Czech readers did not discover ”the Wizard” until 1962 when it was translated by Jakub Markovič with the title ”Čaroděj ze země Oz”. Although this translation has been re-worked several times after him, it should be said that Markovič´s translation is very skilful and it actually has not yet been surpassed.

Martina Vosková published her most recent translation in 1995 and it must be said that she followed Markovič´s text very closely. In fact, all she really did was modernize the language of the 1960s and provide several new solutions for problematic passages, which I shall present for analysis further on.

It should be mentioned that many English adaptations or retellings exist which are also widely translated into various languages. One of them, recently published in the Czech Republic in 1997, is a short version by Lucy Kincaid (translated by Jarmila Jurečková). This version is intended for young children from 4 – 8 years of age. Many deletions, simplifications and explanations are justifiable when catering for this age group.

Moreover, Vosková uses too many diminutives (chaloupka, strýček, pejsek, sklípek, chvilička,…) which one can hardly find in the original. Markovič is more careful with them and Príbusová uses them only where they correspond with the original.

Now, let me look at specific problems concerning ”The Wonderful Wizard of Oz”. I have come across several local American words connected with nature. Starting with Kansas prairies on the first page, I have discovered that Markovič, Vosková and Príbusová have identical solutions - kansaská prérie/préria. They transfer the cultural context wisely and in doing so broaden children's minds. After all, the Czech word prérie is usually taught in lower geography classes and it is easy to explain even to younger children. I would like to complete the list with the solutions of Hana Vrbová: kansaská step, and Jurečková pláň v Kansasu. I understand the reasons and purpose of Jurečková who translated an adaptation for young kindergarten children. Of all the solutions pláň is easiest to comprehend for it may occur in a Czech cultural context. On the other hand, I think that Vrbová had hardly any reason for writing step and it is quite obvious that she copied the Russian translation.

Cyclone is the title of the first chapter and the Czech solutions are different in every translation. Markovič follows the procedure of functional equivalent and uses vichřice. In the Slovak text we also find víchor. However Vosková chooses tornádo which is not really transference (cyklón) but which still preserves a cultural flavour. The two other translators suggest větrná smršť (Jurečková´s componential analysis) and uragán (Vrbová). In my opinion, the original expression cyclone is technical and even American children are not generally familiar with its correct semantic meaning. This seems to be the author’s purpose; to make the tale wise and a little demanding. Therefore I do not see any reason for simplification in this place and agree with the Vosková solution because tornádo is closest to the nature of an American cyclone, although Vrbová did not do any harm to the text when choosing uragán, which is also a typical American phenomenon.

As we can see the solutions of Markovič and Vosková are compatible within the Czech text, although they both completely omit the existence of whirlwinds. It is curious that none of the translators uses větrný vír which I think relates to tornádo as well as větrný sklep/sklípek. When I saw protiuragánový sklep I could not help myself imagining protiatomový kryt. I think it is not just me who feels these connotations and believes that there is a graphic and partially semantic similarity.

Food is inevitably the most sensitive and important expression of any national culture and gastronomic terms are subject to the widest variety of translation procedures. Fortunately, food is not often mentioned in Baum´s story. There are just a few expressions I am going to discuss. The English word, porridge is almost universally translated into Czech as kaše without any addition or annotation. This universal rule is followed in all the compared translations. According to Webster’s Encyclopaedic Unabridged Dictionary of the English Language, porridge is ”a food made of oatmeal, or some other meal or cereal, boiled to a thick consistency in water or milk”. This explanation fits the Czech term kaše nicely (and it is not necessary to identify what kind it is) but it does not say anything about the fact that it is very culture-bound and almost a national breakfast food. I am not saying it should be replaced with chléb s máslem, although it is one of the possible solutions using componential analysis. On the other hand poridž as a proper name of an American food is not one most Czech people are familiar with. We must bear in mind that the book will be read in various households with varying levels of education. If one wanted to preserve the original word, it would be appropriate to include an explanatory note. Pure transference would not be practical with this type of text.

Popcorn is a food which has increased in popularity in the Czech Republic during the last 10 years and hence it no longer causes any major problems. At present, translators would probably not hesitate to use popcorn in its English form – a typical transference procedure. However, when most of the ”Oz” translations came into being, this kind of dainty was not known to Czech children. That is the reason why Markovič replaced it with zmrzlina, which works from a functional point of view and it is perfectly implemented and connected in the text. Vosková copied this solution. As for Príbusová, she chooses pukance which is the Slovak equivalent of English popcorn.

The choices outlined above are understandable and considering their cultural aspect they are reasonable. What I could not understand are the solutions for translating candy. Bonbóny or sladkosti seem appropriate to me with regard to function, communication and semantic purpose. Nevertheless, Markovič and subsequently Vosková use the word brambory, while Príbusová has cukríky. To illustrate this situation I am presenting the whole sentence: ”Green candy and green pop corn were offered for sale, ...”

Markovič, Vosková: ”Prodávaly se tam zelené brambory a zelená zmrzlina, ...”

One more cultural word I would like to present from the field of food is the term brown sugar in the following simile ”melting away like brown sugar”. In agreement with Markovič, Martina Vosková writes ”... se rozpouští jako kostka cukru”. In the Slovak translation Príbusová chooses karamel. In this particular simile no strict rule exists in the Czech language; it is not a bound collocation. Czech people use the verb rozpouštět connected to various nouns to express this situation. For example kostka cukru, karamel, led are all possible and natural in this context.

Corn is a widely grown crop in America and accounts for a high percentage of its agricultural production. This information is lost if a translator decides to translate cornfield as obilné pole (Markovič, Vosková). At first, I suspected that they did not know the difference between this expression in British and American English. But this would be a very foolish mistake. In the Czech text it is not of a great importance to specify what kind of field it is but, as I mentioned above, the readership is deprived of some interesting information. Another possibility is to use cultural equivalent and to replace corn with some other kind of plant usually grown in this country, probably pšenice. For instance, Vrbová uses pšeničný lán in her translation. Príbusová’s solution is the most accurate of all of the compared translations. She chooses kukuričné pole and, honestly, her decision does not in any way devalue the book with regard to incomprehensibility. On the contrary, children must appreciate the unusual nature of this landscape image.

Clothes may be explained for the readers if the generic noun or classifier is added (the procedure of componential analysis). This is the case, although not completely, with sunbonnet, which must be explained by adding čepeček proti slunci (Markovič), and it is has minor modifications in all translated texts. The Czech paradigm simply does not offer any one-word expression of the English one. Therefore, it is partially a problem of language and partially a translation problem.

Baum describes Dorothy's dress: ”It was gingham, with checks of white and blue; ...”. It must be considered that the book is over a hundred years old and some kinds of fabric are not used or known any longer. Gingham is a difficult term, it is a cotton, striped or checked, fabric and has a Czech equivalent (gingham) but it is clear that it does not fit into children's literature. Markovič and Vosková have kretonové šaty, Príbusová uses bavlněné šaty. Kreton is a good equivalent because it is made of cotton as well as gingham. On the other hand, kreton is not fashionable these days and I would not recommend it for any new translations of this passage. It depends on whether a translator intends to preserve the image of a 19-century little girl and her clothing or to modernize it.

In considering culture, currency must not be forgotten. In the tale, there is only one situation connected to money. The text says ”... they paid for it with green pennies.” and the translations offer two possible solutions: Markovič and Vosková use ”... platily zelenými mincemi.” and Príbusová decides in this way ”... platia zelenými peniazmi.” Functionally both suggestions are appropriate and also fulfil the communicative role. However, none of them says what kind and system of currency people have in America. I respect the dates of publication of the individual translations but for future translations I would certainly suggest the word cent without any fear of losing intelligibility. With regard to the present day, with TV and other media having such an influence on the younger generation, I am convinced that children have a broad knowledge of basic American cultural elements.

In the book several animals appear. As a general example, I cite the great yellow Wildcat chasing a little field mouse and quote the available suggestions: velký žlutý rys (Markovič, Vosková, Jurečková), and veľká žltá divá mačka (Príbusová). Here I can present Vrbová´s solution too because this is a part which she does not omit in her work. Her choice is žlutě rezavý divoký kocour. If I pass over the žlutě rezavý color, of which one part (regardless of which one) is I believe, redundant, it seems to me that kočka/mačka or kocour is a better counterpart to mouse than rys.

In this passage, I intended to choose the most problematic and illustrative passages and to deduce some principles of translating cultural words. What can be said about the tendencies of the individual translators? Markovič and Vosková do not differ much for the earlier work is copied to a considerable degree. The only difference presented here is the solution for cyclone which demonstrates Vosková´s greater sense of transference. Otherwise, it is obvious that both Markovič and Vosková like translating the cultural words using componential analysis in order to make the text as readable for young readers as possible.

Príbusová is also aware of the age of the readership. She chooses the message over the culture and nominates words that are comprehensible to a Slovak readership (pukance, préria…), but still she is closer to the original because she creates the same image of the objects as the original does (pukance, cukríky, kukuričné pole).

With regard to the first type, the names Dorothy (the main character), Toto (her dog), uncle Henry and aunt Em are in most cases transferred in order to preserve their nationality, only Dorothy changes into Dorotka in the process of ”Czechification” and creating a diminutive, and Em is lengthened to Ema (Vosková, Príbusová). The translators´ intention is obvious – to bind the names into the Czech codified grammar system; and this is known as a procedure of naturalisation. Markovič, however, goes little bit further and decides to use the Czech equivalent for Henry – Jindřich and the story told by him in this way is withdrawn from its foreign context and evokes a laugh when reading kansaská prérie and Jindřich in one line. As one can never meet Jindřich in Kansas children are not being taken seriously. Each translator should consider logical compatibility in the text and must carefully decide which procedure he/she chooses for all connected expressions. If I followed Markovič´s intention strictly, I would possibly create another solution and replace kansaská prérie with, for example, moravská nížina or česká pahorkatina, which I do not really defend. From my point of view, it is fine to present foreign cultures even if we translate for little children. Hana Vrbová introduces completely different names for all the characters (most probably influenced by the Russian adaptation). Her girl is called Neli, the dog is Top, and there are no uncle and aunt, just the girl’s parents, Robert and Anna.

The second type of proper name is much more interesting. Oz, as the name of the wizard and of the land, is central in the story. Therefore, it remains unchanged in all translations. There are also three ”nations” of fairy tale creatures: the Munchkins living in the East, the Quadlings in the South and the Winkies in the West. Both Czech translations present nice and witty solutions based on linguistic resemblance. Baum´s vivid imagination reflected in the names is skilfully transmitted in the Czech works. Mlaskalové, Čtvermoňové and Mrkalové fit the tale perfectly, they are easy to imagine for they are descriptive and show the author’s sense of humour and play. These neologisms are originally from Markovič, and Vosková retained them.

Surprisingly, the Slovak translator does not make any effort to translate the names of these strange people and transcribes them into Slovak as: Mančkinovia, Kvodlingovia and Vinkiovia. I understand Príbusová´s evident aim is to present American culture and to preserve the originality of the book as much as possible. Nevertheless, in this instance, this chosen procedure may cause a loss of functionality. Certainly these names do not amuse young Slovak readers as much as the Czech ones because they cannot comprehend them. I quite appreciate Vrbová´s choice for Munchkins, which is Žvýkalové and best expresses the semantics of the English word.

I must not forget the other main characters, the closest friends of Dorothy, who are Scarecrow, Tin Woodman and Cowardly Lion. Again, a functional and communicative translation is the best way to make the characters accessible to a young readership. It seems to be the course followed by all the translators. Markovič uses the names Hastroš, Plechový drvoštěp and Zbabělý lev. Vosková´s only difference is Plecháč, and Príbusová uses the Slovak equivalents Strachopud, plechový drevorubač and lev Bojko. Vrbová´s solutions are strašák Hastrašák, železný drvoštěp and zbabělý lev. All the choices I consider functionally correct, although the Czech Plecháč does not really express the profession of the woodman, and I have my own personal feeling that, in the Czech version, strašák would be more appropriate than hastroš. The word hastroš I connect with a man not tastefully dressed.

It is worth noting the capitalization of these particular proper names. In English, capital letters occur in every part of a proper name. On the other hand it is hard to find any rule followed in the translations. Markovič and Vosková copy the English version in the way they put a capital letter at the beginning of a whole name; Príbusová partially solves the problem when she invents a name for the lion Bojko, but she devalues the Tin Woodman to a general name. Vrbová omits capitals with one exception – Hastrašák.

The book is of course full of supernatural creatures. Three of them, who appear most frequently, are the wizard, witch and sorceress. Wizard is a name for a male figure and it is distinct in the story. All the Czech and Slovak translators agree on čaroděj, while for female characters, there are two English names. Dictionaries say both are possible in either a negative or a positive sense. Baum himself uses both with a positive meaning. In chapter two, Dorothy is thought to be "the most noble Sorceress” when she speaks to a good Witch of the North. Up to this time the little girl believed all witches were wicked, but now she learns there are good witches and wicked witches. I would say this is a simple and clear diversification. However, it is very chaotic in the translations. What options do we have? Čarodějnice, čarodějka, and kouzelnice. What I believe is that the Czech word ”čarodějnice” has negative connotations, ”kouzelnice” has positive features and ”čarodějka” is rather neutral. These semantic differences in the Czech environment should lead the authors of the translations towards possible solutions.

However, Markovič created a curious and controversial phrase Zlá kouzelnice z Východu, which is absolutely contrary to what I have outlined above. Dobrá kouzelnice ze Severu sounds much better as it collocates properly. Moreover, he is even less understandable using the expression čarodějnice for both dobrá čarodějnice and zlá čarodějnice when he designates the same personae in the same chapter. This point is compounded by his solution for noble Sorceress which is vznešená čarodějka. He mixed up all the expressions regardless of natural connotations.

Vosková is more logical in her decisions but again her personal names are not as unified as Baum's are in the English original. She suggests Zlá čarodějnice z Východu and dobrá čarodějka ze Severu. Čarodějka is also used for sorceress in her work.

Finally, Príbusová stays very close to the original and decides to use one name for all of the fairy tale’s creatures - čarodejnica. This results in vznešená čarodejnica for noble sorceress, zlá čarodejnica z východu for the Wicked Witch of the East, and čarodejnica zo severu for the Witch of the North (the good one).

The Czech authors' solutions might confuse the readership and it is not advisable to be inventive in this case or too eager to place as many synonyms as possible in order to present the richness of the target language. If the aim is to show the difference between good and evil, then the translators could use the opposite of kouzelnice (possibly víla) – čarodějnice.

On one page Markovič uses ”vykání” when addressing the Witch of the North: ”Jste opravdu moc laskavá,…” and several lines down he asks: ”A ty jsi také Mlaskalka?”. In all subsequent instances he is familiar and only uses ”tykání” and makes no distinction between ordinary people, friends, queens, witches or Oz himself.

On the contrary, Príbusová tries to implement a system. She uses Slovak ”vykání” whenever Dorothy addresses good witches or Oz, the Great. Then, this form occurs when the little company meet the Queen of the Field Mice and her people say: ”Oh, your Majesty, we thought you would be killed!” in Slovak ”Ach, vaša výsosť, už sme sa báli, že vás zabije!” (whereas in the Czech books they say: ”Ach, Vaše Veličenstvo, už jsme myslily, že jsi mrtva.”). Another example is when Dorothy meets one of the Munchkins who thinks Dorothy is a great sorceress and admires her. In this passage Príbusová suggests: ”Vy ste dozaista veľká čarodejnica.” On the other hand the little girl does not speak with honour to the Wicked Witch of the East, to evil. In this case ”tykání” is applied.

An illustrative example can be found in chapter 20: ”You're quite as stiff and prim as if You'd eaten up a poker!”. We can easily imagine the person and his/her demeanour. Stiff behaviour is rather formal and not very friendly or relaxed. A poker face is an expression that conceals a person’s inner feelings. In Czech, this is usually expressed by the adjectives: škrobený, upjatý, vážný, rezervovaný or prkenný pohled. In all the translations the metaphor is translated in this way: ”…jako byste spolkly pravítko”. This is an acceptable solution which certainly fulfils its communicative functions and corresponds semantically. It reproduces the image of the English metaphor. In Czech, however, this expression is not so common. People hardly say this in everyday conversation. That is why I would spend more time thinking about other figurative expressions rather than using what I found in the dictionary. E.g. Váš nepřítomný or povýšený pohled, prkenný pohled, ...stojíte jako zkoprnělé are more suitable for Czech conversation. But I am not saying they are perfect. To be honest, to find the closest equivalent both semantically and metaphorically is a hard and time-consuming task.

The verb to help is a multifunctional word, the meaning of which can only be understood by looking at the context in which it is used. I am going to consider two cases present in the story: ”...and saw such delicious fruit hanging from the branches that she gathered some of it, finding it just what she wanted to help out her breakfast”. This example illustrates how wide the range of possible solutions is. Each translator chooses a different expression – Markovič: ”…a obohatila si tak svou snídani”, Vosková: ”…zpestřila si jím svou snídani”, Príbusová: ”…těšila sa, že bude mať bohatšie raňajky” - but at the same time they all preserve the situation and image of the original.

The next sentence provides the same fundamental verb, but with a different collocation: ”...and having helped herself and Toto to a good drink”. Markovič and Vosková ignore the fact that Dorothy poured the water herself. The Czech versions; ”…napila se pořádně čerstvé vody”, illustrate the situation adequately, but from a linguistic point of view they are a little simplified. Príbusová’s suggested solution; ”…napila sa pramenistej vody”, is not much better. I would suggest that the meaning of the English expression is better served by the Czech collocation; ”nalila sobě i Totovi čerstvou vodu”.

For ”table loaded with delicious fruits” the expressions ”stůl pokrytý skvostným ovocem” (Markovič, Vosková), ”stôl plný chutného ovocia” (Príbusová) are used. Plný is stronger than pokrytý but I still do not think it is sufficient. The tone of the whole sentence is compromised in both instances. In my opinion, Stůl byl naložen or překypoval would not only convey the image but would also preserve the tone and the style of the narrator.

For ”hearty supper” we are presented with ”dobrá večeře” in Czech and ”bohato prestretý stôl” in Slovak. Once again, dobrá večeře does not carry the same intensity as bohatá. Moreover, a slight shift of meaning is uncovered in the first solution as it does not express the nutritious value of the food.

Further down the text, ”otevřená krajina” (Vosková), ”otevřená příroda” (Markovič) and ”otvorená krajina” (Príbusová) are used for ”open country” although my own suggestion would be volná příroda. The first two solutions have been influenced by the original English collocation, irrespective of the nature of the Czech language.

One more instance of figurative expression is worth mentioning. It is the saying ”There is no place like home.” Surprisingly, only one translation makes use of the widely used Czech equivalent; ”Všude dobře, doma nejlíp.” (Vosková). Markovič translates directly from the English expression: ”Nikde není tak dobře jako doma.”, which sounds unnatural to me as does Príbusová’s ”Domovu sa nijaké iné miesto nevyrovná.” I am of the view that if any saying, metaphorical expression, or collocation exists, which (especially in this instance) can be clearly incorporated into the Czech language system, then it should be used, as this makes use of the aesthetic sense of the metaphor.

Another Russian work, this time by Alexandr Volkov, was published in Moscow in 1978 and translated into Czech by Hana Vrbová ten years later. I have already mentioned the book in relation to several translation problems compared above. It must be appreciated that no adventure of Dorothy and her company is passed over although the manner of their telling reminds me of great heroic tales, which are typically Russian. Some of the names used in this version illustrate this point: Smaragdburk, Bigbag Veliký a Děsuplný. Characters´ names do not usually correspond to the original ones. For instance, Dorothy is called Neli, Toto is Top, Oz is Bigbag. Furthermore, all the witches have names whereas in the American original hardly one of them is named. One other peculiarity is the division of the book into 3 parts. The first section recounts the trip to the Smaragdburk, the second part covers the journey to the West in order to kill the Wicked Witch, and the last part describes their third trip to Glinda, the Witch of the South, to ask for help so that Dorothy can get home. A few new passages were written by Volkov and incorporated into the story (e.g. chapters 1,2,5), which do not change the plot but explain something that should be concealed or which are simply redundant.

Finally, I must mention the most recent translation of as English adaptation from 1997. This adaptation was made by Lucy Kincaid, and the translation was by Jarmila Jurečková (year of publication is not stated). Of all the adaptations I have come across this one is the thinnest. Only a brief outline of the story and the main characters remain. This book, which is intended for very young readers, concentrates exclusively on the action.

In my opinion, none of the three compared translators breaks this principle. On the whole, each translation made a good impression on me, and only a closer examination of individual translation problems provided any scope for negative criticisms. I would only disapprove of Vosková´s approach which relies too heavily on Markovič´s work. As I have hopefully demonstrated in this thesis, there are many passages remaining, which could be solved in a more modern and appropriate way. There is no such a thing as a perfect, ideal translation, but it can usually be improved. I believe this thesis can be seen as an appeal to skilful translators to produce a modern translation of ”The Wonderful Wizard of Oz”.

Baum, L. Frank. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. New York: Blue Ribbon Books, Inc, 1981.
Baum, L. Frank. TheWizard of Oz. Retold by Joan Collins. Ladybird Books Ltd. Leicestershire UK, 1984.
Baum, L. Frank. Čaroděj ze země Oz. Trans. Jakub Markovič. Praha: Státní nakladatelství dětské knihy, 1962
Baum, L. Frank. Čaroděj ze země OZ. Trans. Monika Vosková. Praha: Nakladatelství Svoboda, 1995.
Baum, L. Frank. Čarodejník z krajiny Oz. Trans. Margita Príbusová. Bratislava: Mladé letá, 1990.
Kincaid, Lucy. Čaroděj ze země Oz. Trans. Jarmila Jurečková. Havlíčkův Brod: Fragment.
Volkov, Alexandr. Čaroděj ze smaragdového města. Trans. Hana Vrbová. Praha: Lidové nakladatelství, 1988.

Čermák J., Illek B., Skoumal A. Překlad literárního díla. Praha: Odeon, 1970.
Hrdlička, Milan. Literární překlad a komunikace. Praha: FF UK, 1997.
Kufnerová, Zlata. Překládání a čeština. Praha: Nakladatelství H a H, 1994.
Levý, Jiří. České teorie překladu. Praha, 1957.
Newmark, Peter. A Textbook of Translation. UK: Prentice Hall, 1988.
Newmark, Peter. Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd., 1981