Academic literature on the topic 'St. John Yacht Club'

In this article relevance of design and the background of yacht-clubs emergence and development are viewed. The historical description of the fi rst world and russian yacht-clubs in Moscow and St. Petersburg is provided. Planning features, yacht-clubs functional structures and their development are revealed. Also the history of the Samara yacht-club of XX of century and history of the Tolyatt i yacht-club - an ultramodern sport complex - is studied.

By the summer of 1929, Norman Rockwell was a full-fledged success. At age thirty-five, he had been creating covers for the Saturday Evening Post for thirteen years. A generation of American youth had grown up beguiled by his illustrations for Boys' Life, St. Nicholas, and the Boy Scouts' calendar. For more than a decade, Rockwell's artistry had helped sell Adams Black Jack gum, American Mutual insurance, Sun Maid raisins, and Coca-Cola. As this commercial success modulated into social success, Rockwell, whose father had risen to middle-class respectability in the offices of a New York City textile firm, found himself living the good life in the artists' colony of suburban New Rochelle. The drab apartments and boardinghouses of his youth and adolescence had been left behind. He joined the Larchmont Yacht Club, golfed in clothes from Brooks Brothers, and hosted elaborate parties worthy of Jay Gatsby.

The following has been adapted from talks given at St Alphege Church, Solihull; Our Lady and St Alphege Church, Bath; and St Joseph’s Church, Peasedown St John, and to the English Catholic History Association, Winchester Catholic History Society and Prinknash Abbey Book Club. Alphege is one of the outstanding saints from these lands, Bath’s greatest son, a gifted monastic leader, a radical bishop of Winchester and a self-sacrificing archbishop of Canterbury. He was to be revered throughout pre-Reformation England and beyond. I will make some general points about Alphege’s world, then set out what we know about the life and death of Alphege and finally suggest why he is important for us today.

In a previous article in History in Africa the rules and regulations of the Mombasa Club, dating from 1903 or earlier, were laid out (Frankl 2001). Since that article was written, the original Mombasa Club Rules, a booklet of sixteen pages printed in Mombasa and dated 1899, has come to light in the Public Record Office at Kew. One of the three signatories to that document was Rex Boustead, Proprietor. Edward Rodwell (1988:20) asked “Who was Rex Boustead?” This paper attempts to answer that question.Altogether there were six Boustead children, of whom Rex was the last born. The Bousteads, originally from Cumrenton in Cumberland, were connected with Ceylon from the early nineteenth century. Rex's paternal grandfather, John Boustead St., was paymaster of the Ceylon Rifles Regiment for more than half a century. Rex's father, John Boustead Jr. (1822-1904)—his occupation is given as “Army Agent” in Rex's birth certificate—was an only son, the second of five children. He married Augusta Phoebe Twentyman (1824-1911) at St Mary's Walthamstow in 1853; between 1854 and 1863 she gave birth to six children. John Boustead Jr. had several estates in Ceylon, and it is clear from his will that he was a moderately wealthy man, for he left £6662, a not inconsiderable sum in 1904.All the children of John Boustead junior were born in England, all married, and all died in England. Of the boys, all except Rex went to Harrow School. John Melvill (known as “Jack”), the oldest brother (who had east African connections), was born on 31 March 1854, at Walthamstow.

Daphne du Maurier’s 1938 novel Rebecca provides rich opportunities for the study of imaginary narrative spaces and the language associated with such spaces. The present study explores the linguistics of the imaginary narrative spaces in Rebecca, drawing upon three lines of linguistic research consistent with a Cognitive Linguistic approach: (i) an interest in understanding and appreciating ordinary readers’ actual responses (rather than merely relying upon “expert” readers’ responses), (ii) the construction of worlds or “spaces”, and (iii) the application of ideas from Cognitive Grammar. The study reveals a surprisingly intricate interplay of linguistic devices used in the construction of imaginary narrative spaces and the maintenance of such spaces in extended discourse. References Armitt, L. (2000). Contemporary women’s fiction and the fantastic. New York: St. Martin’s Press. Beauman, S. (2003). Afterword. In Daphne du Maurier’s Rebecca (pp. 429-441). London: Virago Press. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finnegan, E. (Eds.) (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited. Birch, D. (2007). Addict of fantasy. The Times Literary Supplement, 5447-5448, 17-18. Dancygier, B. (2012). The language of stories: A cognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dancygier, B. (2017a). Introduction. In B. Dancygier (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 1-10). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dancygier, B. (2017b). Cognitive Linguistics and the study of textual meaning. In B. Dancygier (Ed.) The Cambridge handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 607-622). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Du Maurier, D. (2012). Rebecca. London: Virago Press. Emmott, C. (1997). Narrative comprehension: A discourse perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Fauconnier, G. (1985). Mental spaces: Aspects of meaning construction in natural language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Forster, M. (1993). Daphne Du Maurier. London: Chatto & Windus. Gavins, J. (2007). Text world theory: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Hadiyanto, H. (2010). The Freudian psychological phenomena and complexity in Daphne Du Maurier’s “Rebecca” (A psychological study of literature). LITE: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Budaya 6(1), 14-25. Available at: https://publikasi.dinus.ac.id/index.php/lite/article/ view/1348/1014. Harrison, C., Nuttall, L., Stockwell, P., & Yuan, W. (Eds.) (2014). Cognitive grammar in literature. Amsterdam & New York: John Benjamins. Harrison, C., & Stockwell, P. (2014). Cognitive poetics. In J. Littlemore and J. R. Taylor (Eds.), The Bloomsbury companion to cognitive linguistics (pp. 218-233). London: Bloomsbury. Horner, A., & Zlosnik, S. (1998). Writing, identity, and the Gothic imagination. London: Macmillian. Huddleston, R. (2002). The verb. In R. Huddleston & G. K. Pullum (Eds.), The Cambridge grammar of the English language (pp. 71-212). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kelly, R. (1987). Daphne du Maurier. Boston: Twayne Publishers. Lakoff, G., & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press. Langacker, R. W. (1991). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Vol. II: Descriptive application. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Leech, G. N. (1969). A linguistic guide to English poetry. London: Longman Group Limited. Margawati, P. (2010). A Freudian psychological issue of women characters in Daphne Du Maurier’s novel Rebecca. LANGUAGE CIRCLE: Journal of Language and Literature IV(2), 121-126. Available at: https://journal.unnes.ac.id/nju/index.php/LC/article/viewFile/900/839 Naszkowska, K. (2012). Living mirror: The representation of doubling identities in the British and Polish women’s literature (1846–1938). Doctoral dissertation, The University of Edinburgh. Palmer, F. R. (1974). The English verb. London: Longman Group Limited. Stockwell, P. (2002). Cognitive poetics: An introduction. London & New York: Routledge. Turner, M. (1996). The literary mind. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press. Turner, M. (2015). Blending in language and communication. In E. Dąbrowska & D. Divjak (Eds.), Handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 211-232). Berlin & Boston: de Gruyter Mouton. Werth, P. (1999). Text worlds: Representing conceptual space in discourse (M. Short, Ed.). Harlow, UK: Longman. Wilde, O. (1996). The picture of Dorian Gray. In The complete Oscar Wilde: The complete stories, plays and poems of Oscar Wilde (pp. 11-161). New York: Quality Paperback Book Club. Winifrith, T. J. (1979). Daphne du Maurier. In J. Vinson (Ed.), Novelists and prose writers (Great writers of the English language) (pp. 354-357). New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Статтю присвячено вивченню впливу чинника статі мовного посередника на застосовувані ним пріоритетні стратегії під час створення цільового тексту. Емпіричним матеріалом дослідження слугували тексти англомовної художньої прози та їхні українські переклади у виконанні чоловіків та жінок. Застосований у праці психолінгвістичний підхід до аналізу двомовного корпусу дав змогу встановити деякі ‘S-універсалії’ (Chesterman, 2011) вибору різностатевими посередниками тих чи тих мовних структур, що дає підстави погодитися з іншими дослідниками в питанні існування значущих відмінностей у гендерних пріоритетах структурування перекладного дискурсу. Серед найпомітніших “жіночих” універсалій в перекладі українською – метакогнітивна гнучкість, що кваліфікуємо як синтетичний когнітивний стиль. Крім того, простежено застосування перекладачками стратегії статусної нейтралізації в діалозі між персонажами під час відтворення статусно-маркованих і дифузних ситуацій; вищі показники лексичного розмаїття, експліцитації й номіналізації, ніж у цільових версіях перекладачів чоловічої статі. Останні виявляють більшу обережність у перекладі, вдаючись до ‘семантичного методу’ (Newmark, 1988) перекладу, виявляючи відтак аналітичний когнітивний стиль поведінки, а також демонструючи стратегію негативної ввічливості під час відтворення діалогів персонажів у статусно-маркованих і статусно-дифузних комунікативних ситуаціях. Література References Бендас Т. В. Гендерная психология. – СПб.: Питер, 2007.Bendas, T. (2007). Gendernaya Psikhologiya [Gender Psychology]. St. Petersburg: Piter. Карасик В. И. Социальный статус человека в лингвистическом аспекте // “Я”, “Субъект”,“Индивид” в парадигмах современного языкознания. – М. : ИЯ РАН, 1992. – С. 47–74.Karasik, V. I. (1992). Sotsialnyi status cheloveka v lingvisticheskom aspekte [Human socialstatus in linguistic aspect] ‘Ya’, ‘Subjekt’, ‘Individ’ v Paradigmakh SovremennogoYazykoznania, 47–74. Кутузов А. Переводы мужские и женские: есть ли разница? (на материале Корпусанесовершенных переводов)/А. Кутузов // Проблемы перевода, лингвистики илитературы. – 2012. – Вып. 15, № 1. – С. 97-104.Kutuzov, A. (2012). Perevody muzhskiye i zhenskiye: yest li raznitsa? [Male and femaletranslations: Any difference?]. Problemy Perevoda, Lingvistiki i Literatury, 15(1), 97-104. Сорокин Ю. А. Переводоведение: статус переводчика и психогерменевтическиепроцедуры. – М. : МТДК «Гнозис», 2003. – 160 с.Sorokin, Yu. A. (2003). Perevodovedeniye: Status Perevodchika i PsikhogermenevticheskiyeProcedury [Translation Studies: Translator’s Status and Psychohermeneutic Procedures].Moscow: Gnozis.5. Холод А. М. Речевые картины мира мужчин и женщин. – Днепропетровск : Пороги, 1997.– 229 с. Kholod, A. M. (1997). Rechevye kartiny mira muzhchin i zhenshchyn [Speech world view ofmen and women]. Dnepropetrovsk: Porogi. Холодная М. А. Когнитивные стили: О природе индивидуального ума. – М. : ПЕР СЭ,2002. – 304 с.Kholodnaya М. А. (2002). Kognitivnye Stili: O Prirode Individualnogo Uma [Cognitive Styles:On the Nature of Individual Mind]. Мoscow: PERSE. Arabski, J. (2013). Psycholinguistic and neurobiological differences between males andfemales. Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of the ISAPL (423). Baker, M. (1999). The role of corpora in investigating the linguistic behaviour of translators.International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 4(2), 281–298. Berman, A. (1990). La retraduction comme espace de traduction. Palimpsestes, 4, 1–7. Blum-Kulka, S. (1986). Shifts of cohesion and coherence in translation. In: Interlingual andIntercultural Communication (pp. 17–35). J. House, S. Blum-Kulka, (Eds). Tübingen: Narr. Brown, P., Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. Chesterman, A. (2000). A causal model for Translation Studies. In: Intercultural Faultlines:Research Models in Translation Studies I: Textual and Cognitive Aspects (pp. 15–27).M. Olohan, (Ed). Manchester: St. Jerome. Denturck, K. (2012). Explicitation vs. implicitation: a bidirectional corpus-based analysis ofcausal connectives in french and dutch translations. Across Languages and Cultures, 13(2),211–227. Desmidt, I. (2009). (Re)translation revisited. Meta: Translators’ Journal, 54(4), 669–683. Leonardi, V. (2007). Gender and Ideology in Translation. Do Women and Men TranslateDifferently? A Contrastive Analysis from Italian into English. Bern: Peter Lang AG. Laviosa, S. (2002). Corpus-based Translation Studies. Theory, Finding, Applications.Amsterdam; Atlanta: Rodopi. Newmark, P. (1988). Approaches to Translation. London: Prentice Hall. Olohan, M. (2002). Leave it out! Using a comparable corpus to investigate aspects ofexplicitation in translation. Cadernos de Tradução, 9, 153–169. Vinay, J. & Darbelnet, J. (1995). Comparative Stylistics of French and English. Translated byJ. C. Sager and M. J. Hamel. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Zasiekin, S. (2016). Understanding translation universals. Babel: International Journal ofTranslation, 62(1), 122–134. Sources Bradbury, R. The Smile. Retrieved from: http://raybradbury.ru/library/ story/52/9/1/ Bradbury, R. (1983). Fahrenheit. Short Stories. Moscow: Raduga Publishers, 1983. – 382 p. Бредбері Р. Усмішка / пер. з англ. Л. Коломієць // Всесвітня література в середніхнавчальних закладах України. К.: Педагогічна преса, 1999. № 3 (227). С. 11–12.Bradbury, R. (1999). Ousmishka [The Smile] / translated by L. Kolomiyets. VsesvitniaLiteratura v Serednikh Navchalnykh Zakladakh Ukrainy, 3(227), 11–12. Бредбері Р. Усмішка / пер. з англ. А. Веприняка // Зарубіжна література. 6 клас.Посібник-хрестоматія. Тернопіль: Навчальна книга – Богдан, 1999а. С. 296–300.Bradbury, R. (1999). Ousmishka [The Smile] / translated by Yaroslav Vepryniak. ZarubizhnaLiteratura. 6th Form, 296–300. Бредбері Р. Усмішка / пер. з англ. А. Євси // Світова література. 6 клас. Хрестоматія /Упорядник Гарбуз В. М. ; наук. ред. Таранік-Ткачук К. В. – Харків : ФОП Співак В. Л.,2011. – С. 374–381.Bradbury, R. (2011). Ousmishka [The Smile] / translated by Andrii Ievsa. Svitova Literatura.6th Form. Textbook, 374–381. Браун Д. Код да Вінчі. – Х.: Клуб сімейного дозвілля, 2006.Brown, D. (2006). Kod da Vinchi [The Da Vinci Code] / translated by A. Kamianets’.Kharkiv: Club Simeinoho Dozvillia. Браун Д. Код да Вінчі. // Всесвіт. – 2006. – № 1–4, 11–12. – К. : Всесвіт.Brown, D. (2006). Kod da Vinchi [The Da Vinci Code] / translated by V. Shovkun. Vsesvit,1–4, 11–12. КТУМ: Корпус текстів української мови / [Електронний ресурс]. Режим доступу:http://www.mova.info/corpus.aspx?l1=209Korpus Tekstiv Ukrains’koyi Movy [The Corpus of the Ukrainian Language] / [ElectronicResource]. Retrieved from: http://www.mova.info/corpus.aspx?l1=209 Slovnyk Ukrainskoyi Movy [Dictionary of the Ukrainian Language] / I. K. Bilodid, ed. –Vol. 5. Kyiv: Naukova Dumka. – P. 36, 100. Tolkien J. R. R. (1954). The Fellowship of the Ring. L.: George Allen & Unwin. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Володар Перснів: Хранителі Персня / пер. з англ. А. Немірової. Харків:Фоліо, 2003. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Старий ліс: Уривок з епопеї «Володар Перснів» / пер. з англ.А. Веселовського // Всесвіт. 2006. №№ 11–12, 124–135. Tolkien, J. R. R. (1981). The Hobbit, or, There and Back Again. L. : Unwin. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Гобіт, або Туди і Звідти / пер. з англ. О. О’Лір. – Львів: Астролябія,2012.Tolkien, J. R. R. (2012). Hobit abo Tudy i Zvidty [The Hobbit, or There and Back] / translated byОlena О’Lear. Lviv: Astroliabia. Толкін Дж. Р. Р. Гобіт, або Мандрівка за Імлисті гори / пер. з англ. О. Мокровольського.– К. : Веселка, 1985.Tolkien, J. R. R. (1985). Hobit abo Mandrivka za Imlysti Hory [The Hobbit, or a Trip Beyond theMisty Mountains] / translated by Оlexandr Mokrovols’kyi. Кyiv: Veselka.6. Brown, D. (2003). The Da Vinci Code. L. : Corgi Books.

The study of indirect translations (IT) into Ukrainian, viewed from a psycholinguistic perspective, will contribute to a better understanding of Soviet national policies and the post-Soviet linguistic and cultural condition. The paper pioneers a discussion of the strategies and types of IT via Russian in the domains of literature and religion. In many cases the corresponding Russian translation, which serves as a source text for the Ukrainian one, cannot be established with confidence, and the “sticking-out ears” of Russian mediation may only be monitored at the level of sentence structure, when Russian wording underlies the Ukrainian text and distorts its natural fluency. The discussion substantiates the strategies and singles out the types of IT, in particular, (1) Soviet lower-quality retranslations of the recent, and mostly high-quality, translations of literary classics, which deliberately imitated lexical, grammatical, and stylistic patterns of the Russian language (became massive in scope in the mid1930s); (2) the translation-from-crib type, or translations via the Russian interlinear version, which have been especially common in poetry after WWII, from the languages of the USSR nationalities and the socialist camp countries; (3) overt relayed translations, based on the published and intended for the audience Russian translations that can be clearly defined as the source texts for the IT into Ukrainian; this phenomenon may be best illustrated with Patriarch Filaret Version of the Holy Scripture, translated from the Russian Synodal Bible (the translation started in the early 1970s); and, finally, (4) later Soviet (from the mid1950s) and post-Soviet (during Independence period) hidden relayed translations of literary works, which have been declared as direct ones but in fact appeared in print shortly after the publication of the respective works in Russian translation and mirrored Russian lexical and stylistic patterns. References Белецкий, А. Переводная литература на Украине // Красное слово. 1929. № 2. С. 87-96. Цит за вид.: Кальниченко О. А., Полякова Ю. Ю. Українська перекладознавча думка 1920-х – початку 1930-х років: Хрестоматія вибраних праць з перекладознавства до курсу «Історія перекладу» / Укладачі Леонід Чернований і Вячеслав Карабан. Вінниця: Нова Книга, 2011. С. 376-391. Бурґгардт, Осв. Большевицька спадщина // Вістник. 1939. № 1, Кн. 2. С. 94-99. Dollerup, C. (2014). Relay in Translation. Cross-linguistic Interaction: Translation, Contrastive and Cognitive Studies. Liber Amicorum in Honour of Prof. Bistra Alexieva published on the occasion of her eightieth birthday, Diana Yankova, (Ed.). (pp. 21-32). St. Kliminent Ohridski University Press. Retrieved from https://cms13659.hstatic.dk/upload_dir/docs/Publications/232-Relay-in-translation-(1).pdf Dong, Xi (2012). A Probe into Translation Strategies from Relevance Perspective—Direct Translation and Indirect Translation. Canadian Social Science, 8(6), 39-44. Retrieved from http://www.cscanada.org/index.php/css/article/viewFile/j.css.1923669720120806.9252/3281 Дзера, О.. Історія українських перекладів Святого Письма // Іноземна філологія. 2014. Вип. 127, Ч. 2. С. 214–222. Філарет, Патріарх Київський та всієї Руси-України, Василь Шкляр, Микола Вересень, В’ячеслав Кириленко. Розмова В’ячеслава Кириленка із Патріархом Київським та всієї Руси-України Філаретом. Віра. У кн.: Три розмови про Україну. Упорядник та радактор В. Кириленко. Х.: Книжковий Клуб «Клуб Сімейного Дозвілля», 2018. С. 9-92. Flynn, P. (2013). Author and Translator. In Yves Gambier, Luc van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies, 4, (pp. 12-19). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Gutt, E.-A. (1990). A theoretical account of translation – without a translation theory. Retrieved from http://cogprints.org/2597/1/THEORACC.htm Коломієць Л. В. Український художній переклад та перекладачі 1920-30-х років: матеріали до курсу «Історія перекладу». Вінниця: «Нова книга», 2015. Іларіон, митр. Біблія – найперше джерело для вивчення своєї літературної мови / Митр. Іларіон // Віра і культура. 1958. Ч. 6 (66). С. 13–17. Іларіон, митр. Біблія, або Книги Святого Письма Старого и Нового Заповіту. Із мови давньоєврейської й грецької на українську дослівно наново перекладена. United Bible Societies, 1962. Jinyu L. (2012). Habitus of Translators as Socialized Individuals: Bourdieu’s Account. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(6), 1168-1173. Leighton, L. (1991). Two Worlds, One Art. Literary Translation in Russia and America. DeKalb, Ill.: Northwestern Illinois UP. Лукаш М. Прогресивна західноєвропейська література в перекладах на українську мову // Протей [редкол. О. Кальниченко (голова) та ін.]. Вип. 2. X.: Вид-во НУА, 2009. С. 560–605. Майфет, Г. [Рецензія] // Червоний шлях. 1930. № 2. С. 252-258. Рец. на кн.: Боккаччо Дж. Декамерон / пер. Л. Пахаревського та П. Майорського; ред. С. Родзевича та П. Мохора; вступ. ст. В. Державіна. [Харків]; ДВУ, 1929. Ч. 1. XXXI, 408 с.; Ч. 2. Цит за вид.: Кальниченко О. А., Полякова Ю. Ю. Українська перекладознавча думка 1920-х – початку 1930-х років: Хрестоматія вибраних праць з перекладознавства до курсу «Історія перекладу» / Укладачі Леонід Чернований і Вячеслав Карабан. Вінниця: Нова Книга, 2011. С. 344-356. Munday, J. (2010). Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and Applications. 2nd Ed. London & New York: Routledge. Pauly, M. D. (2014). Breaking the Tongue: Language, Education, and Power in Soviet Ukraine. Toronto Buffalo London: University of Toronto Press. Pieta, H. & Rosa, A. A. (2013). Panel 7: Indirect translation: exploratory panel on the state-of-the-art and future research avenues. 7th EST Congress – Germersheim, 29 August – 1 September 2013. Retrieved from http://www.fb06.uni-mainz.de/est/51.php Плющ, Б. O. Прямий та неопрямий переклад української художньої прози англійською, німецькою, іспанською та російською мовами. Дис. …канд. філол. наук., Київ: КНУ імені Тараса Шевченка, 2016. Ringmar, M. (2012). Relay translation. In Yves Gambier, Luc van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies, 4 (pp. 141-144). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Simeoni, D. (1998). The pivotal status of the translator’s habitus. Target, 10(1), 1-39. Солодовнікова, М. І. Відтворення стилістичних особливостей роману Марка Твена «Пригоди Тома Сойера» в українських перекладах: квантитативний аспект // Перспективи розвитку філологічних наук: Матеріали ІІІ Міжнародної науково-практичної конференції (Хмельницький, 24-25 березня). Херсон: вид-во «Гельветика», 2017. С. 99-103. Sommer, D, ed. (2006). Cultural Agency in the Americas. [Synopsis]. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Špirk, J. (2014). Censorship, Indirect Translations and Non-translation: The (Fateful) Adventures of Czech Literature in 20th-century Portugal. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Venuti, L. (2001). Strategies of Translation. In M. Baker (ed.). Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, (pp. 240-244). London & New York: Routledge. References (translated and transliterated) Beletskii, A. (1929). Perevodnaia literatura na Ukraine [Translated literature in Ukraine]. Krasnoe Slovo [Red Word], 2, 87-96. Reprint in: Kalnychenko, O. A. and Poliakova, Yu. (2011). In Leonid Chernovatyi and Viacheslav Karaban (Eds.). Ukraiins’ka perekladoznavcha dumka 1920-kh – pochatku 1930-kh rokiv: Khrestomatiia vybranykh prats z perekladosnavstva do kursu “Istoriia perekladu” [Ukrainian translation studies of the 1920s – early 1930s: A textbook of selected works in translation studies for a course on the “History of Translation”]. (pp. 376-391). Vinnytsia: Nova Knyha, Burghardt, O. (1939). Bolshevytska spadschyna [The Bolsheviks’ heritage]. Vistnyk [The Herald], Vol. 1, Book 2, 94-99. Dollerup, C. (2014). Relay in Translation. Cross-linguistic Interaction: Translation, Contrastive and Cognitive Studies. Liber Amicorum in Honour of Prof. Bistra Alexieva published on the occasion of her eightieth birthday, Diana Yankova, (Ed.). (pp. 21-32). St. Kliminent Ohridski University Press. Retrieved from https://cms13659.hstatic.dk/upload_dir/docs/Publications/232-Relay-in-translation-(1).pdf Dong, Xi (2012). A Probe into Translation Strategies from Relevance Perspective—Direct Translation and Indirect Translation. Canadian Social Science, 8(6), 39-44. Retrieved from http://www.cscanada.org/index.php/css/article/viewFile/j.css.1923669720120806.9252/3281 Dzera, O. (2014). Istoriia ukraiinskykh perekladiv Sviatoho Pysma [History of Ukrainian translations of the Holy Scripture]. Inozemna Filologiia, 127, Part 2, 214-222. Filaret, Patriarch of Kyiv and all Rus-Ukraine et al. (2018). Rozmova Viacheslava Kyrylenka iz Patriarkhom Kyivskym ta vsiiei Rusy-Ukrainy Filaretom. Vira [A Conversation of Viacheslav Kyrylenko with Patriarch of Kyiv and all Rus-Ukraine Filaret. Faith]. In: Try rozmovy pro Ukrainu [Three Conversations about Ukraine], compiled and edited by V. Kyrylenko. Kharkiv: Family Leisure Club, 9-92. Flynn, P. (2013). Author and Translator. In Yves Gambier, Luc van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies, 4, (pp. 12-19). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Gutt, E.-A. (1990). A theoretical account of translation – without a translation theory. Retrieved from http://cogprints.org/2597/1/THEORACC.htm Kolomiyets, L. (2015). Ukraiinskyi khudozhniy pereklad ta perekladachi 1920-30-kh rokiv: Materialy do kursu “Istoriia perekladu” [Ukrainian Literary Translation and Translators in the 1920s-30s: “History of translation” course materials]. Vinnytsia: Nova Knyha. Ilarion, Metropolitan (1958). Bibliia – naipershe dzherelo dlia vyvchennia svoiei literaturnoi movy [The Bible is the first source for studying our literary language]. Vira i kultura [Faith and Culture], No. 6 (66), 13–17. Ilarion, Metropolitan. 1962. Bibliia abo Knyhy Sviatoho Pusma Staroho i Novoho Zapovitu. Iz movy davnioievreiskoi i hretskoi na ukrainsku doslivno nanovo perekladena. Commissioned by United Bible Societies. Jinyu L. (2012). Habitus of Translators as Socialized Individuals: Bourdieu’s Account. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(6), 1168-1173. Leighton, L. (1991). Two Worlds, One Art. Literary Translation in Russia and America. DeKalb, Ill.: Northwestern Illinois UP. Lukash, M. (2009). Prohresyvna zakhidnoievropeiska literatura v perekladakh na ukraiinsku movu [Progressive West European Literature in Ukrainian]. Protei. Vol. 2. Edited by O. Kalnychenko. Kharkiv: Vydavnytstvo NUA, 560-605. Maifet, H. (1930). [Review]. Chervonyi Shliakh [Red Path], 2, 252-258. Review of the book: Boccaccio G. Decameron. Tr. by L. Pakharevskyi and P. Maiorskyi; S. Rodzevych and P. Mokhor (Eds.).; introduction by V. Derzhavyn. Kharkiv: DVU, 1929. Part 1. XXXI; Part 2. Reprint in: Kalnychenko, O. and Poliakova, Yu. (2011). In Leonid Chernovatyi and Viacheslav Karaban (Eds). Ukraiins’ka perekladoznavcha dumka 1920-kh – pochatku 1930-kh rokiv: Khrestomatiia vybranykh prats z perekladosnavstva do kursu “Istoriia perekladu” [Ukrainian translation studies of the 1920s – early 1930s: A textbook of selected works in translation studies for a course on the “History of Translation”]. (pp. 344-356). Vinnytsia: Nova Knyha. Munday, J. (2010). Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and applications. 2nd Ed. London & New York: Routledge. Pauly, M. D. (2014). Breaking the Tongue: Language, Education, and Power in Soviet Ukraine. Toronto Buffalo London: University of Toronto Press. Pieta, H. & Rosa, A. A. (2013). Panel 7: Indirect translation: exploratory panel on the state-of-the-art and future research avenues. 7th EST Congress – Germersheim, 29 August – 1 September 2013. Retrieved from http://www.fb06.uni-mainz.de/est/51.php Pliushch, B. (2016). Direct and Indirect Translations of Ukrainian Literary Prose into English, German, Spanish and Russian. PhD thesis. Manuscript copyright. Kyiv: Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Ringmar, M. (2012). Relay translation. In Yves Gambier, Luc van Doorslaer (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies, 4 (pp. 141-144). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Simeoni, D. (1998). The pivotal status of the translator’s habitus. Target, 10(1), 1-39. Solodovnikova. M. I. (2017) Vidtvorennia stylistychnykh osoblyvostei romanu Marka Tvena “Pryhody Toma Soiera” v ukrainskykh perekladakh: kvantytatyvnyi aspekt. Perspektyvy rozvytku filolohichnykh nauk: Book of abstracts of III International Scientific Conference (Khmelnytskyi, 24-25 March). Kherson: Helvetyka Publishing House. (99-103). Sommer, D., Ed. (2006). Cultural Agency in the Americas. [Synopsis]. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Špirk, J. (2014). Censorship, Indirect Translations and Non-translation: The (Fateful) Adventures of Czech Literature in 20th-century Portugal. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. Venuti, L. (2001). Strategies of Translation. In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, (pp. 240-244). M. Baker (ed.). London & New York: Routledge.

This paper explores voyage and migration in tropical Africa through Lauren St John’s Rainbow’s End, a memoir contributing to debates of white African identity that now include more contemporary renditions of identity in female self-reflective accounts differing markedly from masculine perspectives. In her coming-of-age memoir, St John chronicles her experiences of a privileged 1970s white Rhodesian society at war, and her gradual awareness of racial inequalities that transformed her into a white Zimbabwean. For her parents, voyage and migration take different paths. Her father migrated (with his family) to fight for a white Rhodesia, driven by masculine concerns. In contrast, St John’s mother was an avid traveller who journeyed from the mundane world of tropical farm life to exotic locations in Europe and beyond, escaping both her deteriorating marriage and the dull world of the club, small town gossip and a narrow minded semi-colonial rural environment. St John’s account of white settler identity and racial difference gives us insights into a day in the African tropics, and furthermore speaks to those in other settler countries such as Australia who are debating colonial history and identity, and who are often uncomfortable with aspects of their own settler past.

This chapter focuses on the founder of the Athenæum, John Wilson Croker. Croker created a new kind of club, which had no political affiliation, which chose its members on the basis of achievements rather than birth, and which was to benefit from the rapid rise of an expanding middle class. Croker knew about clubs, and he also knew literary, scientific, and artistic London better than most. Many of the Athenæum's 'original' members, as those elected in the first year or so were called, moved in the same political and intellectual circles, in the House of Commons and the Admiralty, at John Murray's publishing house and the Royal Institution, among the book shops of St James's, at the learned societies in Somerset House off the Strand, at soirées in private houses, or at the Union Club in Waterloo Place. The chapter visits these centres of activity in the years after Wellington's victory at Waterloo in 1815, a victory that established Great Britain as the leading European power which ruled over the largest empire the world had ever known. In this way, one can see what Croker meant when he referred to 'these times' as being propitious for the formation of a new London club.