43051 (687269), страница 5

Просмтор этого файла доступен только зарегистрированным пользователям. Но у нас супер быстрая регистрация: достаточно только электронной почты!

Текст из файла (страница 5)

To say that no one who has become a bloody turant would speak in this way is pointless; he would feel in this way, or so we are convinced.

By feeling the paugs that we would feel if we were in his place , and by passing our judgements upon himself, Macbeth altaches as to him and consequently himself to us. We cannot view him with cold objectivity as something strange and apart. The unnaturalness of his acts is always counterpoised by the naturalness of his actions: his hesitant overtures to Banquo, his volubility after Duncan’s death, his dazed petulance at the appearance of the ghost.

The time has been

That, when the brains were out, the man woald die,

And there an end. But now they rise again,

With twenty mortal murders on their crowns,

And push us from our stools. This is more strange

Then such a murder is. (III. 4. 78–82)

Макбет:

Когда у жертвы череп разможен,

Кончался человек, и все кончалось.

Теперь, имея даже двадцать ран

На голове, они встают из гроба,

Чтобы согнать нас с места за столом

Что пострашней, чем ужасы убийства. (стр. 524)

Макбет:

Аммо шуки, бош суягин пачоғи чиққач,

Ўлик қайтиб тирилмаган, ўликдай ётган.

Энди бошда йигирмата жароҳат билан

Гўрдан чиқиб, тирик жонга таҳдид солмоқда. (79 б)

There is something here both grimly humorous and affecting, this Killer’s speaking in the accents of a hurt child. We should not ascribe Macbeth’s humanity to the automatic working of Shakespeare’s sympathetic nature. There is nothing casual about it. If Macbeth were other than he is, less like ourselves, he would be a less powerful symbol of our own worst potentialities and the abyss we have escaped. There is nothing of him in Edmund or lago for all of Shakespeare’s sympathetic nature.

if is hard to believe that so universal a work was calculated to the meridian of any particular person, but there are orgunuents favoring the possibility. James Stuart, who had ascuded the English throne and become the nominal patron of Shakespeare’s company a few years before «Macbeth» was written, was supposedly descended from Banquo and was intensely interested in witchcraft; moreover he had assumed in 1605 the prerogative of curing the «king’s evil» instituted by Edward the confessor and mentioned somewhat irrelevantly in the play. On the other hand, one way argue that, had Shakespeare’s primary concern been to please the manaroh, he might have dramatized more creditable episodes in Scottish history, night have drawn a more flattering portrait of Banquo, might have seized the opportunity to enlogize James as first holder of the «treble sceptes», mentioned in the show of kings. (IV.I.)

Possibly Shakespeare was responding in his own way to the urgings of his dramatic company; he was in some respects the most reticen writer of his times, and his allusions even to Elizabeth had been his and restrained.

Whether or not «Macbeth» may be considered in a sense «topical» it contains elements that are, or might have been; mere theatrical entertainment If combines with its great theme the working out of a puzzle, and offors us the pleasure of watchiny pieces dropping into place.

And he lives long enough to see how bad they were. When Birnam wood appears to move, something which seemed an impossibility, he begins

To doubt the equivocation of the fiend,

That lies like truth. (V–V. 43–4)

Макбет:

Теперь я начинаю сомневаться

Я веровал в двусмысленность. Меня

Поймал на правде дьявол, обнадежив: (стр. 556)

Макбет:

Қаттиқ шубҳа оралади энди ичимга,

Шайтоннинг сўз ўйнига учибман, билсам;

У гўлликдан илинтириб, ишонтирдики. (135 б)

for it seems that the weird sisters have sold their souls to the fiend, the devil. When Macduff says that he was not born of woman. Macbeth knows for sure that he ahs put his faith in evil, and has been betrayed:

Macbeth:

Acensed be that tongue that tells, me so,

For it hath cowed my better part of man!

And be these juggling fiends no more believed,

That palter with us in a double sense,

That keep the word of promise to our ear,

And break it our hope. (V.VIII. 19–22)

Макбет:

Язык отсохни, это возвестивший!

Он сразу мужество во мне сломил!

Не надо верить прорицаньям ада,

Проклятье им за их двоякий смысль!

Слова их не обманывают слуха,

Чтоб тем полней надежды обмануть.

Я не дерусь с тобой. (V.VIII. стрю 560)

Макбет:

Ҳоҳ, шу гапни айтган тилинг тагдан қурисин!

Шаштим синди! Минбаъд шайтон башоратига

Ишонмайман. У дўзахнинг сўз ўйинидир.

Лаънат ёғсин, икки тилли иблис жинсига!

Эшитганда, ширин сўзи қулоққа ёвар,

Аммо тшонч хайф бу сўзга, илондай чақар.

Йўқ сен бтлан савашмайман. (V. 8. 140 б)

Act III, Scene V, shows the witches as different in some ways from this description of the part they play in the rest of the tragedy: but this scene is generally considered not to be part of the original play. But this does not concern our theme, of course.

That Macbeth would be king but no father of kings, that he would reign until; Birnam would be uncongexerable by any man born of woman were riddling prophecies included in Holinshed, but the manner of presenting them through apparitions was Shakespeare’s invention:

the «Armed Head» instigating the aggression against Macduff probably represents Macbeth himself; the «Child Crowned, with a tree in his hand» certainly represents young Malkolm, deviser of the tactics as Birnam Wood; the «Bloody Child» represents Macduff, who was «from his mother’s womb untimely ripped». These ingenlities might well have been intrusive in a play so elemental; as haundled by Shakespeare they contribute to the master plan by allowing us to watch Macbeth gradually stripped of hope by those juggling fiends» upon whom he has relied.

Such lines us

Hecate:

O, well done! I commend your pains

And every one shall shave: th gains.

And now about the cauldron sing

Like elves and fairies in a ring.

Enchanting all that you put in. (IV. 1. 39–43)

Геката:

Вы все сварили к кутежу.

Я вас за это награжу.

Но надо цель иметь в виду:

Попеть, сплясать и на ходу

Заклясть, заговорить бурду. (стр. 531)

Ҳеката:

Ишратга тайёр газак.

Энди ишни кўзласак: –

Айланиб, айтинг тилсим,

Бўтқангиз тилга кирсин! (IV.1. 91 б)

make us appreciate the more the magical rancousness of the language that Shakespeare himself gave his witebes. The authenticity of the Porter’s speech was questioned by Coleridge a useful purpose, in evoking from De Quincey a gem of literary appreciation.

No one who has read the play will ever forget the hardy characters who struggle to readmit light into their murky world, and certainly not that incandescent couple who kill together and die apart. The style has the vigor, condensation and imaginative splendor of Shakespeare at his greatest, when he seems to be pressing upon the very bounds of the expressible. Blood and darkness are constantly invoked and jarring antitheses, violent hyperbole, and chaotic imagery give the lines the quality demanded by the action. But there also moments of unforsettable hush. Some of the speeches seem to express the agony of all manking.

Macbeth:

Cure her of that!

Caust thou not minister to a mind diseased,

Pluck from the memory a rooted sorrow,

Raze out the written troubles of the brain,

And with some sweet oblivious antidote

Cleans the stuffed bosom of that perilous staff

Which weighs upon the heart? (V.III. 40–45)

Макбет:

Избавь ее от этого. Придумай,

Как удалить из памяти следы

Гнездящееся печали, чтоб в сознанье

Стереть, воспоминаний письмена

И средствами, дающими забвенье,

Освободить истерзанную грудь.

От засоряющих ее придатков.

Макбет:

Бу балодан қутқар уни. Давосини топ.

Миясига уя қурган қайғу қуртини.

Ўлдирмоғу онгидаги хотира – хатни

Ўчирмоқ – ла, биратўла, унутишимда.

Юрагини ғижимлаган шу чиркин азоб

Чангалидан озод этмоқ чорасин изла.

(С.А.) (130 б)

Макбет:

Даволашнинг йўлини топ. Яхшироқ ўйла.

Қандай қилса, хаста идрок тузалур буткул,

Қандай қилса, андуҳ учиб кетар хотирдан,

Мия фориғ бўлур ҳасрат битган ёвуздан.

Дори берки, қувват йиғсин ўзни унутиб,

Ва тош бўлиб юрагига чўккан ғуссани

Кўкрагидан юлиб ташла. (Ж.К.) (218 б)

Over the centuries comes the quiet answer, convincing us, as so often the words of this part so strangely do, that nothing further can be said.

There is the patient

Must minister to himself. (V. II. 45–46).

Врач: Тут должен сам больной помог.

Табиб: Бундай дардга чора фақат хастанинг ўзи. (С.А.)

Табиб: Ўз-ўзига мадакордир беморнинг ўзи. (Ж.К.)

Conclusion

In our Summary and Suggestions we want to talk about our wishes for further improvement for understanding Shakespeare’s text. For better understanding his text as early as in the eighteenth century in spelling, punctuation, and stage directions, very few emendations by the eighteenth and nineteenth century editors have been adopted; and these with the more important variations from the very First Collections (the First Folio, for example), are indicated in the textual note. These notes are printed immediately below the text, so that a reader or student may see at a disputed reading, and have definite understanding of the seasons for those differences in the text of Shakespeare which frequently surprise and very often annoy such an arrangement should be of special help in the case of a case of a play which as wialely read and often outed; and interpreters and actors seldom agree in adhering to one text. Uzbek translations should have special such kinds of notes as well. A consideration of the more poetical, or the more dramatically effective, of two variant readings will often lead to which results in awakening a spirit of discriminating interpretation and in developing free creative criticism. In no sense in this a factual variorum edition. The variants are seven only those of importance of high authority.

The index of words and phrases has been so arranged as to serve glossary and as a guide to the more important of the grammatical differences between Elizabeth and modern English.

This kind of work should be carried out in our Uzbek translations.

Shakespeare was the creator of colloquial prose, of the prose most appropriate for drama (Churton Collins)

Next time we think that is necessary to give special attention to the principles that underlie Shakespeare’s transition from prose to verse and from verse to prose. In I.III. 220. When Brabantio recalls the Duke to deal with the business on hand, – «I humbly beseech you, proceed to the affairs of state», – the Duke, who usually speaks in verse, at once uses prose as the medium of expression. So when Emilia drops into gossip in her confidential talk with Desademono (IV.III. 70) her diction changes from verse to prose.

Macbeth is really one of the most famous tragedies. It is put in equal line but after «Hamlet», «Othello», «King Lear», «Romeo and Juliet». This tragedy has two translation versions: the first belongs to Sadulla Ahmad and the second to Jamol Kamol, consecutively they were performed in 1983 and 1991/

When speaking about these translations we have to keep in our mind that the main hero of this tragedy sometimes speaks with splendid solemnity, and such cases also should be kept in mind. Macbeth uses the word «robes» = «одеяния» as a splendid word but Banquo simply says «garments» – «одежды». Macbeth speaks about poisoned chalice and he also speaks about Banquo simply says «garments» – одежды. Macbeth speaks about poisoned chalice and he also speaks about «vessel of peace». These units bring us to King’s palace, and sometimes to gothic temple.

Macbeth Calls his soul as eternal gem». Sometimes Macbeth speaks as if he is a great artist. He uses «golden view» instead of «a kind view». Instead of «pale liver» he uses «lily – white liver», (the word pale). Because the word pale was considered as «the sign of cowardness» instead of «blush on the cheeks he uses «ruby – coloured the cheeks».

Literature

1. Асқад Мухтор. Даҳо асар. Вильям Шекспир. «Макбет». Тошкент. Ўзбекистон. ЛКСМ марказий комитети «Ёш гвардия» нашриёти 1987.

2. Вильям Шекспир. «Макбет» 1987. «Ёш гвардия» Publishing House. Tashkent.

3. Вильям Шекспир. «Макбет». Трагедия. Перевод с английского. Издательство «Художественная литература». Москва.

4. Саломов Ғайбулла.» Тил ва таржима». Тошкент. Ўзтекистон ССР «Фан» нашриёти 1966.

5. Саломов Ғайбулла. «Таржима назариясига кириш». Тошкент. «Ўқитувчи» нашриёти. 1978.

6. Саломов Ғайбулла. «Адабий санъат ва бадиий таржима». Тошкент. «Фан».1980

7. Саломов Ғайбулла. «Таржима назарияси асослари». Тошкент. «Ўқитувчи» нашриёти. 1983.

1 Асқад Мухтор. Даҳо асар. Вильям Шекспир. “Макбет”. Тошкент. Ўзбекистон. ЛКСМ марказий комитети “Ёш гвардия” нашриёти 1987

2 Асқад Мухтор. Даҳо асар. Вильям Шекспир. “Макбет”. Тошкент. Ўзбекистон. ЛКСМ марказий комитети “Ёш гвардия” нашриёти 1987

3 Вильям Шекспир. “Макбет”. Трагедия. Перевод с английского. Издательство “Художественная литература”. Москва

4 Вильям Шекспир. “Макбет”. Трагедия. Перевод с английского. Издательство “Художественная литература”. Москва

5 Вильям Шекспир. “Макбет”. Трагедия. Перевод с английского. Издательство “Художественная литература”. Москва

6 Вильям Шекспир. “Макбет”. Трагедия. Перевод с английского. Издательство “Художественная литература”. Москва

Характеристики

Список файлов курсовой работы