Studia Islandica - 01.06.1994, Blaðsíða 36

34
speak not only to communicate, however, but also to leave
unspoken. The receiver of any communication must per-
form an act of translation both on what is included and
what is excluded. The fabric of a second language adds
extra distance and complicates this communication process
and it is the task of the translator just as of a literary com-
mentator or critic to expedite the interpretation of the mes-
sage being transmitted.
“Translation”, properly understood, is a special case of the arc of
communication which every successful speech-act closes within a
given language. On the inter-lingual level, translation will pose con-
centrated, visibly intractable problems; but these same problems
abound, at a more covert or conventionally neglected level, intra-
lingually. (Steiner 1984:47)
6. Conclusions and indications
The impulse to tell a story, to send a message, to commu-
nicate with others is doubtless rooted in our human need to
entertain and to be entertained. But just as human society
has undergone revolutionary changes through the ages, so
the conditions for our interpersonal contact and communi-
cation have altered drastically.
Looking backwards through time we can perceive the
gradual distancing of the sender of a message from his
receiver, of the author from his audience, as a result of
changes in the conditions of transmission. One of the first
changes was the replacement of the storyteller or performer
himself by the far more impersonal written, and subse-
quently printed, word.' From this point in time onwards, as
Levý points out very succinctly, narrative has been forced
to look for other means to compensate for the loss of the
1 The trend continues: words are now generally electronically reproduced
at least at some stage in transmission and thus have become completely imper-
sonal and even indecipherable to their intended receivers at this point.