Poetry Translating as Expert Action
In Draft 1, RT1 for both poems was a quick reading run-through “to get the mean-
ing” (Toen wij, TU23). With Toen wij, RT1 ended with an assessment that the
poem is “very heavily crafted in terms of sound” (TU29). Krik’s more formal struc-
ture was quickly assessed in two further reading runs-through: rhyme scheme in
RT2, and metre in RT3. I then wrote my literal version: during Toen wij’s RT2 and
Krik’s RT4 (longer because it also involved brainstorming rhymes, as mentioned).
Krik, unlike Toen wij, had no final quality-checking run-through because I was
tired from the sheer length of the previous run-through (1h 27m).
My Draft 2 for both poems closely echoes Irene’s pattern for Toen wij (p. 241):
a quick reading run-through (RT1) followed by an intensive RT2 working on in-
trinsic features. The absolute length of Krik’s Draft 2 (2h 57m) testifies to the effort
needed to add rhyme and rhythm to just one of the 40 sonnets in the book. This
may at least partially explain why not all translators are willing to recreate rhyme
and rhythm – and certainly explains why I was again too tired for a final revision
run-through.
Draft 3 shows the same pattern across the two poems: intensive typing-up
(RT1) plus two quick quality-checks (RT2, RT3). The knock-on effects of fluency/
style revisions on intrinsic form, as mentioned above, are shown by the greater
relative intensity of all the Krik runs-through.6.3.4 Macro-sequences and Lines
Average macro-sequence length is virtually identical for Toen wij and Krik, both
overall (46.4tu vs. 48.9tu respectively, or 4m) and within Drafts (see Figure 50).
This again shows how personal translation-management strategies are not poem-
or language-specific. They did vary, however, by Draft:- In Draft 1, both poems’ macro-sequences typically tackled half-line segments
with occasional whole-Line recaps. - In Draft 2, Toen wij’s macro-sequences were usually Line- or stanza-based;
besides the long macro-sequence focusing on Stanza I’s reactivated idioms,
they tackled quite diverse problems. Krik’s macro-sequences typically tackled
rhyme in two-Line segments, each followed by single-Line segments tackling
rhythm and fluency. The challenging nature of both poems’ Draft-2 work is
reflected in the relatively long time spent per text segment (Figure 50). - In Draft 3, during the long typing + revision RT1 (Figure 49), macro-sequenc-
es were stanza-based for Toen wij, and Line-based for Krik (reflecting fine-
tuning of rhythm). Whole-poem macro-sequences dominated the two check-
ing runs-through that followed.