms governing the modelling process and the functions of models and prototypes in relation to norms in translation studies.

Within the cognitive paradigm of scientific knowledge, such translation models as cognitive-psychological [Bell, 1994], cognitive [Kiraly, 1995], cognitive-pragmatic [Gutt, 1991], and linguistic-artistic [Rebrii, 2018] have been developed. Cognitive-discursive models of translation [Gopo, 2015; Андрієнко, 2015] take into account not only the text but also the mental activity of the translator and the reader when interpreting this text, focusing primarily on the cognitive scope of the translator's activity and addressing to his / her bilingual world picture. Translation is understood as processing someone's “mental content”, which consists of the following stages: interpretation (analysis of the original text), projection (projection of the conceptual image of the source text onto the world picture of the translated language), and implementation (creation of the translated text).

Taking into account the entropy of the time-remote original work, the creative potential of the target culture and the peculiarities of the translator's creative bilingual personality, which is formed under the influence of social-historical and cultural contexts, we propose the CDM, which consists of discursive, cognitive, and retranslation modules, appropriateness of which is justified by their correspondence to the main stages of the translation process.

CDM is a hypothetical conditional scheme that represents the transformation process of one literary text, expressed in English, in diachronic plurality of retranslations, expressed in Ukrainian. CDM is a theoretical and methodological tool for revealing the internal mechanisms of the diachronic plurality in translation, visualizing the translation process at all its stages, such as: the translator's understanding of a time-remote original work, which takes into account the extralingual context of its creation; translator's decision-making in conditions of cognitive consonance or cognitive dissonance with the author of the original; implementing translation decisions while translating the original as the translator's interpretive and heuristic activity.

The complex methodology of step-by-step CDM construction consistently reproduces the translation process and consists of five research stages [Бойко, 2023].

At the first stage, the use of general scientific methods of induction and deduction, empirical and theoretical methods of analysis and synthesis, as well as methodological principles of discourse analysis makes it possible to describe the macrostructure of the discourse of the time-remote original work and chronologically distant Ukrainian retranslations of the 19^th-21^st centuries. The cultural-historical method is used to determine the features of the social-historical, political-ideological and cultural contexts in which W. Shakespeare's tragedies and their Ukrainian retranslations were created. The comparative-linguistic-cultural method is used for the analysis of the cultural-aesthetic environment of the relevant historical epochs, which had an impact on the author's and translators' individualities.

The time-remote original works are W. Shakespeare's nine tragedies: “Romeo and Juliet”, “Troilus and Cressida”, “Julius Caesar”, “The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark”, “Othello”, “King Lear”, “Macbeth”, “Antony and Cleopatra”, “The Tragedy of Coriolanus”.

The history of Ukrainian retranslations of W. Shakespeare's tragedies covers 19^th-21^st centuries and is noted by the names of famous Ukrainian translators:

• (the second half of the 19^th century) Panteleimon Kulish, Osyp-Yurii Fedkovych (Osyp Dominik Gordynskyi), Mykhailo Starytskyi, Marko Kropyvnytskyi, and Panas Myrnyi (Panas Rudchenko);

• (the 20^th century) Mykhailo Rudnytskyi, Yurii Klen (Oswald-Eckard Burghardt), Maksym Rylskyi, Todos (Teodosii) Osmachka, Boris Ten (Mykola Khomychevskyi), Iryna Steshenko, Viktor Ver (Viktor Cherevko), Vasyl Mysyk, Abram Hozenpud, Hryhorii Kochur, Vasyl Barka (Vasyl Ocheret), Leonid Hrebinka, Yurii Koretskyi, Mykola Lukash, and Dmytro Pavlychko;

• (the beginning of the 21^st century) Oleksandr Hriaznov and Yurii Andrukhovych.

The macrostructure of the discourse of the original work and chronologically distant retranslations is also formed by the literary style of the epoch of W. Shakespeare's tragedies (Renaissance literature) and Ukrainian retranslations of the 19^th-21^st centuries (romanticism, realism, neoclassicism, futurism, neobaroque, modernism, and postmodernism). The use of the biographical method allows characterizing the creative path of the playwright and the Ukrainian translators of his works, the features of their worldview that shaped them as creative personalities. Comparative analysis helps to trace the historical evolution of artistic forms and cultural contexts of the original work and chronologically distant Ukrainian retranslations. Interpretive-textual method of analysis makes it possible to specify W. Shakespeare's and translators' idiostyles as factors of a plurality of interpretations when overcoming the information entropy of the time-remote original work.

At the second stage, the use of general scientific methods of observation, interpretation, description, generalization, systematization and classification aims at analyzing the microstructure of the discourse of the time-remote original works and Ukrainian retranslations of the 19^th-21^st centuries, in particular, the uniqueness of the language of the original texts and the language of Ukrainian retranslations as sign systems in a historical perspective (etymological method), the specificity of the author's and translators' idiostyles as creative personalities (descriptive method), the ethnocultural and connotative colouring of W. Shakespeare's language in the context of the diachronic plurality in translation for the formation of the material for analysis (methods of contextual, semantic and stylistic analysis).

At this stage, culturally / connotatively coloured contexts (hereafter CCCs) are singled out from the original and translated texts, i.e. fragments of the text that express a coherent and complete thought. Such CCCs contain units of analysis, which appear to be unit / units of the original (hereafter UO) and the corresponding unit / units of translation (hereafter UT). UO and UT are either culturally marked verbal means characterizing the ethno-cultural specificity of the historical period, or connotatively coloured units, whose lexical meaning expresses any component of connotation - imagery, expressiveness, emotivity, evaluation or stylistic colouring. The size of the CCC chosen for the analysis varies from one replica in a dialogue to the fragment of a monologue representing a complete thought.

As a result of continuous sampling of the material under study, 5,364 CCCs were extracted, 1,086 CCCs of which are from W. Shakespeare's nine tragedies totalling 1,468 pages and 4,278 CCCs are from 38 Ukrainian retranslations of W. Shakespeare's plays analyzed.

At the third stage, the interpretation component of the discursive module in the CDM structure is built by presenting the macroand microstructure of the discourse of the time-remote original works and Ukrainian retranslations of the 19^th-21^st centuries. General scientific methods of interpretation, description and generalization, as well as methods of semantic, component and stylistic analysis, help to determine the stylistic features of the author's and translators' idiostyles as creative personalities, as well as the factors that cause the plurality of interpretations of the timeremote original works (interpretive-textualanalysis) in terms of information entropy [Boiko, 2023].

At the fourth stage, the application of methods of comparative and conceptual analysis, in particular the method of concept identification, makes it possible to reconstruct the verbalized concepts of the original (hereafter VCO) and translation (hereafter VCT) and to model the conceptual content of VCO and VCT (frame modelling method). The conceptual contents of VCO and VCT consist of concept-slots, the reconstruction of which takes place through semantic and component analysis of dictionary definitions of the units of analysis in order to determine their referential correlation. Contextual and stylistic analyses identify those meanings that are actualized in the analyzed CCCs, and establish types of connotations (imagery, expressiveness, emotivity, evaluation, and stylistic colouring). Interpretive-textual analysis, which involves all the researcher-interpreter's experience (sensual, physical, historical, and social), acquired in the process of mastering the surrounding world, reveals the deep meanings embedded by the author of the time-remote original work in the UO and by the translator in the UT. Accordingly, the nomenclature of concepts-slots in the conceptual contents of VCO and VCT differs from the nomenclature of semes in the meanings of UO and UT.

Forming the conceptual contents of VCO and VCT, concepts-slots are combined into five semantic groups - information constituents of the frame:

• Factuality - the referential potential of the conceptual contents of VCO and VCT, i.e. correspondence of facts (objects, subjects, phenomena, etc.) of extralingual reality expressed by UO and UT (referents);

• Emotivity - emotional colouring of the conceptual contents of VCO and VCT, i.e. lexical (in the semantics of UO and UT) expression of feelings, moods, human experiences, etc.;

• Imagery - the figurative aspect of the conceptual contents of VCO and VCT, i.e. visual and sensory representations and associations expressed by UO and UT;

• Evaluation - the evaluative aspect of the conceptual contents of VCO and VCT, i.e. estimation of the object, subject, phenomenon, event, etc., expressed by UO and UT;

• Expressiveness - the stylistic aspect of the conceptual contents of VCO and VCT, i.e. functional styles to which UO and UT belong.

The proposed denominations of the information constituents in the frame structure are similar with the ones of the components of connotation - figurative, emotive, evaluative, and expressive, since the conceptual contents of VCO and VCT, which are named by connotatively coloured UO and UT, are marked with such meaning components. The use of the terms “imagery”, “emotivity” and “evaluation” in the conceptual analysis is not unusual in linguistic cognitive studies, in which the structure of the concept is revealed through the analysis of linguistic means of representation, and appears as a set of various constituents / components / elements / layers / modes, such as valuable, imaginative and conceptual; meaningful, factual; substantive, associative, figurative, evaluative, symbolic, etc.

The differentiation of the degrees of cognitive proximity of VCO and VCT is carried out by frame mapping, i.e. the projection of knowledge structures (information constituents) in the VCO frame onto similar knowledge structures in the VCT frame in order to establish the cognitive equivalence / analogy / variance of the conceptual contents of VCO and VCT in terms of cognitive consonance or cognitive dissonance between the author and translators [Boiko, 2022].

At the fifth stage, contrastive translation and transformational methods determine the strategy (modernization or archaization, domestication or foreignization) and tactic (reproductive or adaptive) of reproduction of culturally marked and connotatively coloured UOs in Ukrainian retranslations in terms of cognitive consonance or cognitive dissonance between the author and translators.

The methodological principles of discourse analysis and cognitive translation studies made it possible to construct the CDM, which consists of three parts - discursive, cognitive, and retranslation modules.

The discursive module in the structure of the cognitive-discursive model of the diachronic plurality in the translation of the time-remote original work is represented as a unity of extralingual, lingual, and interpretation components (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1 Model of discursive module in the structure of cognitive-discursive model of the diachronic plurality in translation of the time-remote original text¹

Conventional abbreviations: SHC1, SHC2... SHCn - multiple variants of social-historical contexts of Ukrainian retranslations; CAE1, CAE2... CAE n - multiple variants of cultural and aesthetic environments of Ukrainian retranslations; L1, L2... Ln - multiple variants of language specificity of Ukrainian retranslations as a symbolic system in the historical perspective; LS1, LS2... LSn - multiple variants of literary styles of Ukrainian retranslations; IS1, IS2... ISn - multiple variants of idiostyles of Ukrainian translators; CP1, CP2,..., CPn - multiple variants of creative personalities of Ukrainian translators; IE - information entropy of the original text

The extralingual component structuralizes information about the macrostructure of discourse, in particular, about social-historical contexts (SHC₁, SHC₂... SHC_n), cultural and aesthetic environments (CAE₁, CAE2... CAE _n) and literary styles (LS₁, LS2... LS_n) of the epochs of the timeremote original texts and chronologically distant Ukrainian retranslations of the 19^th-21^st centuries, which shape the author's and translators' worldviews.

Social-historical contexts (SHC₁, SHC2... SHC_n), in which W. Shakespeare's tragedies and their Ukrainian retranslations of the 19^th-21^st centuries were created, are determined by radically different historical epochs. On the one hand, the Elizabethan epoch of the 16^th-17^th centuries in the history of Great Britain with its characteristic social stratification and strictly regulated hierarchy in society, on the other hand, three different historical periods of the development of Ukrainian society can be distinguished. The second half of the 19^th century is the time of the birth and spread of Ukrainian national and cultural revival, Ukrainian national self-awareness. The 20^th century is the time of World War I, the February and October revolutions, the struggle for Ukrainian statehood in 1917-1920, the creation of the USSR, World War II, the crisis of socialism and the collapse of the Soviet system, Ukraine's independence, denationalization of property, the advent of “wild” capitalism with an unfair distribution of wealth, the formation of a national oligarchy, the fall of social standards for the absolute majority. The beginning of the 21^st century is the time of raising the status of national culture, strengthening the idea of spiritual rebirth as a prerequisite for economic, social, and state revival. Practically every translator of W. Shakespeare's tragedies has his own life tragedy caused by dramatic historical events of the 19^th-21^st centuries.

In the formation of the translator's creative personality, a key role is played not only by the social-historical contexts (SHC₁, SHC2... SHC_n) and the cultural and aesthetic environments (CAE₁, CAE2... CAE _n), but also by the literary styles of the epochs of Ukrainian retranslations (LS₁, LS2... LS_n), which directly form the idiostyles of particular translators (IS₁, IS₂... IS_n) (see Fig. 1).

W. Shakespeare's works belong to the Renaissance culture, which was characterized by a deviation from theocentrism in favour of anthropocentrism, which led to a new understanding of the world and the man in it.

Ukrainian retranslations were implemented during the period of formation of such literary styles as romanticism, realism, neoclassicism, futurism, neobaroque, modernism and postmodernism in the Ukrainian literary tradition, which influenced the translators' idiostyles. In the second half of the 19^th century, W. Shakespeare's works were translated in Ukraine in the tradition of romanticism (Panteleimon Kulish, Osyp-Yurii Fedkovych, and Mykhailo Starytskyi) in the conditions of Russification of the upper rank of Ukrainian society and in the tradition of realism, whose representatives (Marko Kropyvnytskyi and Panas Myrnyi) claimed that national language heritage is the key to “correct” national literature.

In the 20^th century, W. Shakespeare's works were translated in such literary styles as neoclassicism (Yurii Klen, Mykhailo Rudnytskyi, Maksym Rylskyi, Boris Ten, Iryna Steshenko, Vasyl Mysyk, and Hryhorii Kochur), futurism (Viktor Ver and Yurii Koretskyi), neo-baroque (Todos Osmachka, Abram Hozenpud, Leonid Hrebinka, and Mykhailo Lukash) and modernism (Vasyl Barka and Dmytro Pavlychko). The main literary style in Ukraine at the end of the 20^th - beginning of the 21^st century was postmodernism (Oleksandr Hriaznov and Yurii Andrukhovych), in which the boundaries between high and popular art are blurred.

The lingual component structuralizes information about the microstructure of the discourse, in particular about the uniqueness of the language of the time-remote original text and the language of chronologically distant Ukrainian retranslations (L₁, L₂. L_n), as well as the specificity of the author's and translators' idiostyles (IS₁, IS₂... IS_n).

The languages of the time-remote original text (early modern English) and Ukrainian retranslations (the new Ukrainian language of the end of the 19^th and the beginning of the 21^st centuries) show significant peculiarities due to different conditions of existence - the gradual development of the English language and the constant prohibitions and oppressions of the Ukrainian. W. Shakespeare was able not only to successfully use the resources of the English language of that time but also to be an innovator in the field of stylistics of the work, as well as in vocabulary and even grammar. The authors of Ukrainian retranslations often appeared as “hostages” of the Ukrainian language oppressions. However, at the same time, many of them were also innovators, striving for the normalization of their modern Ukrainian language. The period from the end of the 19^th - the beginning of the 20^th century is characterized by the use of the so-called “phonetic” spelling and the use of colloquial language. The middle and the end of the 20^th century are connected with the forced Russian amalgamation of Ukrainian culture and the creation, on the one hand, of amalgamated translations and, on the other, the protection of the living Ukrainian language in translations. At the beginning of the 21^st century, the Ukrainian language is characterized by the weakness of the language standard, the strong influence of the English language and the existence of alternative language norms.

The variability of the diachronic plurality in Ukrainian retranslations of the 19^th-21^st centuries of W. Shakespeare's tragedies reflects the author's and translators' idiostyles (IS₁, IS2... IS_n), which were formed under the influence of various literary styles dominant in the respective epoch. The translator's idiostyle, besides the system of language units in their connotative usage, contains a typology of professionalism (professional methods and means of solving translation tasks).

The interpretation component structuralizes information about the factors affecting the interpretation by the translators' creative personalities (CP₁, CP2,..., CP_n) of the time-remote original text in terms of information entropy (IE) in order to reproduce the original work in target language adequately. The interpretation component is a synthesis of the extralingual and lingual components of the discourse module, as it considers all the key factors of interpretation [Boiko, 2022a].

The information entropy of culturally marked and connotatively coloured UOs is a prerequisite for the diversity of translation interpretations and, accordingly, the diachronic plurality in translation, which is illustrated in Ukrainian retranslations of the CCC from W. Shakespeare's tragedy “Romeo and Juliet” (1594), act I, scene 5:

1. William Shakespeare (1594): My only love sprung from my only hate! [...] Prodigious birth of love it is to me, that I must love a loathed enemy [Shakespeare, 2004, p. 52].

2. Panteleimon Kulish (1901): Єдиная любов з єдиної вражди [...] О дивная любов! мені ти дивно сталась, що з клятим ворогом моїм я покохалась `A single love from a single enmity [...] O strange love! You seemed strange to me that I fell in love with my cursed enemy'. [Шекспір, 1901, p. 31].

3. Panteleimon Kulish in Mykhailo Voronyi's edition (1928): З єдиної злоби - єдина і любов... [...] Як наді мною ти, зла доле, насміялась, що з ворогом своїм я вперше покохалась!. `From one malice comes one love... [...] How you, evil fate, laughed at me, that I fell in love with my enemy for the first time!' [Шекспір, 1998, p. 33].

4. Vasyl Mysyk (1932): З ненависті любов моя повстала [...] Предивно почалась любов моя, що маю ворога любити `My love arose from hatred [...] My love began to be wonderful, that I have to love my enemy'. [Шекспір, 2024d]

5. Abram Hozenpud (1937): З ненависті єдиної - встає любов єдина [...] Мені гірке судилося життя, бо ворога кохати мушу я `From single hatred, single love arises [...] My life is bitterly destined, because I have to love the enemy'. [Шекспір, 1937, p. 48].

6. Iryna Steshenko (1952): Злоба єдина у душі буяла, і зі злоби любов єдина встала!.. [...] Ох, не на радість ти, любов моя, бо ворога кохаю ніжно я! `Malice was the only one in the soul, and from the malice only love arose!.. [...] Oh, you are not happy, my love, because I love the enemy tenderly!' [Шекспір, 1985, p. 336].

7. Yurii Andrukhovych (2016): Любов одна, як ненависть одна - її б не знати краще, та вона сама прийшла - і спробуй відведи це щастя, повне знаками біди `Love is one, as hate is one - it would not be better to know it, but it came by itself - and try to take away this happiness, full of signs of trouble'. [Шекспір, 2016, p. 98].

In the original (1), the idea of love is realized by connotatively coloured UOs, which are epithets with a positive evaluation prodigious birth and a negative evaluation a loathed enemy, as well as UOs with a negative evaluation: hate and enemy. In (1), love is associated with fate (prodigious birth of love), moreover, with evil fate (love a loathed enemy). Juliet's love is so unpredictable that it arose from a completely opposite feeling (My only love sprung from my only hate!).

In Panteleimon Kulish's translation (2), love is not associated with fate, but with a miracle and something supernatural (о дивная любов! мені ти дивно сталась 'oh strange love! You are strange to me'). At the same time, the idea of enmity that grows into love is expressed quite clearly (єдиная любов з єдиноївражди 'the only love from the only enmity'). The degree of hatred for the enemy is conveyed as accurately as possible (шо з клятим ворогом моїм я покохалась 'that I fell in love with my cursed enemy').

In Mykhailo Voronyi's adaptation (3), love is also associated with fate as a living being that laughs at people (зла доле, насміялась 'evil fate, laughed'). The idea of hatred is weakened and replaced by malice (з єдиної злоби - єдина і любов що з 'out of only malice is only love'). Furthermore, the idea of enemy in (3) is also weakened (ворогом своїм я вперше покохалась 'that for the first time I fell in love with my enemy'), while in (1) strong hatred is expressed (that I must love a loathed enemy).

Retranslations performed by Vasyl Mysyk (1932), Abram Hozenpud (1937) and Iryna Steshenko (1952) at one and the same historical period of time, differ in the scope of information implied by the author and presented in retranslations.

In Vasyl Mysyk's translation (4), love also seems strange (предивно почалась любов моя 'my love began very strangely'). Quite precisely conveying the contrast between feelings of love and hatred (з ненависти любов моя повстала 'my love rose from hatred'), Vasyl Mysyk weakens the level of enmity, talking about Juliet's lover (що маю ворога любити я 'that I have an enemy to love').

Abram Hozenpud in (5) does not touch the theme of either fate or miracle. Love in (5) is only a part of life (мені гірке судилося життя 'I had a bitter life') in this difficult period - the period of enmity between families (в страшну годину 'in a terrible hour'). The idea that love grew out of hatred is preserved (з ненависті єдиної - встає любов єдина 'from only hatred - only love arises'), but the idea of enmity is somewhat softened (бо ворога кохати мушу я 'because I must love the enemy').

Iryna Steshenko in (6) presents love as a problem of unhappiness (ох, не на радість ти, любов моя 'oh, you are not happy, my love'), depriving it of mysticism. In (6), love is opposed to malice (злоба єдина у душі буяла, і зі злоби любов єдина встала 'malice was the only one in the soul, and from malice only love arose'), and enmity is weakened not only by omitting the adjective, but also by adding another, denoting tender feelings (бо ворога кохаю ніжно 'for I love the enemy tenderly').

In Yurii Andrukhovych's version (7), love is also associated with fate (щастя, повне знаками біди 'happiness full of signs of trouble'), and the idea of love is conveyed through the idea of signs of fate. Fate in (7) is similar to its perception in (1) - it is only a development of events beyond human control, which is considered as determined by a supernatural force rather than by humans. In (7), the phrase that I must love a loathed enemy is omitted altogether, but the idea of hatred is represented in the phrase любов одна, як ненависть одна 'love alone, as hatred alone'. In addition, the expression вона сама прийшла - і спробуй відведи 'and she herself came - and try to take her away' makes the reader of this translation to perceive the heroine as a victim of love, and not as a person who loves.

Thus, in Panteleimon Kulish's translation, love is more connected with the game of evil fate, which is characteristic of the fatalism of the Ukrainian national character of the 19^th century. The fact that in the retranslations of the 20^th century love is also associated with fate (Abram Hozenpud, Vasyl Mysyk) or, on the contrary, with something more down-to-earth, vital (Iryna Steshenko), reflects the contradictions of the national character of the 20^th century. In the 21^st century, Yurii Andrukhovych presents love through loss of control, preserving the idea of fatalism characteristic of post-Soviet Ukraine, but at the same time preserving the idea of warding off evil.

The translation interpretation of the original text in terms of information entropy depends on the translator's creative personality, formed under the influence of 1) objective factors: historically different social and cultural contexts, in which the original texts of the 16^th-17^th centuries and Ukrainian retranslations of the 19^th-21^st centuries were created, as well as literary styles dominating at the corresponding epochs; 2) subjective factors: translators' creative personalities that reflect their perception of the surrounding world and personal worldviews, determined by different life experiences and social backgrounds. All factors being equal, the scope of information transmitted in retranslation coincides to the original text. If at least one of the factors is different, the translators' interpretations of the cases of information entropy differ which is a prerequisite for the diachronic plurality in translation of time-remote tragedies by Ukrainian translators of the 19^th-21^st centuries.

The cognitive module in the structure of the cognitive-discursive model of the diachronic plurality in translation of the time-remote original text is constructed in terms of cognitive consonance and cognitive dissonance, establishing a certain degree of cognitive proximity between VCO and VCT, and explaining the phenomenon of plurality in translation. Cognitive consonance causes cognitive equivalence and cognitive analogy of the original and translation; cognitive dissonance determines cognitive variance of the original and translation (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2 Model of cognitive module in the structure of cognitive-discursive model of the diachronic plurality in translation of the time-remote original text

From the point of view of translation, cognitive consonance is the harmonious identity of the author's and the translator's mental processes during the creation of the original text and the translated one. Cognitive dissonance causes flaws in understanding and interpreting by the translator the implicit information encoded by the author of the original text. Cognitive dissonance manifests itself at different levels: epistemological, ideological, and cultural-aesthetic.

Epistemological cognitive dissonance (hereafter ECD) (from the Greek genoskein 'know') is caused by the insufficiency of reliable knowledge of spiritual and physical realities due to the temporal and territorial distance between the original work and its retranslation.

For example, we trace ECD in the translation of the CCC from the tragedy “Othello” (act I, scene 1):

1. William Shakespeare (1604): [...] thou, Iago, who hast had my purse as if the strings were thine [Shakespeare, 2000, p. 38].

The lack of an equivalent in the Ukrainian language for the English metaphorical expression hold/ control the purse strings 'to control how money is spent' [Butterfield, 2024] causes a different meaning in retranslation:

2. Panteleimon Kulish's (1882): Ти, Якго, брав у мене ис кишені, мов се була твоя торбина власна Conventional abbreviations:

ICD - ideological cognitive dissonance; ECD - epistemological cognitive dissonance; CACD - cultural and aesthetic cognitive dissonance; CE - cognitive equivalence; CA - cognitive analogy; CV - cognitive variance. `Iago, you picked my pockets as if it were your own bag'. [Шекспір, 1882a, p. 13].

The author concentrates more on controlling the spending of money, while the translator points to the fact of stealing money from another person's pocket.

Ideological cognitive dissonance (hereafter ICD) (from the Greek idea and logos, literally 'the science of ideas') is revealed in contradictory ideas, assumptions, convictions, beliefs, values, and attitudes to social reality that divide social groups, classes, and society as a whole. ICD influences Iryna Steshenko's interpretation (1952) of the love for a child in CCC from the tragedy “Romeo and Juliet” (act V, scene 3):

3. William Shakespeare (1594): Capulet, Montague, see what a scourge is laid upon your hate, that heaven finds means to kill your joys with love [Shakespeare, 2004, p. 193].

4. Iryna Steshenko (1952): Монтеккії Капулеттії Подивіться, який вас бич карає за ненависть: Ваш цвіт любов'ю вбили небеса! `Montague! Capulet! See what scourge punishes you for hatred: Your flower was killed by the heavens with love!' `He reached to himself from the islands of the western aid to the Cairns and Galioniglossians.' [Шекспір, 1985, p. 412].

Children in the CCC are metaphorically presented as a joy of life, and their loss is a punishment, and the punishment is imagined as a whip that strikes a person directly for his hatred, punishing him for it. Iryna Steshenko, appealing to the moral traditions of Ukrainian culture, presents children as цвіт 'flower' ('something beautiful that grew on earth'), that is, the best that their parents could create. In Ukrainian culture, children are not just a joy, but something that is the “fruit” of activity, care and mothering of parents; therefore, their loss is not only a loss of joy but also a loss of a part of the personality. Iryna Steshenko imagines punishment in a different way: if in the original, it is a punishment for a sin (what a scourge is laid upon your hate), then in the translation (11) the punishment happens directly on the culprit for the sin (який вас бич карає за ненависть 'See what scourge punishes you for hatred').