Explore the vast range of titles available.

This article examines the temporality of interlinear translation through a case study of the rendering of Friedrich Hölderlin’s poetry into Persian. We argue that, in its adherence to the word order of the original, the interlinear crib prioritizes the temporality of the instant (kairos) over the temporality of the linear sequence (chronos). Kairos is made manifest in the literalist translations of Hölderlin by the modernist Iranian translator-poet Bijan Elahi (d. 2010). This inquiry advances our understanding of the role of syntax in constituting literary form and in shaping translation, and exposes the contingency of the translator’s decisions in every given literary juncture.

In his collection of poems, West-östlicher Divan (West-Eastern Divan), Goethe develops a novel concept of mobile authorship, which opposes the notion of a fixed, unified, and authoritative authorial voice. The poems in this collection thematize movement between East and West, and further envision this movement as a dialogue between poets, Persian and German, separated by time and space. While the untethering of words, or poetic voice, from the poet's physical body sets in motion the creative process that drives the collection, the ideal of poetic movement as an exchange among equals is not always realized: Goethe's authorial collaboration with Marianne von Willemer, including her authorship of certain poems of the Divan, remained unacknowledged and largely unknown until after his death. The poems of the Divan reflect on this tension between the poetic ideal of free movement as equal exchange and the threat of constraint or appropriation connected to the notion of mobile authorship.

While Walt Whitman’s thematic use of the Orient continues to receive critical attention based on his explicit foreign references, aside from observations of specific Persian signifiers in “A Persian Lesson,” his engagement with the poetry of Iran has remained especially speculative and therefore analogical, with studies like J. R. LeMaster and Sabahat Jahan’s Walt Whitman and the Persian Poets showing how his mystical relation to his own religious influences tends to resemble the Sufism of Rumi and Hafez. A new discovery emerging from an examination of his personal copy of William Alger’s The Poetry of the East along with his reading of Emerson’s essay “Persian Poetry,” however, reveal a rather subtle yet sustained attempt to directly imitate the foreign verse throughout much of Drum-Taps. That his reliance upon identifiable foreign models to depict what he deemed his nation’s most significant historical moment further coincides with a dramatic shift in style of writing calls for closer comparative analysis of how and why he came to mimic translations of this poetry. Such a reading suggests that compared with previous Orientalist studies, Whitman appears even more personally invested in Persian verse, using it to surrender the distinct Romantic individuality of his earlier poems for the greater spiritual preservation of his conflicted nation.

İslâmi edebiyatta seyr ü sülûkun alegorik tarzda anlatımı ilk olarak Arap Edebiyatı’nda ortaya çıkmış, Fars Edebiyatı yoluyla Türk Edebiyatı’na geçmiştir. İbn Sinâ Arapça kaleme aldığı Salamân u Absâl eseriyle bu türün ilk örneğini vermiş, bu türde eser veren diğer kalem erbabı onu takip etmişlerdir. Fars Edebiyatı’nda ise Suhreverdî’nin Munisü’l- ‘uşşâk’ı ve Attâr’ın Mantıku’t- tayr’ı ilk örneklerdir. 15.yy. Fars Edebiyatı’nın önemli şahsiyetlerinden Fettâhî-yi Nişâbûrî bu türün ilk temsilcilerinden olmasa da aşk, güzellik, gönül v.s. mazmunları kişileştirerek Hosn u Dil (Hüsn ü Dil/ Güzellik ve Gönül) adıyla alegorik tarzda mesnevi yazan ilk kişidir. Eserin konusu görünüşte, Mağrip hükümdarı Akl’ın oğlu Dil ile Maşrik hükümdarı Aşk’ın kızı Hosn arasındaki muaşaka olsa da esasında bir iç yolculuk ve arayış hikayesidir. Bu iç yolculukta kat edilen her bir mekan bedenin bir uzvu veya insana ait bir kavram olup bu mekanlar seyr ü sülûkta bir basamak olarak tasarlanmıştır. Hosn u Dil, Doğu ve Batı edebiyatlarında büyük bir şöhrete sahip olmuş, eserin tercümeleri, tanzirleri yapılmış; ondan esinlenerek eserler ortaya konmuştur. Özellikle 16.yy. Türk şairleri eserden derinden etkilenmiş, Lâmiî, Ahî, Vâlî, Muhyî, Sıdkî aynı isimle eseri manzum veya mensur olarak Türkçe’ye çevirmişlerdir. Ayrıca W. Price ve A. Browne taraflarından İngilizce, R. Dvorak tarafından da Almanca çevirileri yapılmıştır. 16.yy. Türk Edebiyatı’nın güçlü şairlerinden Fuzûlî’nin Sıhhat ve Maraz isimli eserinin de Hosn u Dil’in alegorik kurgusundan izler taşıdığı ileri sürülmüştür. Bu çalışmada Hosn u Dil’in, Sıhhat ve Maraz üzerindeki etkisi irdelenirken iki eserin örtüştüğü ve ayrıştığı noktaları ortaya koymak için eserler şahıs, mekan ve olay örgüsü yönünden karşılaştırılacaktır.

It is a mystery as to why more is not made of the influence of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s Faust on Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben’s body of work. After all, as a great philosophical poet, and tremendously concerned with language, Goethe’s work could not have failed to capture Agamben’s attention, especially given his early and sustained interest in poetry. Indeed, Agamben cites Goethe in at least 12 of his works including: The Use of Bodies, Creation and Anarchy, Pilate and Jesus, The Kingdom and the Glory, , The Signature of All Things, Stanzas, The End of the Poem, Potentialities, Karman, Adventure and Infancy and History. Crucially, the last five reference Goethe’s Faust directly. Thus, this paper seeks to remedy the relative lack of explicit engagement and demonstrate the strong, clear and persistent influence of Goethe’s Faust that underpins Agamben’s signature philological and philosophical approach to literarily explicating law’s foundational riddles. Agamben’s project – it must be recalled – quite accidentally began in part as a direct response to the legalistic justifications for the 1990–91 Gulf War. The present discussion seeks to demonstrate that Goethean influence ironically enough through a close examination of both Faust’s and Agamben’s attempts at partially translating a biblical phrase: ‘in the beginning was the word’.

Romanticists themselves may admit that their original canon was framed by a Paris editor and swiftly republished in Philadephia (and so, as Meredith McGill points out, was transatlantic from the start), or that expressive poetics actually derived from the Orientalist Sir William Jones's Sanskrit and Persian translations (and so, as Aamir Mufti points out, was Orientalized from the start), or that the historical coincidence of the emergence of Romanticism and the middle of the Middle Passage was no coincidence (and so, as Edouard Glissant and many others have pointed out, was invested in the emergence of the worst forms of modernity from the start), but those admissions have not made much difference in the way we tell the story of Romanticism and almost no difference in the way we conduct the business of the profession of literary studies.4 When we do speak of American Romanticism, we tend to mean Transcendentalism, and by Transcendentalism, we tend to mean Emerson and the writers in conversation with his heady mixture of German philosophy, British poetics, and American pragmatism:

A tension between cosmopolitanism and nationalism characterizes the career of the poet–philologist Friedrich Rückert. The German orientalist and mentor to Paul de Lagarde translated remarkable quantities of Sanskrit, Farsi, and Arabic verse, while earning popular acclaim for his Biedermeier celebrations of the German Heimat. The contradiction in these scholarly pursuits can be reconciled by examining the intersection of the local, national, and global in Rückert's conception of language. In the German Pietist tradition, national tongues embodied both the divine word of God and the particular historical circumstances of speakers. Through feats of translation Rückert expected to transform German into a universal language of spiritual reconciliation, thereby transcending Babel and distinguishing the German nation as a chosen people. This article investigates the process of cultural translation through which Rückert made “world poetry” intelligible to a German audience, arguing that cosmopolitanism underlay a German claim to cultural dominance in post-Napoleonic Europe.

\"1 It is time, I think, for us to question our methods and assumptions, which necessarily involves taking into account the historical distance between us and same-sex love in the eighteenth century.2 The effect of a historical interpretations is not only that few scholars pay attention to them. In the poems themselves, a plethora of imagery relating to Greek and Roman antiquity, but most particularly to Goethe's medieval Persian sources, clearly suggest sexuality.5 The primary impact that gave rise to Goethe's project was the Austrian diplomat and scholar Joseph von Hammer's two-volume German translation of the poems of the medieval Persian poet Hafiz, which happens to be one of the most openly homoerotic of any available translations from the Persian in Goethe's day (other translations of Persian poetry generally bowdlerized the texts without comment).6 For it remains one of the big secrets of Divan scholarship that \"das beherrschende Motiv\" in medieval Persian literature is love for boys-it does not treat love of women at all.7The misunderstanding arises partly because of a peculiar problem in Persian grammar: the lack of distinction between masculine and feminine for many words. Though both men and women participate in reproduction, Goethe reduces only women to their reproductive function; though man's genitals obviously have a biological function in reproduction, Goethe manages to interpret the male reproductive organs as somehow less \"real,\" more \"ideal\" than the female breast, or, for that matter, than the female genitalia. On the age of puberty in both antiquity and the German eighteenth century, see Herbert Möller, \"The Accelerated Development of Youth: Beard Growth as a Biological Marker,\" Comparative Studies in Society and History 29 (1987): 748-62.

The “Tale of the Pious Man and His Chaste Wife“ is both ancient and widespread in international tradition. So far, the oldest version of the tale that has been found is documented in the German Kaiserchronik, dating from the twelfth century. Consequently, previous scholarship has tended to argue for the tales Western origin. By drawing on a variety of Arabic and Persian sources, this essay proves to the contrary that the tale originated from Near Eastern literatures and probably goes back ultimately to a Jewish source.