PARDON MY FRENCH A STUDY OF TWO CONTEMPORANEOUS TRANSLATIONS OF GULLIVER’S TRAVELS (1726) INTO FRENCH (1727) Aantal woorden: 21.216

Leander Scheir Studentennummer: 01412049

Promotor: Prof. dr. Lieve Jooken Masterproef voorgelegd voor het behalen van de graad master in het vertalen Academiejaar: 2017 - 2018

Statement of permission for use on loan The author and the supervisor(s) give permission to make this master’s dissertation available for consultation and for personal use. In the case of any other use, the copyright terms have to be respected, in particular with regard to the obligation to state expressly the source when quoting results from this master’s dissertation. The copyright with regard to the data referred to in this master’s dissertation lies with the supervisor(s). Copyright is limited to the manner in which the author has approached and recorded the problems of the subject. The author respects the original copyright of the individually quoted studies and any accompanying documentation, such as tables and graphs.

Acknowledgements

As this thesis is bringing my final year at Ghent University to a close, I would like to seize the

opportunity to express my gratitude towards a number of people.

First and foremost, a big thank you to my thesis advisor, Lieve Jooken, PhD of the English

Department of Translation, Interpreting and Communication at Ghent University, for her

unwavering support, encouragement, suggestions, feedback and willingness to read and correct

my drafts, often at very short notice. Thanks also for her expertise in the English language,

British culture, the academic world and academic writing. Without her invaluable help, I would

not have been able to successfully bring this thesis to an end.

In addition, I would like to thank Guy Rooryck and David Chan, for without them I would not

have been able to find my way through the mazes that are French history and English literature.

Thank you to both for your classes that were bursting with enthusiasm and filled with passion,

but also for the valuable knowledge and sources that you have provided me with to complete

this thesis.

I cannot thank my parents enough for their love, support and concern, but also for their hard

work, which has provided me with educational opportunities that have allowed me to pursue

my dreams. Lastly, a huge thank you to my partner, Diana, for her unconditional love, for never

failing to believe in me, for standing by my side, for getting the best out of me and for helping

me to complete the journey that this thesis has been.

Abstract This study zeroes in on Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels (1726) and its first two translations into French. The first translation was carried out anonymously and (presumably) published in The Hague in January 1727. The second translation was taken on by Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines and published in Paris in April 1727. Taking into consideration the epochal and cultural context of both translators, their translatorial interventions were charted by scrutinising the first chapter of Part IV. An additional consideration was given to Desfontaines’s Préface du traducteur and footnotes. These interventions were categorised according to a typology of enarrative functions as proposed by Rooryck & Jooken (2013). Moreover, the five footnotes of Part IV were sorted in accordance with a typology of notes as proposed by Maloney (2005). That approach has made it possible to detect a general tendency, viz. Desfontaines applying his enarrative voice to either adjust or counter Swift’s argumentative position and the anonymous translator mainly using his enarrative voice to align with or reinforce the original author. This notwithstanding, exceptions were found for both, e.g. the anonymous translator omitting problematic parts that followed in quick succession.

Table of contents

1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1

2 Theoretical framework ..................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Cultural context ....................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.1 Eighteenth-century England ................................................................................................ 4

2.1.2 Eighteenth-century France .................................................................................................. 7

2.2 Literature, the press and censorship in eighteenth-century Europe ..................................... 10

2.2.1 The early English novel ..................................................................................................... 10

2.2.2 Satire in eighteenth-century England ................................................................................ 12

2.2.3 Censorship in England ...................................................................................................... 13

2.2.4 Censorship in France ........................................................................................................ 15

2.3 Translating in eighteenth-century Europe ............................................................................. 17

2.3.1 General .............................................................................................................................. 17

2.3.2 The Anglo-French connection ........................................................................................... 21

2.4 The English original ............................................................................................................... 22

2.4.1 Author ................................................................................................................................ 22

2.4.2 Gulliver’s Travels and its reception in England ................................................................. 25

2.4.3 Part IV: A Voyage to the Houyhnhnms ............................................................................. 27

2.5 The anonymous translation into French ................................................................................ 28

2.6 The ‘official’ translation into French ...................................................................................... 29

2.6.1 Author ................................................................................................................................ 29

2.6.2 Voyages de Gulliver and its reception in France .............................................................. 31

2.6.3 The importance of paratextual elements: Desfontaines’s preface and footnotes ............. 34

3. Method ........................................................................................................................................... 36

4. Analysis .......................................................................................................................................... 40

4.1 Peritext: Desfontaines’s Préface du traducteur ..................................................................... 40

4.2 Enarrative voice in Part IV (Chapter I) .................................................................................. 47

4.2.1 Meta-discursive level ......................................................................................................... 47

4.2.2 Argumentative level ........................................................................................................... 49

4.2.3 Evaluative level ................................................................................................................. 63

4.2.4 Extra-diegetic level ............................................................................................................ 64

5. Discussion and conclusion ............................................................................................................ 69

Reference list ........................................................................................................................................ 74

Primary sources ................................................................................................................................. 74

Secondary sources ............................................................................................................................ 74

Appendices ........................................................................................................................................... 79

Appendix A: The title page to Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726) .......................................................... 79

Appendix B: Approbation and privilège du roi in Voyages de Gulliver (Desfontaines, 1727) ........... 80

Appendix C: Frontispiece to Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726) ............................................................ 83

Appendix D: Title page to Voyages de Gulliver (Desfontaines, 1727) .............................................. 84

Appendix E: Frontispiece to Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (Anon., 1727) ......................... 85

Appendix F: Title page to Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (Anon., 1727) ............................. 86

Appendix G: Title page to Part IV of Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726) ................................................ 87

Appendix H: Additional map to Part IV of Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726) ........................................ 88

Appendix I: Opening illustration to Part IV of Voyages de Gulliver (Desfontaines, 1727) ................ 89

Appendix J: Title page to Part IV of Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (Anon., 1727) ............. 90

Appendix K: Additional map to Part IV of Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (Anon., 1727) ..... 91

Appendix L: Corpus of excerpts ........................................................................................................ 92

I. Excerpts relating to the novelistic features ........................................................................... 92

II. Excerpts relating to the readership’s tastes .......................................................................... 97

III. Excerpts relating to the alleged misanthropy ...................................................................... 101

1

1 INTRODUCTION

The Age of Enlightenment, les Lumières, the Age of Reason or even the Golden Age of Satire:

the eighteenth century does not fall short of synonyms to underscore how seminal a period this

transitional era was (Bartkuvienė, 2017, p. 9; Marshall, 2009, p. 372). With rationalism and

empiricism as two important pillars, it brought about a drastic change of paradigm

(Bartkuvienė, 2017; Todorov, 2006; Black, 1996). For eighteenth-century England, that

movement heralded exciting developments in the social, cultural and economic areas. Under

the impetus of a growing population, commerce and trade, the nation was propelled into a more

favourable position (Colley, 2018; McMurran, 2010; Black, 1996). On the other side of the

Channel, France had entered the closing century of its Ancien Régime, in which traditional

values, religion and privileges were still at the order of the day for both society and politics

(Popkin & Higonnet, 2018; Méthivier, 1981, pp. 28-30). This notwithstanding, it was here too

that opportunities were on the rise. Cultural and economic developments were taking place and

critical, oppositional thought was on the rise (Popkin & Higonnet, 2018).

The description of the eighteenth century as the Golden Age of Satire, then, links in with the

new literary developments that this era produced. Public opinion was given a more prominent

place, printing houses were emerging and developing as never before and writers ventured to

explore new writing styles, which was reflected by the rise of both the novel and satire. The

former responded to these changes by its empiric and anthropocentric nature (Mullan &

Cordner, 2017; Bartkuvienė, 2017; Rooryck & Jooken, 2014; McMurran, 2010, p. 30; Halimi,

2010; Backscheider & Ingrassia, 2005; Hill, 1868). Adding to these literary developments was

the growing importance of vernaculars during the eighteenth century, which in return spurred

translative activity (McMurran, 2008; Oz-Salzberger, 2006).

While it is true to say that this enlightened century was still far away from the vast research

area of translation studies of today (Hayes, 2009, p. 2), it “lent itself to translation” (Oz-

Salzberger, 2006, p. 389). In this prospect too, the eighteenth century proved a pivotal point,

turning away from the imitational practices of the seventeenth century and finding new ways in

which could be translated (McMurran, 2010, pp. 16-17). In France, that was reflected by a more

liberal and domesticating approach to translating, which had been spurred by Nicolas Perrot

2

d’Ablancourt. That current would acquire the name of belles infidèles, sometimes anglicised to

the lovely unfaithful ones (Hayes, 2009, p. 3; Oz-Salzberger, 2006).

It is in the light of these changes, developments and epochal context that the present study will

home in on Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels (1726) and two contemporaneous translations

into French (1727). The fact that it concerns an Anglo-French translation is no coincidence, for

the intellectual and cultural bridge that spanned the Channel was an important area of activity

for both enlightened thought and translating (Rooryck & Jooken, 2013; McMurran, 2010, p. 8;

Hayes, 2009, pp. 2-3; Oz-Salzberger, 2006, p. 394). As such, a certain Pierre-François Guyot

Desfontaines was quick to start translating this Anglo-Irish author and his work that had been

able to excite spirits in both England and Paris (Desfontaines, 1727, p. ix-xiv). His translation

was published in Paris in April 1727 and is generally acknowledged to be situated in the

domesticating, belles infidèles current (Valentin, 2011; Léger, 2004; Léger, 1996; Du Sorbier,

1986, p. 121). This notwithstanding, another (anonymous) translation was even faster to appear,

for Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver was published in The Hague in January 1727. That

provides this study with a second translation into French, which had been worked on in a more

liberal context compared to France (Wilke, 2013, par. 18)

As to the original work, Marshall (2010, p. 91) points out how Jonathan Swift, his role, his

character, his writings and notably Gulliver’s Travels all have a broad range of aspects to them.

Subsequently, the Swiftian area of research is characterised by a lack of consensus and

direction, notwithstanding its vastness (ibid., p. 98). The present study links in to this domain

insofar that it turns its attention to Gulliver’s Travels (1726) and puts it in the field of eighteenth-

century translating by comparing the work to two translations into French. It zeroes in on the

translation of the first chapter of Part IV by means of a systematic analysis of Voyages de

Gulliver (1727) by Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines and Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel

Gulliver (1727) by an anonymous translator. In addition, the Préface du traducteur and the

footnotes of Part IV that have been added by Desfontaines were also taken into consideration

and given closer attention to. By means of this analysis, this research will attempt to give an

answer to the following questions:

3

(1) What translatorial changes has Part IV (Chapter I) of Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726)

undergone in its two translations into French (Desfontaines, 1727; Anon., 1727)?

a. How can these translatorial changes be categorised in accordance with the four

enarrative functions as proposed by Rooryck & Jooken (2013)?

(2) What is the impact of Desfontaines’s altered paratextual framework, viz. his Préface du

traducteur and the five footnotes that have been added to Part IV?

a. How can these footnotes be categorised in accordance with the four enarrative

functions as proposed by Rooryck & Jooken (2013)?

b. How can these footnotes be categorised in accordance with the typology of notes

as proposed by Maloney (2005)?

The following chapter will provide a theoretical framework in which a number of subjects will

be elaborated upon, viz. eighteenth-century England and France, eighteenth-century literature

and media, censorship in England and France, translating in the eighteenth century and lastly

the original English work and its two translations into French. Afterwards, the method of this

study will be described in chapter three. The fourth chapter, then, will provide the reader with

a detailed analysis, in which the original work is compared to the French translations and in

which additional attention is given to the paratextual elements of Pierre-François Guyot

Desfontaines’s translation. In the fifth and final chapter, a more in-depth discussion and

conclusion will follow.

4

2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.1 Cultural context

Upon scrutinising Jonathan Swift and his writings – in casu Gulliver’s Travels (1726) – it is of

paramount importance to take into consideration the epochal context (Boulaire, 2002, par. 1;

Hill, 1868). Indeed, the following sections will show that Swift as well as Pierre-François Guyot

Desfontaines were no insular writers or translators. Quite the contrary, they seem to have been

inextricably bound to and influenced by the cultural and socio-political climate of their era. As

such, this study firstly addresses the zeitgeist of both England and France in an ever-changing

eighteenth century.

2.1.1 Eighteenth-century England

In order to effectively acknowledge the progressive nature of Swift’s work, it is important to

take into consideration that Gulliver’s undertakings were published in an era during which the

quest for the philosopher’s stone was still ongoing, the last witches were still being hunted for,

Isaac Newton’s ground-breaking Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica was still

largely disregarded and society essentially consisted of an upper and a lower class (Colley,

2018; Hill, 1868). Notwithstanding the fact that the Enlightenment had yet to fully flourish at

the time of Gulliver’s Travels, the following will demonstrate that its seeds were undeniably

sprouting. Swift, Defoe and Pope are but three examples of the important precursors of

enlightened thought during this period of transition.

Indeed, the eighteenth century heralded a watershed in the history of England. On a social level,

the rise of a third class, viz. the middle class, paralleled the rise of a more tolerant, progressive,

enjoyable and secure society. The growing power of commerce (cf. infra) could be associated

with that development (Hill, 1868). Whilst the population was still growing slowly but steadily

during the first half of the eighteenth century, a veritable population explosion would take place

from the 1750s onwards (Colley, 2018; Razzell, 1965). Nonetheless, the middle class

emergence introduced unprecedented opportunities in the fields of education and employment.

As such, the commercial industries were not only given a boost, but important breakthroughs

were also being made (Colley, 2018). In the field of medicine, for example, the invention of

inoculation in 1721 made it possible to curtail the smallpox disease to some extent.

5

Subsequently, data suggests that life expectancy increased considerably during the eighteenth

century (Razzell, 1965).

This era, this ‘Age of Reason’, was built on rationalism and empiricism, which brought forth

the notions of freedom, (scientific) progress, human autonomy, anthropocentrism, universality

and knowledge (Bartkuvienė, 2017; Todorov, 2006; Black, 1996). It might come as no surprise

that it is at this point too that the weight and the attention shift from the religious sphere towards

the rationale. The transfer of ideas between France and England definitely played a role in this

change of paradigm (cf. infra). In addition, that growing interest in man and men went hand-in-

glove with a growing interest in women. Consequently, it was during this era that the way was

paved for the feminism of the following century (Bartkuvienė, 2017; O’Brien, 2009).

Although the fall of the Oxford Ministry in 1714 had left Britain somewhat dislocated, at heart

the nation was affluent and already a flagship on European and sovereign level (Colley, 2018).

Culturally, it was acknowledged – albeit reluctantly at times – that Britain was to take up an

influential position at the time. As such, the eighteenth century saw an upswing in British

products, art, music, literature (cf. infra), as well as the Rule, Britannia! and God Save the King

aura of superiority and nationalism (McMurran, 2010, pp. 99-108; Black, 1996). Colley (2018),

for example, points out that urban development and architecture became more complex and

luxurious during this period, the remnants of which can still be seen in the Georgian buildings

that stood the test of time. Whilst some believe that this cultural development was only

accessible to an urban minority, others argue that its range was more comprehensive and far-

reaching, suggesting that the urban and rural societies were no monolithic structures but rather

intertwined entities (Colley, 2018; Black, 1996).

The British economy, then, still largely revolved around agriculture, but industry and trade were

undeniably climbing the ladder (Colley, 2018). As such, both society and economy were

becoming more and more infused with a commercial and consumerist mind-set (Black, 1996).

The establishment of financial institutions such as the Bank of England (1694) or the South Sea

Company (1711), for example, allowed for the first time ever to accumulate wealth via stock

exchange. Furthermore, the English economy had strengthened warfare and vice versa (Colley,

2018). While it is true to say that consumerism allowed for a more enjoyable lifestyle, the ‘real’

opulence was only obtainable for the happy few. Conversely, the more unfortunate did not have

the economic puissance that was needed (Colley, 2018). Indeed, if Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels

6

(1726) was described as progressive in England above, it is even more so in the case of Ireland

(Hill, 1868). As early as the seventeenth century, the Irish were obliged to cede their lands to

Westminster, who in return had it supervised by the “bons Anglais” (Boulaire, 2002, par. 8),

also known as absentee landlords as they were practically never thereabouts. Thus, Ireland was

to abide by the measures that England imposed, by which the latter was (economically)

favoured and the former reduced to nothing but a mere colony that could be exploited (Boulaire,

2002). That economic background might clarify why Jonathan Swift was so bitter and dismayed

in his satires. This sudden spurt of new, exciting opportunities seemed to have been beyond the

reach of the Irish. Whilst his native country was left with famines and unemployment, its

‘coloniser’ feasted upon commerce and consumerism to strengthen both its society and

economy (Boulaire, 2002; Hill, 1868).

English politics then, also a recurrent theme in Swift’s works1, links in to that economic

commerce and consumerism. At the turn of the eighteenth century, the political climate in

England was clearly divided between two distinct, adverse parties, viz. the Whig party and the

Tory party (Kishlansky & Morrill, 2018). With the inviting prospect of the new developments

and opportunities mentioned above, heated discussions were taking place on what commercial

and economic route was to be taken. That quarrelling did not only take place between the parties

themselves, but also spread to the media. On the one hand, the Tory faction was favourably

disposed towards the seizure of land so as to maintain order both internally and externally. The

Whigs, on the other hand, saw the industrial and trading area as more propitious (Pincus, 2012).

To add insult to injury, the Tory party was also dichotomised by the uncertainty surrounding

the succession of Queen Anne (Kishlansky & Morrill, 2018). As the Queen passed away in

1714, the Tory government fell (cf. supra) and the Whigs took over. In an endeavour to

completely shatter their adversaries, the latter tried to incriminate several Tories, amongst

which Jonathan Swift for his “sympathies jacobites” (Boulaire, 2002, par. 51). That series of

events brought forth the establishment of a firm Whig policy, which would lead to a more

cohesive nation and pave the way for the superiority and nationalism that were mentioned above

(Boulaire, 2002; Black, 1996). When invoking English politics as a recurrent theme within

Swift’s writings, the name of Robert Walpole – his “bête noire” (Boulaire, 2002, par. 44) –

cannot be overlooked. With the collapse of the South Sea Company in 1720, otherwise known

as the South Sea Bubble, Walpole was pushed to the fore on the political scene (Colley, 2018;

1 See for example the Drapier’s Letters, seven pamphlets written between 1724 and 1725

7

Boulaire, 2002, par. 41 – 42). Indeed, it seems as though he ingeniously took advantage of the

created vacuum to seize the position of Prime Minister and firmly consolidate his power. Colley

(2018) observes that politics were far from democratic at the time, insofar that politicians could

exert their power or money to push the population into a certain direction. Consequently, it

might come as no surprise that Walpole too was able to eliminate opposition through, inter alia,

“le clientélisme, le népotisme, l’intimidation et la corruption” (Boulaire, 2002, par. 43).

Thus, from the above follows that Swift seemed to be standing at a semi-enlightened junction

when he published Gulliver’s Travels (1726). Unequivocally, opportunities were arising, but

they were not for everyone and smudges of superstition, elitism and deception were still

apparent. In addition, the Whig ascension and a subsequent forced retreat to Ireland (cf. infra)

attributed to the bitterness and dismay in Swift’s works during this period, which can be noticed

in his Drapier’s Letters (1724-1725) and Gulliver’s Travels. Harth (1976), for example, points

out that Swift’s ‘muse’ Walpole has often been associated with Flimnap, the bothersome

character that thoroughly despises Gulliver.

2.1.2 Eighteenth-century France

As with Swift’s work in England, it is imperative to home in on the translation of Pierre-

François Guyot ‘abbé’ Desfontaines in the light of the cultural and socio-political climate in

France of the era. Although the previous section on eighteenth-century England only touched

briefly on religious matters, they are hard to overlook in the case of France. Strictly speaking,

the Kingdom of France was still going through the so-called Ancien Régime, otherwise known

as the Old Regime. During this period, the end of which is generally acknowledged to be the

French Revolution of 1789, the religious sphere was still predominant on all fronts and fostered

a reciprocally consolidating relationship with the state (Popkin & Higonnet, 2018; Méthivier,

1981, pp. 29-30).

Méthivier (1981, p. 21) remarks that the notion of Ancien Régime should be observed in its

broadest sense, in that it somewhat was a vast, well-oiled machine on various levels. Two

important characteristics of Ancien Régime France could be singled out, viz. a Catholic society

and a political regime (ibid., pp. 29-30). On the one hand, Catholicism was both a support and

a beacon in the everyday lives of the population. As such, the clergy held sway over various

8

matters, ranging from education and employment to official birth and death records (Popkin &

Higonnet, 2018; Méthivier, 1981, pp. 29-30). On the other hand, the Old Regime was also

highly political, insofar that political life was wholly connected to the king. He held a firm grip

on economic, political and religious matters as well as the population. The French, for example,

were no citizens, but “by birth, subjects of the king of France” (Popkin & Higonnet, 2018, p. 96)

The basis on which his reign was built, then, was a reciprocally consolidating relationship with

the church. Whilst the monarch staunchly propagated Catholicism, his position and continuity

was justified by God. In other words, he drew from a divine right, a droit divin to rule (Popkin

& Higonnet, 2018; Méthivier, 1981, pp. 29-30).

Whilst it might seem inviting to position France in such a blunt manner against England, reality

is more nuanced. During the closing century of the Ancien Régime, France was undeniably

changing (Popkin & Higonnet, 2018). As much as it was based on tradition and continuity, the

Ancien Régime “also contained within it powerful forces for change” (ibid., p. 97).

Notwithstanding the fact that it is delicate to pinpoint an event as the Enlightenment to a specific

year, Mason & Birkett (2016, p. 1) equate the death of Louis XIV in 1715 with the start of les

Lumières in France. Le Roy Ladurie (1986, p. 137) further suggests that France changed for the

better with the demise of the Roi-Soleil. That year is not haphazardly chosen, as the reign of

Louis XIV in some way epitomises what the enlightened thinkers were precisely rejecting.

Indeed, his firm authoritarian rule seems to have been marked by his relentlessness and his

tenaciousness. That shone through, amongst others, in his religious, economic and foreign

policies (Popkin & Shennan, 2018; Le Roy Ladurie, 1986). On a religious level, Louis XIV

adopted a hostile attitude with regard to Protestantism and Jansenism. The dragonnades and

the Edict of Fontainebleau2 are exemplary therein, insofar that many Protestants saw no option

but to flee the kingdom. Economically, France was flagging and the high taxes that were levied

by the king prompted poverty and famine. As to his foreign policy, Louis XIV was obsessed

with conclusively fixing France’s borders and was as such at loggerheads with almost all

European countries (Popkin & Shennan, 2018; Le Roy Ladurie, 1986).

2 Otherwise known as the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes

9

Eighteenth-century France, then, threw off the yoke of the previous century and managed to

somewhat uplift its economy. As in England, the focus shifted from an agricultural to a more

commercialised mind-set and as such, commerce expanded both internally and externally. Here

too, that evolution was driven by an increase in population during the eighteenth century. In

return, more opportunities were created in the fields of employment and consummation (Popkin

& Higonnet, 2018). While it is true to say that change was taking place in l’Hexagone, it was

significantly slower than across the Channel. Agriculturally, for example, France held on to its

traditional patterns for a longer period of time and lacked behind on the new techniques that

had already been introduced in England. By the same token, its industry was developing, but

not as considerably as its English counterpart (Popkin & Higonnet, 2018).

In section 2.1.1, it was argued that it was unsure whether the developments in England only

took place in its cities. In France, on the other hand, it was more readily apparent that the city

was the main centre of activity. Riding on this fresh wave of commerce and economy, the urban

stimulus was quick to spread to culture and it is here that the Enlightenment is brought into play

(Popkin & Higonnet, 2018). As stated above, the enlightened movement was built on

rationalism and empiricism. Whilst in England it was able to grow fairly concomitantly to the

nation’s economic and socio-political developments, the early French intellectuals also had to

engage more actively in opposing the omnipresent forces of tradition and continuity (Popkin &

Higonnet, 2018). Important precursors during this period of transition were, amongst others,

(1) Charles Louis de Secondat or ‘Montesquieu’, who put together a confronting, foreign

picture of France in his Lettres persanes (1721); (2) Voltaire, who paid tribute to the country

that had welcomed him from 1726 to 1729 in his Letters on England (1733); and in latter times

(3) Denis Diderot, who adopted an encyclopaedic and empiricist approach and (4) Jean-Jacques

Rousseau and his fixation on nature (Popkin & Higonnet, 2018; Mason & Birkett, 2016).

In short, from the above follows that the Kingdom of France appeared to be somewhat torn

apart by change on the one hand and traditional values on the other. Following Louis XIV’s

regime came a France that was provided with more economic and commercial opportunities,

but cultural changes were only introduced piecemeal. That schism is also reflected in

Desfontaines’s translation of Gulliver’s Travels (cf. infra). Lastly, it is important to note that

this study by no means aims at depicting France as diabolic vis-à-vis its English counterpart.

Whilst the focus of attention in the previous section was indeed on a liberal, modern England

and a religious, traditional France, it is undeniable that the latter also was imbued by

10

opportunities and critical precursors. Nonetheless, there was more room for manoeuvre in

England than on the other side of the Channel (cf. supra). Voltaire describes it as follows in his

Letters concerning the English Nation (1733):

A FRENCHMAN who arrives in London, will find Philosophy, like every Thing else, very much chang’d there. He had left the World a plenum, and he now finds it a vacuum. At Paris the Universe is seen compos’d of Vortices of subtile Matter; but nothing like it is seen in London. In France, ‘tis the Pressure of the Moon that causes the Tides; but in England ‘tis the Sea that gravitates towards the Moon; so that when you think that the Moon should make it Flood with us, those Gentlemen fancy it should be Ebb, which, very unluckily, cannot be prov’d. For to be able to do this, ‘tis necessary the Moon and the Tides should have been enquir’d into, at the very instant of the Creation. (pp. 109-110)

2.2 Literature, the press and censorship in eighteenth-century Europe

2.2.1 The early English novel

As observed above, the rise of the middle class was a contributing factor in the social, cultural,

economic and political developments during the eighteenth century. Hill (1868) further asserts

that the notion of public opinion began to take a more prominent role too, insofar that the media,

writers (e.g. Swift) and their writings now began to act as sounding boards for the population.

Literature had come within the reach of John Doe. It is in this context too that a new style of

writing emerges, viz. the novel. Black (1996) emphasises that the novel can be associated with

the “embourgeoisement of culture” (p. 20) and that it spoke to a broader spectrum of the

population. Parallel to the population and the economy, the novel grew slowly but steadily

during the first half of the eighteenth century before fully blossoming in the wake of the

population explosion (cf. supra) during the second half of the century (Bartkuvienė, 2017).

Before moving on to its characteristics, a definition of the novel is needed. The Oxford

Dictionary of Literary Terms (2015) proposes the following:

Nearly always an extended fictional prose narrative, although some novels are very short, some are non-fictional, some have been written in verse, and some do not even tell a story. Such exceptions help to indicate that the novel as a literary genre is itself exceptional: it disregards the constraints that govern other literary forms, and acknowledges no obligatory structure, style, or subject-matter. (…) The novel differs from the prose romance in that a greater degree of realism is expected of it, and that it tends to describe a recognizable secular social world, often in a sceptical and prosaic manner inappropriate to the marvels of romance. The novel has frequently incorporated the structures and languages of non-fictional prose forms (history, autobiography, journalism, travel writing), even to the point

11

where the non-fictional element outweighs the fictional. It is normally expected of a novel that it should have at least one character, and preferably several characters shown in processes of change and social relationship; a plot, or some arrangement of narrated events, is another normal requirement. (The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms, 2015, “novel”).

The novel was indeed a ‘novelty’ in that it reflected the eighteenth-century concerns and mind-

set, contrasting as such with the romance form of literature that resorted to “imitation and

convention” (McMurran, 2010, p. 30). In that prospect, Daniel Defoe, Samuel Richardson and

Henry Fielding are often huddled together as a leading trio (ibid., p. 34). On the other hand,

Bartkuvienė (2017), points out that as of the eighteenth century, “there was no understanding

about what a novel should be” (p. 12). Whilst the genre was perhaps not as clear-cut as it is

today, The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms (2015) singles out two important

characteristics, viz. human experience and “a greater degree of realism”.

Empiricism and anthropocentrism were previously mentioned as notions that the ‘Age of

Reason’ brought forth. In like manner, the eighteenth century novel could be typified by its

realistic, detailed accounts and the individual that is put to the fore. That is reflected in both

choice of words and writing style (Bartkuvienė, 2017; McMurran, 2010, pp. 27-43). The

traveller’s tales that were so ubiquitous during the eighteenth century are the epitome of these

two characteristics (Backscheider & Ingrassia, 2005). Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe springs

to mind, in which the central character sets out on a (risky) undertaking and manages to safely

return by relying upon his rationale and his senses. Gulliver’s Travels in a certain way reverses

the logic and mocks the genre, not wanting to leave the Houyhnhnms that he has met during his

fourth voyage (Bartkuvienė, 2017; Backscheider & Ingrassia, 2005). Nonetheless, in Gulliver’s

Travels, Swift too walks a thin line between the imaginary and the realistic. The title page

(Appendix A), for example, mentions Lemuel Gulliver, “First a Surgeon, and then a Captain of

several SHIPS” (Swift, 1726), as the author.

Thus, the novel introduced a new, ‘individual’ way of writing (cf. supra). A possible reason that

could explain this movement could be the growing importance of vernaculars as ways of

communication and transmission during the eighteenth century. In the wake of a growing

national self-awareness, production in Latin was waning and vernaculars did not only supplant

the former in literature, but also took on a more substantial role in the field of translation

(McMurran, 2008; Oz-Salzberger, 2006). That evolution will be discussed in further detail in

sub-chapter 2.3.

12

However, the nature of the novel was also twofold and therefore poses a curious paradox. Not

only did it rest on a basis of individualism, it could also be assigned to the category of the

universal. On the one hand, the novel undoubtedly links in to the notion of particularity due to

its close ties to empiricism, anthropocentrism and a definite feeling of (national) self-

consciousness. On the other hand, the novel could also be associated with universality. It did

not only distinguish itself as a genre to be ascribed to England, it could also be extrapolated to

the general level of humanity, as it traces the universal morals and values that bind us together

(McMurran, 2010, pp. 27-43). As such, Gulliver’s Travels also skirts the universal edge of the

novel, as Swift – especially during the Houyhnhnm voyage of Part IV – so fiercely lampoons

human vice (Just, 2002).

2.2.2 Satire in eighteenth-century England

The eighteenth century also ushered in the heady days of satire. Political satire especially was

in vogue, as the turmoil between the Whig and the Tory party proved a fertile source of

inspiration (Bartkuvienė, 2017; Mullan & Cordner, 2017). That shines through in the quibbling

between the Lilliputians and Blefuscudians, whilst Part IV responds more to what Bartkuvienė

(2017) identifies as “Menippean satire” (p. 16), focussing on persona rather than on person.

Parallel to the development of the novel and new narrative techniques, satire was still in its

experimental, wide-ranging phase during the first decennia of the eighteenth century (Marshall,

2009). Rooryck & Jooken (2014) point out that it is during this era that writers started to

experiment with writing styles, wherein they readily utilised a “style élevé et dialogues

grossiers, truffant de propos familiers et parfois vulgaires (p. 293). In other words, writers did

not shy away from amalgamating formal and vulgar language. Swift as well as some of his

fellow writers (e.g. Pope and Gay) disavowed gaudy language and opted to accommodate their

writings to the masses by bringing everyday language into their works (Mullan & Cordner,

2017). Hill (1868) even goes as far as commenting that “literature (…) put on plain clothes, and

met plain men on equal terms” (p. 77). Anonymity was important therein insofar that it was not

the satirist but the fictional character that was pushed into the firing line (Mullan & Cordner,

2017; Marshall, 2009).

13

The deaths of Pope (1744) and Swift (1745) are frequently aligned with the demise of the

“golden age of satire” (Marshall, 2009, p. 372). Notwithstanding the fact that Marshall (2009,

p. viii-ix) indicates that it is unsure whether both were indeed as eulogised during the Augustan

era as they are today, the satiric features of Gulliver’s Travels undoubtedly stood out from other

productions. Just (2002, par. 11) argues that a good satirist does not produce bite-size material,

but leaves some space for the reader’s interpretation. Swift would respond to that definition, in

that he did not vituperate for the sake of vituperating, but looked to provoke critical thought in

his audience (Marshall, 2009).

Upon discussing satire, the eighteenth century, Pope and Swift, it is scarcely possible not to

evoke the so-called Scriblerus Club. It is indeed during this period that the ‘Scriblerians’, viz.

Jonathan Swift, Alexander Pope, John Gay, John Arbuthnot, Henry ‘Lord Bolingbroke’ St. John

and Thomas Parnell, had an exemplary role when it comes to the satiric genre. Consequently,

the six authors have thenceforward often been grouped together under that name as they all

took up their pens to ridicule a wide array of contemporary issues (Bartkuvienė, 2017, Marshall,

2009). On the other hand, a distorted image might have been created due to studies singling out

the Scriblerus Club and its members for such an extended period of time. As a matter of fact,

the Scriblerians’s interconnectedness might not have been as strong and their styles not as

similar as is presented today. As such, Jonathan Swift stands out from the others by his gaiety,

his lightness, his acerbity, his offensive language, at times even resorting to personal slander

(Marshall, 2009). Thus, “forcing Swift into a “Scriblerian” pigeonhole grossly misrepresents

his early career as a satirist” (ibid., p. 288).

2.2.3 Censorship in England

Hitherto, this study has dealt with eighteenth-century England, its emergence of a middle class,

its changing society, culture, economy and politics and the thrive of the novel and the satire in

the field of literature. Whilst the focus in the previous section might have been on the openness

and the enlightened spirit of eighteenth-century England, this attitude of free expression also

faced restrictions. The development of communication, Green & Karolides (2005, p. xviii)

explain, has always been mirrored by the development of ways to curb it. In other words,

censorship has always risen concomitantly with communicative improvement.

14

The origins of both the English censorship and the French censure can be traced back to

censere, which in Latin signifies “to “declare formally”, to “describe officially”, to “evaluate”

or to “assess”” (ibid., p. xviii). The first form of control in England was established under the

Tudors at the end of the fifteenth century and it would remain intact under various forms until

the death of Queen Anne in 1714 (Wilke, 2013). At first clerical and then secular, censorship

would eventually rest on moral grounds during the eighteenth and the nineteenth century. It no

longer focussed on the consolidation of power, but rather on the suppression of works that were

deemed too improper or indecent for the masses. As such, obscene libel and seditious libel

became pursuable offenses (Green & Karolides, 2005, pp. xviii-xix & pp. 502-503).

This notwithstanding, it was as far back as the seventeenth century that the English population

felt that Royalty or Parliament should not be able to influence what was published or said. One

of the most oft-quoted examples in that prospect is John Milton’s Areopagitica of 1644, in

which he condemned the pre-publication of the press and literary works that was established

under the Licensing Order of 1643 (Green & Karolides, 2005, p. 18). Whilst it might not have

been as canonical to his contemporaries, it grew out to be a quintessential work in latter times

and a source of inspiration for other academics and thinkers. Indeed, politically it did not

manage to bring about any considerable change, but culturally it certainly was a precursor in

the field of anticensorship (Halimi, 2010; Green & Karolides, 2005, p. 19). Wilke (2013,

par. 20), for example, underscores the modernity of the work in comparison to the era in which

it was published by mentioning that its French translation was not published until 1788 and its

German translation not until 1848.

By the eighteenth century, the population no longer felt that it needed to be infantilised and

‘protected’ from works and writings. The general tenor at the turn of the century was one of

freedom (Halimi, 2010). As such, the actual abrogation of the Licensing Order that Milton had

decried was issued in 1694, which in return brought about a series of events. As stated above,

public opinion had become more important as of the eighteenth century and the exchange of

enlightened ideas would now find a new manner of dissemination in the printing industry. The

printing houses and the book market consequently reached unprecedented magnitudes (Halimi,

2010; Backscheider & Ingrassia, 2005). What once had started in coffee houses, was now

spreading onto the press and the printing industry. Critical discussion, argumentation and the

exchange of ideas was by now certainly gaining traction and brought people together (Colley,

2018; Pincus, 2012; Halimi, 2010). In literature too, the printing houses added a great impetus.

15

Benjamin Motte, publisher of Gulliver’s Travels (1726), for example, was given permission to

alter the text to his liking and as such, “Gulliver’s narrative still bears witness to those initial

textual decisions, whether made by the bookseller, editor, compositor or pressman”

(Backscheider & Ingrassia, 2005, p. 358).

Halimi (2010, pp. 24-25) points out that in reaction to this phenomenon, financial as well as

legal measures were imposed. The several Stamps Acts, for example, were encouraged by both

government as well as certain printers who were fearful to see their monopoly end by the surge

of the printing houses. On the other hand, slander had become the focal point of justice in order

to avoid the publication of works that were deemed improper. This notwithstanding, Halimi

(2010) adds that these restraints only brought moderate success.

2.2.4 Censorship in France

As was discussed above, communicative developments have always gone hand-in-glove with

censorial developments (Green & Karolides, 2005, p. xviii). It should be noted though that, as

ubiquitous it may be, censorship comes in many forms and also rests on different attitudes.

Indeed, Green & Karolides (2005, p. xx) point out that national differences are apparent as to

what is considered to be acceptable or decent. Notwithstanding the fact that their study applies

to censorship in a modern timeframe, their remark seems to be applicable to the case of France

and its bon goût (cf. infra). As such, works that would be deemed improper for publication in

eighteenth-century France might have been perfectly acceptable in Holland (Wilke, 2013,

par. 18).

As to its censorial ‘origins’, the Kingdom of France was not very different from England insofar

that communication was first hampered in the form of pre-publication censorship at the

beginning of the sixteenth century (Wilke, 2013; Green & Karolides, 2005, p. 180). During the

remainder of the century, the notion of “royal privilege” (Wilke, 2013, par. 17) would be

introduced and printing would become highly centralized in Paris (ibid., par. 17). As to the

former, that meant that royal consent was required prior to the printing of a text. As such, the

monarchy was supplied with information on both production and producer. As to the latter, this

centralisation brought about smoother and simpler censorial activity, since the lion’s share of

the printing processes was now taking place in the capital, right under the monarchical nose

(ibid., par. 17; Lambe, 1985, p. 152).

16

In rough terms, French censorship started out as a close collaboration between the church and

the state. Whilst ecclesiastical institutions such as the Vatican took up a prominent censorial

role through its Index of Forbidden Books, the apparatus of the state would increasingly

establish and codify procedures and positions to control new publications (Carpentier, 2017, p.

13; Brown, 2003, par. 5). During the seventeenth century, the censorial system was increasingly

consolidated via an increased number of censors and pre-publication censorship. Then again, a

certain tolerance was built in for economic reasons, for denying a publication would also mean

denying its revenue: it would indeed find other, clandestine routes (Green & Karolides, 2005,

p. 180).

As of the beginning of the eighteenth century onwards, enlightened and critical thought was

blooming, as was the printing industry. Consequently, the state seemed to be increasingly

determined to halt the spread of these ideas, e.g. by muzzling authors such as Voltaire and

Rousseau (Wilke, 2013; Green & Karolides, 2005, p. 180). To this end, the Kingdom of France

relied upon a vast network of royal censors for pre-publication censorship and a “book police”

(Green & Karolides, 2005, p. 180) for post-publication control (ibid., p. 180). Before taking to

the printing presses, writings would be minutely scrutinised by the former, who would then

determine whether it was fit for publication or not. Sometimes, that meant that changed needed

to be made, which resulted in what Popkin & Higonnet (2018, p. 104) mark as “watered-down”

versions (Poitou, 2017; Green & Karolides, 2005, p. 180; Brown, 2003). If it was deemed

appropriate and thus, obtained an “approbation” (Brown, 2003, pp. 241-242), it would be

published under one of the following three approvals3:

(1) Privilège du roi

(2) Permission tacite

(3) Permission de simple police

The Privilège du roi (1) meant that a certain publisher, and that publisher only, was officially

given the right to publish the text, which made royal censorship economically interesting for

him. This privilège, alongside the censor’s name, was to be included in the book (Poitou, 2017;

Brown, 2003). In Desfontaines’s translation, such an official approbation is included at the end

of the book, with the name of a certain Lancelot as the royal censor (Appendix B).

3 as described by Poitou (2017)

17

The permission tacite (2), then, signified that a text would be “granted (…) legal sanction but

not the approval of the crown” (Brown, 2003, p. 242). As such, the royal censor’s name was

omitted and the state turned a blind eye, again, for economic reasons (Poitou, 2017; Wilke,

2013). With the permission de police simple (3), it was agreed upon that publishers would not

be prosecuted (Poitou, 2017).

In this context, it appears that works that had been denied publication in France were often more

alluring to the public, and thus also more profitable (Green & Karolides, 2005, p. 181; Brown,

2003). It seems, however, that this was not the case for the anonymous translation that was

published in The Hague in January 1727. This edition would indeed perish in the wake of

Desfontaines’s successful translation that was to be published three months later (McMurran,

2008).

2.3 Translating in eighteenth-century Europe

2.3.1 General

Thus far, it has been discussed how both England and France were starting to blossom under

the impetus of a critical, enlightened spirit at the beginning of the eighteenth century. That was

not only reflected on societal level, but also spread to the literary field (e.g. the novel, satire and

the printing industry). In addition, the eighteenth century brought about a fundamental shift in

the field of translating (McMurran, 2010, p. 2). Indeed, it was during this century that the field

turned away from the seventeenth-century imitatio practices and towards what would become

the transnational approach of the nineteenth century (McMurran, 2010 pp. 1-29). Whilst the

seventeenth century had started out with a firm focus of attention on imitating the Ancients, the

second half of the century gave way to a growing number of translations into vernacular

languages and new ways of translating. It is here that the notions of ‘libertine translating’ and

‘belles infidèles’ come into play (McMurran, 2010, pp. 16-17). The former leads us to the

transition of imitatio to ‘imitation’ in England, by which translations of the ancients were

adapted to the English culture. The latter, then, brings us the name of Nicolas Perrot

d'Ablancourt (ibid., pp. 16-17).

18

With his Huit Oraisons de Cicéron (1638), d’Ablancourt was indeed one of the first to stand

up to the imitatio way of neoclassical translating (Hayes, 2009, pp. 3-6). He and his peers

instigated a freer way of translating in the seventeenth century, by which works of the Classical

antiquity were rendered in smooth(er), fluent and idiomatic French. They no longer closely

adhered to the literal practices of before, but in some way ‘Frenchified’ the works to the norms

and tastes of the readership (Hayes, 2009, pp. 3-6; Oz-Salzberger, 2006). In a certain sense,

translating was as such moulded into an art form (Zuber, 1968, as mentioned in McMurran,

2008, p. 157). Whilst their move caused quite a stir at the time, it is undeniable that their work,

their method, their belles infidèles would remain exemplary in the field of translation (Hayes,

2009, pp. 3-6).

During the eighteenth century, the translation field in France could roughly be divided into two

currents, viz. (1) the “école (…) libérale” or the liberal current and (2) the “école des puristes”

or the purist current (Du Sorbier, 1986, p. 121). The former was predominant and could be

described as centrifugal (or domesticating, cf. infra), as the translator altered the text to the

liking of his or her readership. As such, his or her role overlapped to some extent with that of

the author. The latter current, on the other hand, would essentially develop at the end of the

century and could be defined as centripetal (or foreignizing, cf. infra). Here, it was the original

work that was to be adhered to (Du Sorbier, 1986, p. 121). McMurran (2010) taps into that

division and mentions the “domesticating method”4 and the “foreignizing method”5 of

Lawrence Venuti (1995, p. 20) in order to underscore that seventeenth- and eighteenth-century

translating in France and England firmly belonged to the former category Notwithstanding the

fact that both terms would only be introduced some 270 years after Gulliver’s Travels, they are

“applicable to different periods, languages, locations and texts” (McMurran, 2010, p. 4).

In an eighteenth-century context, that domesticating method implied a number of aspects, e.g.

(1) for the source text to be adapted to the target readership, its norms, and its tastes; (2) for

translators to take liberties in doing so; (3) for translators to introduce a certain level of

‘idiomatic’ fluency and (4) for infidelities to become increasingly accepted (Rooryck & Jooken,

2014; McMurran, 2010, p. 14; Oz-Salzberger, 2006, p. 391; Venuti, 1995, pp. 66-67).

4 “An ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text to target-language cultural values, bringing the author back home” (Venuti, 1995, p. 20) 5 “An ethnodeviant pressure on those values to register the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text, sending the reader abroad” (ibid., p. 20)

19

Most of these translative infidelities, McMurran (2010, p. 74) indicates, can be assigned to two

categories, viz. amplification (amplificatio) and omission (brevitas)6. As to the consequences,

Venuti (1995) states that an author is likely to be put to the fore when the translator renders his

translation more fluent and elegant. As such, the readership is led to believe that it is reading

the original, viz. “the illusion of transparency” (ibid., p. 1). Contrariwise, McMurran (2010,

pp. 4-7) advocates the view that the eighteenth-century audience was in fact reading the

translator rather than the original author in the wake of the previous century. In the periodical

and cultural context of France, it would seem that the latter applies. Thus, as the French

audience was making the acquaintance of Lemuel Gulliver in 1727, they were introduced to

Desfontaines’s Gulliver rather than Swift’s (Just, 2002).

In addition, it should be noted that both terms are not confined to a literary level, but can also

be extrapolated to the cultural field (McMurran, 2010, pp. 3-7). Translating was increasingly

becoming a fundamental hinge in the (international) exchange of ideas, even reaching eastern

Europe (Rooryck & Jooken, 2013; Oz-Salzberger, 2006). Metropoles such as Paris, London

and Amsterdam were able to put themselves on the map as translative hives of activity. The

French Protestant exile following Louis XIV’s revocation (cf. supra) to countries as Holland or

Switzerland certainly played a part therein (Nies, 2013 p. 67; Oz-Salzberger, 2006; Du Sorbier,

1986, p. 121).

In her study on the role that translators assume in cultural transmission, Broomans (2006)

further asserts that translators can indeed act as “cultuurbemiddelaars” (p. 64), cultural

transmitters that mediate between an alien literature and cultural context on the one hand, and

their proper literature and cultural context on the other (ibid., p. 64). That pivotal role is put into

an eighteenth-century context by Oz-Salzberger (2006, p. 388), who remarks that the rise of

both the literary and the printing industries allowed for translators to become part of “a growing

species of cultural mediators” (ibid., p. 388). The above then, is done on aesthetical and/or

socio-political grounds (Broomans, 2006, p. 64). In the case of Desfontaines, it seems to be a

combination of both. He aesthetically adapted the original to please to the French readership’s

tastes, but the vast censorial network and subsequent prosecutions in the Kingdom of France

seem to be hinting at the latter as well (cf. supra).

6 In rough terms, the former could be defined as “the addition of material not found in the source text” (McMurran, 2010, p. 76) and the latter as the reduction or omission of excerpts (McMurran, 2010, p. 79)

20

Above it was observed that vernacular languages took on an increasing importance as ways of

communication and transmission. English and German, for example, were able to flourish and

whilst French maintained its leading position, it was a “crucial temporary mediator” (Oz-

Salzberger, 2006, p. 389) for the dispersion of enlightened thought across Europe by means of

(secondary) translations (Oz-Salzberger, 2006). The more central position that translations had

achieved was also reflected in the attitude on vernacular translations. During the seventeenth

century, translating was considered to be fairly straightforward, for the viewpoint was put

forward that vernaculars resembled one another. During the eighteenth century, on the other

hand, the realisation was dawning that translating was not as effortless as thought – and taught,

for that matter. It became more widely recognised that languages did indeed seem to differ

considerably, each having features of their own. In return, that brought about more discussion

and debate on (the role of) translating and translations (McMurran, 2010; pp. 101-103; Oz-

Salzberger, 2006, p. 288).

This evolution notwithstanding, there were still certain institutions and works that thought

– and taught – that the vernacular language equivalences could be applied onto the eighteenth-

century context. McMurran (2010, pp. 8-14), for example, illustrates that Latin grammar

methods were extrapolated to the vernaculars. Moreover, she remarks that the Encyclopédie ou

Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers (1751 – 1772) of Diderot and

d’Alembert presented arguments to emphasise that French and English were in some way

naturally bound to one another. They were, in other words, “analog languages” (McMurran,

2010, p. 12). As such, word-for-word translations were deemed sufficient and even beginners

could take on the art of translating. Whilst it certainly was not the predominant viewpoint of

the eighteenth century, it is important to note that it persisted nonetheless (McMurran, 2010,

pp. 8-14). That might help to interpret Desfontaines’s hesitant position. One the one hand, some

were trying to convey the old translation methods onto a new context. Then again, this

contrasted with the new forms of communication and literature that the abbé was faced with

(McMurran, 2008).

21

2.3.2 The Anglo-French connection

Upon scrutinising England, France and translation during the eighteenth century, it is rather

hard to overlook the intense intellectual and cultural exchange that was taking place back and

forth across the Channel (Rooryck & Jooken, 2013; Hayes, 2009, pp. 2-3). Whilst some

welcomed that interchange with open arms, others preferred not to have England (France)

infused with the language, ideas or culture of France (England). It is here that the franco- and

anglophilias, –phobias and –manias are brought into play, notions that would reach their apogee

by the mid of the century (Nies, 2013, p. 57; McMurran, 2010, pp. 99-108; Hayes, 2009, p. 3;

Du Sorbier, 1986) Whilst that infatuation and/or hostility are often presented as two extremes,

McMurran (2010, pp. 101-108) proposes for both to rather be put on a spectrum. Opinions about

the cross-Channel neighbour were often not one or the other, but one and the other. As such,

the smoothening, remodelling and 'Frenchification’ of English works (cf. supra) would

sometimes mean for the balance to be tipped to the philia or phobia side (McMurran, 2010, pp.

99-108, Du Sorbier, 1986).

Whether it was thanks to or in spite of England and France’s interconnectedness, it is undeniable

that the field of translation mirrored that relationship (McMurran, 2010, p. 8). French and

English were the two major languages, which resulted not only in a tidal wave of cross-Channel

translations, but also a plethora of retranslations (McMurran, 2010, pp. 4-5, Oz-Salzberger,

2006). That translative interchange additionally spurred reflection and critical thought on both

the other and the self. As such, it undeniably encouraged the modernising progress, but for

example also provided a framework for the novel to arise (McMurran, 2010; Hayes, 2009,

pp. 2-3). Oz-Salzberger (2006) observes that Voltaire was one of the key figures and mediators

on that cultural bridge. The following letter of Voltaire to Swift clearly illustrates the former’s

intermediary role whilst the latter was making preparations to visit France in 1727:

(…) I SEND you here enclosed two letters, one for Mr. de Morville, our secretary of state, and the other for Mr. de Maisons, both desirous and worthy of your acquaintance. Be so kind as to let me know if you intend to go by Calais, or by the way of Rouen. In case you resolve to go by Rouen, I will give you some letters for a good lady, who lives in her country castle just by Rouen. She will receive you as well as you deserve. There you will find two or three of my intimate friends, who are your admirers, and who have learned English since I am in England. All will pay you all the respects, and procure all the pleasures they are capable of. They will give you a hundred directions for Paris, and provide you with all the requisite conveniencies. Vouchsafe to acquaint me with your resolution, I shall certainly do my best endeavours to serve you, and to let my country know, that I have the inestimable honour to be one of your friends. (…) (Sheridan et al., 1801, Vol. XII p. 234)

22

2.4 The English original

2.4.1 Author

Born in Dublin, Ireland, on the 30th of November 1667, Jonathan Swift grew out to establish

himself as a crown jewel within the literary world – both on an Anglo-Irish and global level –

as well as a prominent figure on the satiric scene, notably thanks to his most seminal work,

Gulliver’s Travels (1726) (Quintana et al., 2017). From his early years onwards, Swift was set

for a life that would be characterised by extremes. Since little is known for certain about his

initial years, writings and biographies on Jonathan Swift abound with disagreement, anecdotes,

rumours, quarrelling and even downright mud-slinging and falsehoods (Marshall, 2018;

Thompson, 2009; Hill, 1868). That might also be due to the fact that the author often dissociated

himself from his works by means of anonymization. Gulliver, for example, is but one of the

fictional characters that may or may not have aligned with his personal views (Marshall, 2011;

Fox, 2003).

Subsequently, the persona of Jonathan Swift has been at the mercy of many different versions

put forward by equally as many biographers (Marshall, 2010, p. 103; Hammond, 2004).

Research has homed in on, inter alia, his childhood, his (misogynistic) relationship with and

towards women (Thompson, 2009), his character, his patriotism, the understanding of his multi-

layered works, his legacy and his political and religious colours (Hill, 1868). Fox (2003), for

instance, mentions Lord Orrery and his 1751 “Judas biography” (p. 15) on Swift, which can be

set in opposition to the likes of other contemporaries (e.g. Lord Bolingbroke, Alexander Pope

and John Gay), all of whom exalt the author for his good-nature and sensibility (Marshall, 2018;

Hill, 1868). Up to a century later, William Makepeace Thackeray ridiculed Swift by labelling

him as someone who “was wild, and witty, and poor” (Wheeler, 1913, p. 2) and who “would

have bullied, scorned and insulted you; (…) watched for you in a sewer, and come out to assail

you with a coward’s blow and a dirty bludgeon” (ibid., pp. 5-6). By contrast, Sir James

Mackintosh had characterized the author as someone who “possessed a degree of masterly and

correct good sense, almost as rare as genius” with “a strong sense of justice” (Mackintosh, 1836,

pp. 181-182).

23

Fatherless from birth, Jonathan Swift would in latter times see his mother leave for England

and the author spent his childhood in Ireland in the company of aunts and uncles (Quintana

et al., 2017; Fox, 2003). Thompson (2009) advocates the view that his deprived childhood

“colored his life and his writings” (p. 14). While it is true to say that Swift did not have the most

comfortable of lives in his tender age, he was provided nonetheless with a decent education at

Kilkenny School and Trinity College (Quintana et al., 2017). With William and Mary usurping

the throne in the wake of the Glorious Revolution, an electric atmosphere pervaded Dublin.

Swift went to England, where Sir William Temple took him under his wing as a secretary

(Quintana et al., 2017; Morgan, 2006). The influence of Swift’s stay at Moor Park, Temple’s

home, is not to be underestimated. It was on these Surrey grounds that Swift found both

intellectual and emotional stability for the first time in his life, having “Temple’s rich library at

his disposal” (Quintana et al., 2017, p. 2) and also making the acquaintance of his future wife,

Esther ‘Stella’ Johnson (ibid., p. 2). Hill (1868, p. 102) further emphasises that “he had never

known a home” and “found food and clothing” at Moor Park.

As these halcyon years went by, Swift would return to Ireland on two occasions, viz. (1) due to

his early stage suffering from Ménières disease, an aural disorder that was not to be discovered

until the nineteenth century by Pière Ménière, and (2) in an attempt to launch his clerical career

as a vicar and priest. It was at that moment that Swift took up his satiric pen and commenced

A Tale of a Tub (1704), in which he condemned the religious practices of the time (Quintana et

al., 2017; Fox, 2003). Upon Temple’s death, Swift returned to Moor Park and served as an

editor whilst maintaining his clerical position all the same. These changed circumstances

allowed him to cultivate his writing talent. In the following decade, the author successfully built

a reputation – albeit anonymously – and was laurelled for his knowledge and his humour

(Quintana et al., 2017; Fox, 2003). Indeed, the above suggests that it was from this point on that

Swift had carved out his career as a prose satirist.

On the political scene, Jonathan Swift was a Whig born and raised but stayed true to the

Anglican church nonetheless. In the dawn of his career as a prose satirist, Swift published a

number of pamphlets under the pseudonym of ‘Isaac Bickerstaff’, which drew the attention of

the Whig faction (Quintana et al., 2017). However, Swift altered his course with the ascension

of the so-called Oxford Ministry, a Tory government, and set himself to writing pamphlets and

periodicals in the interest of the Tories (Quintana et al., 2017; Morgan, 2006; Hill, 1868).

Hill (1868) proposes that this is perhaps why some are so keen on accusing him of

24

“apostasy” (p. 80). By 1710, he had firmly worked his way into Tory circles and was appointed

chief editor of The Examiner, the main Tory journal (Quintana et al., 2017; Morgan, 2006). Fox

(2003) additionally emphasises that Swift had probably become the most influential journalist

in England at the time, as he now held sway over public communication of important matters

such as foreign policy. Unsurprisingly, it was at that time too that the initial contact with

Alexander Pope was established (Fox, 2003). Thus, it seems that Jonathan Swift’s swaying

political convictions underline his ambiguous nature (cf. supra). As such, he never took his

Tory nor his Whig views too extremely and opted for a rather moderate approach (Hill, 1868).

After four years of Swift applying his writing skills on behalf of the Tory faction, Queen Anne

passed away and the Oxford Ministry concomitantly petered out. Swift took back to his native

country, where he secured the position of Dean of St. Patrick’s Cathedral, hence his ‘the Dean’

sobriquet. Thus, it seemed that the English chapter of his life had come to a close (Marshall,

2018; Quintana et al., 2017; Morgan, 2006). Swift would remain in Ireland for twelve more

years and lead a rather sequestered lifestyle. In addition, his retreat heralded the start of a decline

in his editorial activities (Fox, 2003). In a letter of early 1715 to Alexander Pope, Swift

succinctly describes his situation as follows:

You are to understand, that I live in the corner of a vast unfurnished house; my family consists of a steward, a groom, a helper in the stable, a footman, and an old maid, who are all at board wages, and when I do not dine abroad, or make an entertainment, (which last is very rare) I eat a mutton pie, and drink half a pint of wine; my amusements are defending my small dominions against the archbishop, and endeavouring to reduce my rebellious choir. Perditur hæc inter misero lux7. (Sheridan et al., 1801, Vol. XIV p. 6)

By 1720, the Dean had adopted a more open and societal approach again. He actively started to

address the issues that had arisen in Ireland, not only in his characteristic accusative and harsh

style, but also in an encouraging tone of voice towards the Irish. It was in this period too that

Swift set to work on Gulliver’s Travels, which had him return to England in 1726 so as to visit

his intimate friend Pope and print his most-renowned-work-to-be (Quintana et al., 2017; Fox,

2003; Hill, 1868).

7 Thus wretchedly the precious day is lost

25

Parallel to Swift’s early years, the final phase of his life has been subject to a plethora of

rumours and unsubstantiated stories. Due to his aural disorder (cf. supra), Swift suffered from

a serious stroke that left him paralysed and was declared non compos mentis8 in 1742.

Subsequently, he became but a mere shadow of the prolific author he once used to be during

his last days (Quintana et al., 2017; Fox, 2003). That opportunity was readily seized by his

detractors in an endeavour to discredit Swift. The likes of, inter alia, Orrery and Thackeray

(cf. supra) subsequently aimed their attention at his physical disorder and his poor mental state

rather than underscoring his achievements on social and political level (Fox, 2003). Hill (1868,

p. 72) observes that his tarnished image would subsist in “all the cyclopaedias, biographical

dictionaries and text books on English literature for schools” in the century to follow, portraying

Swift as a misanthropist, a misogynist and an ill-natured monster. In 1745, the Dean passed

away and was laid to rest in ‘his’ St. Patrick’s Cathedral, but his legacy as a writer and as a

person would continue to be a fruitful domain for research (Quintana et al., 2017).

2.4.2 Gulliver’s Travels and its reception in England

Gulliver’s Travels was first published in October 1726 and immediately took England by storm

(Quintana et al., 2017, p. 4; McMurran, 2008, p. 159). When it came out, it seemed as though

all the key elements had been there for the book to result in a complete success. The English

readership was bigger and hungrier than ever (cf. supra), the work linked in to the blooming

printing industry and subsequent upswing of both the novel and the satiric genre (Marshall,

2014, p. 40) and responded to the frenetic activity of vernacular languages (McMurran, 2008,

p. 159). In addition, Block (1953) proposes that Lemuel Gulliver also responded to the middle-

class Englishman. From his birthplace to his education: it appears as though Gulliver was

embodying the rising middle-class (cf. supra).

Just (2002, par. 2) indicates that those who were closest to Swift, notably the Scriblerians,

exalted the work when it was published. The following letters of respectively Alexander Pope

(November 16, 1726) and John Gay (November 17, 1726) seem to corroborate that:

8 Of unsound mind and memory (trans. Fox, 2003, p. 4)

26

I congratulate you first upon what you call your cousin's wonderful book, which is publica trita manu9 at present, and I prophecy will be hereafter the admiration of all men. That countenance with which it is received by some statesmen, is delightful; I wish I could tell you how every single man looks upon it, to observe which has been my whole diversion this fortnight. I have never been a night in London since you left me, till now for this very end, and indeed it has fully answered my expectations. I find no considerable man very angry at the book; some indeed think it rather too bold10, and too general a satire: but none that I hear of accuse it of particular reflections (…). (Sheridan et al., 1801, Vol. XIV pp. 56-57)

Indeed, Pope seems to emphasise the success and positive reception of the book. As a close

friend of Swift (cf. supra), he too praises his friend for Gulliver’s Travels. This notwithstanding,

the sentence in bold subtly hints at the negative criticism that the Travels received (cf. infra).

ABOUT ten days ago a book was published here of the travels of one Gulliver, which has been the conversation of the whole town ever since: the whole impression sold in a week; and nothing is more diverting than to hear the different opinions people give of it, though all agree in liking it extremely. (…) From the highest to the lowest it is universally read, from the cabinet council to the nursery. The politicians to a man agree, that it is free from particular reflections, but that the satire on general societies of men is too severe. (…) Lord —— is the person who least approves it, blaming it as a design of evil consequence to depreciate human nature, at which it cannot be wondered that he takes most offence, being himself the most accomplished of his species, and so losing more than any other of that praise which is due both to the dignity and virtue of a man. (Sheridan et al., 1801, Vol. XII pp. 213-214)

By the same token, John Gay further suggests that it was the talk of the town and a roaring

success. A bit further, Gay links the criticism of misanthropy that Gulliver’s Travels was met

with to a certain “Lord ——”, which Just (2002, par. 4) suggests is Lord Bolingbroke, who

appeared hostile toward Swift’s book of 1726.

Whilst Gulliver’s Travels undoubtedly had a plain, enjoyable style that was palatable for the

masses, it was also marked by the acerbity and violent language that were characteristic to

Swift’s satire (Quintana et al., 2017; Mullan & Cordner, 2017; Marshall, 2009). The Travels

undoubtedly belong to the category of political satire, but the book “also hunts larger prey”

(Mullan & Cordner, 2017, p. 4), viz. human nature. That brings us to Part IV, A Voyage to the

Houyhnhnms.

9 In everybody’s hands (trans. Sheridan et al., 1801, Vol. XIV p. 56) 10 Bold in all excerpts and examples was added by the authors of this study

27

2.4.3 Part IV: A Voyage to the Houyhnhnms

Before briefly discussing Part IV of Gulliver’s Travels, it might be useful to succinctly outline

the voyages that Gulliver had already undertaken. His first journey takes him to Lilliput and

Blefuscu, both of which are inhabited by miniscule human beings. During the second travel,

these roles are reversed when Gulliver meets with the giants of Brobdingnag. The third voyage,

then, brings Gulliver amongst others to the mathematicians of Laputa, the dreamy scientists of

Balnibarbi and the immortal Struldbruggs of Luggnagg (Swift, 1726).

The present study, however will home in on Part IV of Gulliver’s Travels, during which Lemuel

Gulliver is set ashore on the Land of the Houyhnhnms, rational horses that live together with

the Yahoos, inferior human-like creatures. That choice is not haphazard, as it is over this part

that much ink has been spilled. Nineteenth-century as well as twentieth-century studies have

found the fourth part to be “a hard nut to crack” (Harrison, 2003, p. 35) and Just (2002) speaks

of “the problematic status of Part IV” (par. 1). It is here too that the notion of misanthropy is

all too easily attributed to Swift, the question at the heart of which is whether or not Gulliver’s

disgust is representative of Swift’s view on human nature (Marshall, 2010, p. 91; Harrison,

2003, p. 38). Consequently, the portrait of Jonathan Swift as a misanthropist might have been

spurred by the alignment of his personality with Gulliver’s (Just, 2002, par. 10).

Sackett (1973) further points out that the key question that hangs over this part is whether the

Yahoos represent humans or not. He suggests that both the Yahoos – the “homo” (ibid., p. 214)

– and the Houyhnhnms – the “sapiens” (ibid., p. 214) – have elements that are characteristic

of human beings. In other words, the claim is made that Gulliver’s fourth voyage revolves

around psychology. The Yahoos and the Houyhnhnms both present a side of human nature and

Gulliver is incapable of linking the two together. As such, Sackett (1973) even goes as far as

concluding that the fourth voyage has a Freudian touch to it.

28

2.5 The anonymous translation into French

The publication of Gulliver’s Travels was very swiftly – a mere three months (!) – followed by

an anonymous translation that was issued in The Hague, the Netherlands in January 1727 by

Pierre Gosse and Jean Neaulme. As of 2018, the translator of Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel

Gulliver, en divers pays éloignez is yet to be identified.

It should be noted, then, that The Hague is the presumable place of publication. It was indeed

not uncommon for publishers and writers to turn to another publisher’s name for safety’s sake

and to avoid censorship (Grootendorst, s.d.). A case in point is Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s

Émile ou De l’éducation (1762). Whilst the name of Jean Neaulme adorned the front page,

Parisian publisher Nicolas-Bonaventure Duchesne was in reality responsible for its publication

(Grootendorst, s.d.).

Not only Neaulme, but also Pierre Gosse was recurrently used as a pseudonym, accompanied

by a fictitious place of publication. The Bibliothèque nationale de France (2018) adds the

following two notes to the pages of (1) Pierre Gosse and (2) Jean Neaulme:

(1) Pseudonyme employé d'abord avec ceux de Rutger Christoffel Alberts et Christiaen Van

Lom par Pierre-François Émery, à Paris en 1714, pour dissimuler l'une de ses éditions.

Couvre par la suite des éditions principalement françaises

(2) Pseudonyme qui, sous les adresses de La Haye, Amsterdam et Berlin, emprunte

l'identité du libraire de La Haye Jean II Neaulme (1694-1780), en activité de 1720 à

1763 env. Dissimule notamment des impressions françaises, de Paris et de Rouen

In addition, Geleijns (s.d.) duly notes that Pierre Gosse only began his collaboration with Jean

Neaulme as of 1725 onwards. That would mean that such a vast and successful novel as

Gulliver’s Travels would have been one of the first works in their hands. Could that indeed hint

at “The Hague”, “P. Gosse” and “J. Neaulme” being possible pseudonyms for a French

publisher seeking to avoid censorship and /or subsequent prosecution?

As to the translator’s identity, the most oft-quoted name is that of a Dutchman, viz. Justus Van

Effen. The attribution of this anonymous translation to Van Effen is not haphazard, for

previously he had already translated Daniel Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe (1719, trans. 1722) and

29

Jonathan Swift’s Tale of a Tub (1704, trans. 1721). The former was published in Amsterdam,

the latter in The Hague (McMurran, 2010, p. 215; Oz-Salzberger, 2006; Du Sorbier, 1986). Van

Effen had learned French from a certain Ms. de Limeville, a Frenchwoman who had fled to The

Hague following the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes (cf. supra). Moreover, he had managed

to extend his knowledge during his stay in London from 1714 to 1716. There, he had made the

acquaintance of, amongst others, Jonathan Swift, Isaac Newton, Alexander Pope, Joseph

Addison and Richard Steel and was also admitted into the Royal Society (Du Sorbier, 1986,

p. 122; Stellwagen, 1889, pp. ix-x). Léger (2004, p. 542) holds the same position, remarking

that the anonymous translation is generally attributed to either Cornelis van Blankesteijn or

Justus van Effen.

2.6 The ‘official’ translation into French

2.6.1 Author

As with Jonathan Swift, it would be scarcely possible to analyse Voyages de Gulliver (1727)

without concisely portraying the translator that was responsible for the work. Pierre-François

Guyot Desfontaines – in short abbé Desfontaines – was born in Rouen, France on the 29th of

June 1685. At the age of fifteen, he joined the Compagnie de Jésus, from which he had also

received education during his childhood. He would leave the order in 1715 and find protection

and employment under the wings of Henri-Oswald de La Tour d’Auvergne, cardinal of

Auvergne (Valentin, 2011; Nisard, 1853).

Desfontaines first took up his pen as a poetic writer. However, that proved not as successful as

he would have hoped, which would leave him with a deep sense of revulsion for the genre.

During the following years, the abbé would practise the profession of both critic and editor, but

it was not until 1724 that he would hold his first important position. It was in that year that

Desfontaines was approached to engage in the delicate task of saving the Journal des Sçavans.

The influential literary journal had gone through some rough times at the beginning of the

eighteenth century. With the appointment of Desfontaines, however, the journal managed to

overturn that negative trend (Valentin, 2011; Nisard, 1853).

30

On a personal level, nonetheless, Desfontaines’s life took a turn for the worse. Nisard (1853)

briefly outlines the event as follows:

Une grossière illusion des sens, une erreur impardonnable dans le choix de la personne qui en fut l'objet, un peu trop de laisser-aller dans la manière dont il céda aux besoins de son tempérament, pensèrent le mener à la Grève et l'y faire brûler pour venger les mœurs outragées. Ayant corrompu un ramoneur que, à cause de son fer et de son bandeau, dit Voltaire, il avait pris pour un amour, il fut saisi, dit-on, flagrante delicto, et conduit à Bicêtre. On commençait à instruire son procès. Il y allait pour lui des fagots, parce que le délit dont on l'accusait était devenu si commun, qu'on disait que Paris avait besoin d'un exemple. L'active intervention de Voltaire le sauva. (Nisard, 1853, p. 28)

In other words, the abbé was facing trial and imprisonment on homosexual grounds. Whilst

Voltaire did indeed manage to have Desfontaines discharged from prison, the latter withdrew

from the Journal des Sçavans and took back to the countryside. There, Desfontaines would

assume the role of critic once again, which resulted in a series of libelles (Nisard, 1853). His

Dictionnaire néologique (1726), then, responded to the growing importance of literature and

vernaculars (cf. supra). In passing, however, he also used the neologisms to criticise some

contemporary philosophers and writers such as Montesquieu or his own ‘saviour’, Voltaire.

For his Lettres d’un rat calotin à Citron Barbet (1727), he drew inspiration from Latin and

Greek authors. It was during that same year that Desfontaines’s Voyages de Gulliver was

finished and published in Paris (Nisard, 1853).

Lastly, McMurran (2008, p. 151) remarks that the image of Desfontaines that has lived on is

essentially a negative one. Indeed, it appears that the abbé had the (mis)fortune of living through

the dynamic, transitional period that was the eighteenth century, especially in the fields of

literature and translation. The focus of attention has all but been on his enthusiastic manner of

altering texts, whilst it must not be forgotten that he was in fact an important precursor. Having

translated both ‘the old’ (e.g. Virgil) and ‘the new’ (e.g. Swift), Desfontaines found himself in

a difficult position (McMurran, 2008). That hesitant attitude between his traditional education

and the modernity that was required by works such as Gulliver’s Travels reveals itself in his

Voyages de Gulliver, as shall be illustrated in chapter four.

31

2.6.2 Voyages de Gulliver and its reception in France

Whilst Voyages de Gulliver was initially published anonymously in Paris in April 1727, Léger

(2002b, pp. 20-21) observes that certain elements gave away that it was to be attributed to

Desfontaines nonetheless. An announcement in the Mercure de France of March 1727, for

example, signalled that a certain “M. l’Abbé D. F travaille depuis trois mois à un Ouvrage en

2. Vol, in 12, qui doit paroître vers Pâques” (Mercure de France, 1968, p. 629).

In a letter of July 4, 172611 from Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines to Jonathan Swift, it

becomes clear that the former was indeed responsible for the translation:

Vous trouverez, monsieur, en beaucoup d'endroits une traduction peu fidelle; mais tout ce qui plaît en Angleterre, n'a pas ici le même agrément; soit parce que les moeurs sont différentes, soit parce que les allusions et les allégories, qui sont sensibles dans un pays, ne le sont pas dans un autre; soit enfin parce que le goût des deux nations n'est pas le même. J'ai voulu donner aux François un livre, qui fut à leur usage: voila ce qui m'a rendu traducteur libre et peu fidelle. J'ai même pris la liberté d'ajouter, selon que votre imagination échauffoit la mienne. (Sheridan et al., 1801, Vol. XII pp. 151-152;)

[In many parts you will easily see that my translation is not exact; but what pleases in England, has not always the same effect in France; either because our manners are different, or because the allusions and allegories, that strike people in one country, do not make the same impression in another; or, in fine, because the two nations do not always agree in taste. My intention was to present my countrymen with a book, which might be of use to them; and this has made me take some liberties in varying from the original. I have been even so free as to make some additions, according as I found my own imagination raised by yours]12

Furthermore, the abbé openly adheres to the domesticating, liberal current that was described

above (section 2.3.1) and as such seems to be perpetuating the belles infidèles current of

d’Ablancourt into the eighteenth century. Indeed, the abbé admits to having adapted the book

to its readership’s tastes, having smoothened and Frenchified it, and having taken liberties in

doing so (cf. supra). The general tenor amongst critics and scholars seems to corroborate that

Desfontaines was not too wary of the fidelity vis-à-vis the source text. He made substantial

alterations to meet the French “bon goût” (Léger, 1996, p. 91), for example by expunging

passages that were deemed too vulgar. It is in the light of that attitude and these visible changes

that his translation and/or adaptation is generally identified as a belle infidèle (Valentin, 2011;

Léger, 2004; Léger, 1996).

11 This letter has probably been wrongly dated, for Swift would not publish Gulliver’s Travels until October 1726 and Desfontaines had only started thinking of a translation as of February 1727 (Desfontaines, 1727, p. xii) 12 trans. Sheridan et al., 1801, Vol. XIII p. 463

32

These adaptations notwithstanding, Voyages de Gulliver flew off the shelves (Léger, 2004).

Although an anonymous French translation had been published in The Hague three months

before Desfontaines’s translation (cf. supra), the former was never able to capture the French

market like the Parisian version would. With a mere ten editions throughout the eighteenth

century, the anonymous translation paled into insignificance compared to the abbé’s translation

and its 180 editions (Valentin, 2011; McMurran, 2008, p. 5; Just, 2002, par. 33; Léger, 2002a).

Just (2002, par. 33) suggests that the French readership was indeed less interested in the

unknown author of Lemuel Gulliver than “le célèbre M. Swift, Irlandois, (…) dont tous les

Ecrits, (…) sont connus & trés-estimés en Angleterre” (Desfontaines, 1727, p. vii).

The Journal des Sçavans, for example, highlights the success of Desfontaines’s translation in

respectively May and June of 1727:

La traduction des Voyages de Gulliver que nous avons annoncées le mois passé, se débite avec beaucoup de succès. Nous en donnerons au plutôt l'Extrait. (Journal des Sçavans Apr.-Jun., 1727, p. 1003)

La première édition de la Traduction des Voyages de Gulliver qui a paru après Pâques de cette anné, se trouvant entierement épuisée, les Libraires viennent d’en faire une seconde édition en petit caractere & en un seul volume, & une troisiéme de même caractere que la premiere. (Journal des Sçavans Apr.-Jun., 1727, pp. 1207-1208)

In July of 1727 then, a comprehensive summary of all four voyages was given in the issue of

July – September (pp. 1274-1322). As to the ‘problematic’ fourth chapter (cf. supra), it is

observed that the truth might be confronting but that Desfontaines successfully managed to

adapt it to the French readership:

Notre Auteur, qui en veut précisément à la folie des hommes, & à la dépravation de leurs mœurs, ne pouvoit donc se dispenser de recourir à quelque forte de stratagême, pour attaquer des ennemis si puissans; & nous sommes persuadez qu'il lui eût été difficile d'en trouver un plus convenable que celui dont il a fait choix. Ses réflexions philosophiques, ses préceptes de morale, ses maximes de politique, ses idées sublimes sur l'honneur, sur la probité, & sur tous les devoirs de la vie civile, les éloges qu'il fait de sa vertu, l'horreur qu'il donne du vice en général, & les satyres mordarites qu'il seme par tout contre quantité de défauts en particulier, toutes ces choses sont amenées par des préambules divertissans, & soutenues par des imaginations amusantes, rien de plus propre à faire goûter les régles qu'il propose; rien de plus capable de prévenir favorablement ceux mêmes qui le croiroient un peu maltraitez. (Journal des Sçavans Jul.-Sept., 1727, p. 1303)

33

By the same token, the Mercure de France, Tome XII, Janvier-juin comments in May 1727 that

"il n'y a pas un trait dans ce dernier Voyage qui ne soit beau & frappant." (p. 966) and

additionally praises the translated work:

Ce Livre n’est pas seulement un Ouvrage amusant, mais très-utile. Peintures, fictions, entretiens, reflexions, tout part d’un Pinceau hardi & délicat, & d’un esprit profond. On trouve l’Ouvrage écrit avec pureté, avec élegance, & surtout avec une clarté & une vivacité infinie (p. 966)

While it is true to say that the lion’s share of contemporaneous criticism was positive, it should

be noted that the Frenchified Gulliver was also disapproved of (Just, 2002, par. 42). Two

examples are given by Just (2002, par. 42), viz. a certain Paradis de Moncrif and Madame Du

Deffand, both of whom frowned upon Part IV. Paradoxically, the latter is the exact person that

Desfontaines had dedicated his translation to in his opening epistle of Voyages de Gulliver.

Whilst scant attention has been paid to that épître, both Léger (2002a) and Léger (2004) remark

that Madame la Marquise D*** of Desfontaines’s epistle is Marie du Deffand. In the following

letter of July 1780, the marquise looks back on the abbot’s Voyages de Gulliver and

concomitantly seems to corroborate the clear-cut negative position that she had adopted on the

work:

Je viens de tenter la lecture de Gulliver que j’avois déjà lu, et même que le traducteur, l’Abbé Desfontaines m’avoit dédié. Je ne crois qu’il y ait rien de plus désagréable. La conversation avec les chevaux est l’invention la plus forcée, la plus froide, la plus fastidieuse qu’on ait pu imaginer. (Letters of the Marquise du Deffand, 1810, Vol. IV p. 22).

In like manner, Voltaire overtly states in a letter of May 27, 1727 to Nicolas-Claude Thieriot

that he deplores for the work to have been translated by the abbot:

I hear that M. Gulliver is now translated and takes pretty much. I wish the translation could be your’s : but I am afraid the abbot has outrun you, and reaped the benefit which such a book should have procured to you. (Foulet, 1913, pp. 94-95)

Then again, the Frenchman had read Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels in English, had

established a bitter enmity with Desfontaines by then and was infatuated with both England and

Swift (Oz-Salzberger, 2006; Just, 2002; Thacker, 1967; Nisard, 1853).

34

In brief, from the above follows that, save a few exceptions, Desfontaines’s Voyages de Gulliver

was highly estimated in France. His adjustments to the original work were encouraged rather

than denounced and his work would become particularly successful in France. Gulliver’s

Travels, on the other hand, was met with more scepticism and resistance in England. That seems

to suggest that England made the acquaintance of Lemuel Gulliver as created by Swift, whilst

France was introduced to a version that Desfontaines had passed the belles infidèles sponge

over (Just, 2002).

2.6.3 The importance of paratextual elements: Desfontaines’s preface and footnotes

2.6.3.1 Desfontaines’s preface

A work of fiction can be divided into the text of the work on the one hand, and the material that

accompanies the work on the other (e.g. prefaces or notes). These elements are able to steer the

reader’s interpretation of and attitude towards the text (Maloney, 2005, p. 16). Parallel to the

author of the original, the translator too can choose to have his voice echo throughout the text

by seizing the preface as a tool to guide the reader’s interpretation of the text (Hermans, 2014;

Rooryck & Jooken, 2013, p. 596). The translator’s preface appears to complicate things: due to

its relative free nature, the translator is given room for laying down his reflections and

explanations on the original work, himself and his translation (Valentin, 2011; Hayes, 2009, pp.

7-9). Indeed, he finds himself in a privileged position insofar that he is introducing the reader

to a work that he has already read but the former not (yet) (Hayes, 2009, p. 8). The position that

the translator adopts could be regarded as a manner of “framing” (Hermans, 2014, p. 60) his

message, viz. “a device for signalling the dissociation from the alien and the affirmation of

indigenous values” (ibid., p. 6). The preface is a useful paratextual instrument therein, insofar

that it can affect the translation throughout the remainder of the text (Hermans, 2014, p. 59).

In her study on the translation of Rudolf Höss’s Commandant of Auschwitz (1958), Spiessens

(2013) zeroes in on the translator’s ethical position and voice. In rough terms, she links Theo

Hermans’s notion of the (internally or externally) ever-apparent translator’s voice (Zhang,

2016; Hermans, 2014) to the Genettian notion of paratext13. Translators can position themselves

vis-à-vis the author they are translating by using the “discursive space” (Spiessens, 2013, p. 4)

13 “(…) those liminal devices and conventions, both within the book (peritext) and outside it (epitext), that mediate the book to the reader: titles and subtitles, pseudonyms, forewords, dedications, epigraphs, prefaces, intertitles, notes, epilogues, and afterwords” (Genette, 1997, p. xviii)

35

that paratextual elements provide them with. By the same token, Desfontaines appears to find

and use that space in the form of a translator’s preface that he introduces at the beginning of

Voyages de Gulliver (1727) (McMurran, 2008; Léger, 2002a). The abbot denounces for

example the anonymous translation of The Hague, finds fault with some features of the English

original and then juxtaposes the latter to his own, altered version that was adapted in function

of the French readership (Valentin, 2011; Léger, 2002a). As such, Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s

Travels somewhat slides from a satire into a moral fable (Léger, 2004, p. 528; Léger, 2002a,

p. 183).

2.6.3.2 Desfontaines’s footnotes The translation of a work can coincide with the “remodelage de l’appareillage paratextuel”

(Rooryck & Jooken, 2013, p. 590). That remodelling of the paratextual framework reveals itself

in Voyages de Gulliver not only through the preface, but also in the footnotes that Desfontaines

has added. Notes, Maloney (2005, p. 20) argues, are a particular kind of paratextual element in

that they can be introduced both in and outside of the narrative. As they come in different shapes

and sizes and can serve a variety of functions, Maloney (2005) proposes a typology of notes,

which shall be used for our analysis and described in chapter three.

Footnotes, then, are the “scholarly note par excellence” (ibid., p. 23). They have existed since

medieval times and the flourishment of the printing industry (cf. supra) entailed the use of

certain formats (ibid., pp. 23-24). In the case of Desfontaines, seven footnotes have been added

in comparison with the English original. Two of them are to be situated in the third voyage, five

can be found in Gulliver’s voyage to the Houyhnhnms. In other words, they only occur in the

two voyages that set off the strongest and most hostile reactions to Gulliver’s Travels (Léger,

2002a, pp. 186-187).

In an eighteenth-century context, Léger (2002a) observes, the most troublesome or satirical

excerpts of a work can somewhat be cloaked in notes, which could even nullify the fiction of a

work altogether. They can as such contribute to either the “détonation” (ibid., p. 184) or the

“détonnement” (ibid., p. 184) of the text. By the former, the author (translator) quite abruptly

interrupts the reader, startles him out of the fiction and puts a certain excerpt to the fore. By the

latter, the author (translator) comes to a judgment and underscores the importance of a certain

excerpt, as such compelling the reader to go over it again or more closely (Léger, 2002a, p.

184).

36

3. METHOD

Before moving on to the method that was adopted for this study, it might be convenient to

reutter the research questions that were formulated in chapter one, viz.

(1) What translatorial changes has Part IV (Chapter I) of Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726)

undergone in its two translations into French (Desfontaines, 1727; Anon., 1727)?

a. How can these translatorial changes be categorised in accordance with the four

enarrative functions as proposed by Rooryck & Jooken (2013)?

(2) What is the impact of Desfontaines’s altered paratextual framework, viz. his Préface du

traducteur and the five footnotes that have been added to Part IV?

a. How can these footnotes be categorised in accordance with the four enarrative

functions as proposed by Rooryck & Jooken (2013)?

b. How can these footnotes be categorised in accordance with the typology of notes

as proposed by Maloney (2005)?

In order to provide an answer to all questions, a systematic analysis was carried out on two

contemporaneous translations into French of the first chapter of Part IV of Jonathan Swift’s

Gulliver’s Travels, which was published in London in October 1726 by Benjamin Motte:

(1) The ‘official’ translation into French by Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines, which was

published in Paris in April 1727 by V. Coustelier and Jacques Guérin;

(2) An anonymous translation into French that was published in The Hague14 in January

1727 by Pierre Gosse and Jean Neaulme.

The original work as well as the anonymous translation were acquired online via Google Books

(books.google.com). Both were an electronic, scanned version of the book, the latter of which

was marked with a stamp of the Koninklijke Bibliotheek on page two and four. In like manner,

an electronic, scanned version of the ‘official’ translation was retrieved from the Bibliothèque

nationale de France (gallica.bnf.fr).

14 It could be possible that The Hague was not the actual place of publication, nor Neaulme and Gosse the actual publishers (cf. sub-chapter 2.5).

37

As to the analysis, the current study drew from two other studies. The first is that of Rooryck

& Jooken (2013), in which the English translation of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Discours sur les

Sciences et les Arts (1751) was scrutinised. In section 2.6.3, it was observed that the translator’s

voice is always (internally or externally) apparent (Zhang, 2016; Hermans, 2014).

Rooryck & Jooken (2013) elaborate on that voice, indicating that it can become an enarrative

voice when it appropriates “la parole étrangère par une interprétation qui prétend lui donner la

même valeur que la version originale” (pp. 593-594). In addition, that enarrative voice can

assume a number of functions, which allows for the translation to be somewhat read as a

commentary (ibid., p. 594). In a typology, the former propose four functions that the said

enarrative voice can assume, which were used so as to categorise the alterations that the first

chapter of Part IV of Gulliver’s Travels has undergone in both translations into French. The

four categories comprise:

(1) a meta-discursive level, by which “le traducteur justifie ses choix ou ses stratégies ; il

évoque son travail de traducteur” (ibid., p. 593). In other words, the translator comments

on his choices and strategies and thereby evokes his work as a translator. Thus, this

alteration is always explicit (ibid.);

(2) an argumentative level, by which “le traducteur intervient dans l’argumentation

originale pour l’expliciter, la clarifier, la renforcer, voire la contredire” (ibid., p. 593).

In other words, the translator intervenes in the argumentation of the original work so as

to render explicit, clarify, reinforce or even contradict the position of the author. This

alteration can either be implicit or explicit (ibid.);

(3) an evaluative level, by which “le traducteur fait entendre une appréciation positive ou

négative à propos du texte qu’il traduit” (ibid., p. 593). In other words, the translator

gives a positive or negative value judgement on the text that is being translated. This

alteration can either be implicit or explicit (ibid.);

(4) an extra-diegetic level, by which “le traducteur incorpore des références contextuelles,

tantôt venant de la culture source, tantôt appartenant à la culture cible; il intervient en

marge de l’énoncé, en dehors de l’exposé diégétique” (ibid., p. 593). In other words, the

translator integrates contextual references from either the source culture or the target

culture, by which he intervenes outside of the utterance, outside of the actual diegetic

statement. This alteration can either be implicit or explicit (ibid.).

38

In order to chart the five footnotes that were added by Desfontaines in Part IV, this study

followed Carpentier’s (2017) research on the paratext of Les Liaisons Dangereuses (1782) and

its first translation into English (1784). She used a typology of notes as proposed by Maloney

(2005):

Thus, three types of notes are put forward, all of which can spring from two different sources.

As this study zeroed in on the five footnotes that were added by Desfontaines, their source was

inevitably allographic.

The first type of notes are factual notes, which “provide a particular piece of information to the

reader at a particular point in time, most often as supporting evidence for the fact being

represented in the main text” (Maloney, 2005, pp. 29-30). They can come in many forms,

amongst which:

a. Definitional notes

b. Explanatory notes

c. Intertextual notes

d. Historical notes

Interpretive notes, then, are “not meant to convey (at least not solely) a particular piece of

information, but rather (…) to provide a perspective, aside, or comment on an event or

description in the main narrative” (ibid., pp. 41-42). This type of notes disclose on the narrative

Figure 1: Typology of notes as proposed by Maloney (2005, p. 28)

39

context and exert a more far-reaching effect on the commitment of the reader to the text than

factual notes do (ibid., p. 42).

Lastly, discursive notes most commonly assume the shape of a narrative proper . As such, they

contain “a narrative that is separate from, though most often interconnected with, the main body

of the text” (ibid., pp. 48-49). Discursive notes are often used by authors in an endeavour to

inform or elaborate on the main story without interrupting the “mimetic consistency” (ibid.,

p. 49). As with the former two notes, this type can also be employed by an allographic speaker

such as a translator (ibid., p. 49).

In brief, the analysis first homed in on the Préface du traducteur of Desfontaines, singling out

nine larger examples so as to better disclose the stance that the abbot adopts vis-à-vis the

original, the reader and his own translation. Then, the four categories of Rooryck & Jooken

(2013) were used in order to delineate the enarrative functions that can be traced in both the

official and the anonymous translation. In order to do so, excerpts were taken from the first

chapter of Part IV, which is not uncommonly described as the most problematic and puzzling

part of the four (Harrison, 2003, p. 35; Just, 2002, par. 1). A corpus of 59 examples was

composed, which can be found in Appendix L. The excerpts in which the translators’ ennarative

voices were most visible were singled out and scrutinised in further detail in the analysis. All of

the examples in both chapter four and in the corpus were preceded by an abbreviation that

indicated the text from which they had been taken, viz. ST (source text), TTD (target text

Desfontaines) and TTA (target text anonymous). The five footnotes that Part IV contains were

also attributed to one of the four categories and scrutinised in concordance with Maloney’s

(2005) typology. For the analysis of the preface, the enarrative changes as well as the footnotes,

it was decided to all but keep the original orthographies of the English original and its two

translations into French. The sole modification that the reader will find is that the so-called

‘long s’ (ſ) was replaced by a lower case, modern ‘s’ so as to assure him or her a smoother

reading of the excerpts and examples.

40

4. ANALYSIS

4.1 Peritext: Desfontaines’s Préface du traducteur

As discussed above in section 2.6.3, the preface is one of those peritextual elements that provide

the author or translator with a device and space for him (1) to reflect or elaborate on the original

work, the translation or himself (Valentin, 2011; Hayes, 2009, pp. 7-9) and (2) to influence the

reader’s interpretation of and attitude towards the work (Maloney, 2005, p. 16). As such, the

preface can sometimes continue to resonate throughout the remainder of the work (Hermans,

2014; Rooryck & Jooken, 2013). In his Préface du traducteur, the abbot welcomes the reader

with a reflection on the original author, the original work, his translation into French, the

anonymous translation of The Hague and his own cultural context. The following will point out

that the abbot indeed seems to utilise his preface, this discursive space as a manner of message

framing so as to manoeuvre away from the foreign and towards the proper values (Hermans,

2014, p. 60).

A first difference can be noted in that Desfontaines does not adopt the frontispiece that Jonathan

Swift had introduced in Gulliver’s Travels (cf. infra). Instead, Desfontaines immediately

commences his translation with the title page, an epistle to Madam La Marquise D*** (cf.

supra) and – most importantly – his Préface du traducteur. After a short dedicative epistle to

Marie du Deffand (see section 2.6.2), the abbot commences his preface with a four-page

reflection (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. vii-x) on the author of the original work, “le celebre M.

Swift, Irlandois, Doïen de l’Eglise de S. Patrice, à Dublin” (ibid., p. vii).

The choice of celebre is not haphazard, for Desfontaines will continue to underscore the

success, reputation and popularity of Jonathan Swift. By 1727, Swift had already made a certain

name for himself (see section 2.4.1), and the cross-Channel dialogue and interchange was

exciting spirits in both England and France (see section 2.3.2). The latter is also explicitly

reuttered by Desfontaines, remarking that he wanted to undertake this translation “pour me

perfectionner dans la connoissance de la Langue Angloise, qui commence à être à la mode à

Paris” (ibid., p. xiv). It would seem that the abbé was aware of the fact that his readership would

rather be allured by the renown of Swift, the Anglo-Irishman, than some unknown

Lemuel Gulliver (Just, 2002, par. 33). As such, Desfontaines carries on his accolade, observing

that all of Swift’s writings “soit dans le genre de Belles-Lettres, soit sur les matieres de

41

Politique, sont connus & trés estimés en Angleterre” (Desfontaines, 1727, p. vii). He then

concludes these paragraphs on the Dean by enumerating some celebrated works that had been

written by the latter, e.g. A Discourse of the Contests and Dissensions Between the Nobles and

the Commons in Athens and Rome (1701), seven small treatises (viz. Drapier’s Letters of 1724-

1725) and Tale of a Tub (1704), the translation of which was ”assez mauvais, [mais] eut

beaucoup de succès” (ibid., pp. ix-x).

The Tale of a Tub was rendered as the Conte du Tonneau by Justus Van Effen and published in

The Hague in 1704. Indeed, the Dutchman was already mentioned above as the possible

translator of the Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (1727), also issued in The Hague.

Whether or not Van Effen was indeed responsible for the work, Desfontaines also employs his

preface to take position against the anonymous translation, and by extension the translation

practices in Holland:

Example 1

TTD J'apprends qu'on en imprime actuellement une en Hollande. Si elle est litterale, & si elle est faite par quelque Traducteur ordinaire de ce païs-là, je prononce, sans l'avoir vûë, qu'elle est fort mauvaise, & je suis bien sûr, que quand elle paroîtra je ne serai ni démenti, ni détrompé. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. xviii-xix)

The abbé not only condemns the literal manner of translating, he also snubs the ordinary

translators in Holland and foresees that the translation would be of poor quality. To a certain

extent, the disregard for the Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver of The Hague and

captivation for the Voyages de Gulliver of Paris seem to corroborate that suggestion (cf. section

2.6.2). The translative field of eighteenth-century France was dominated by a domesticating,

liberal frame of mind (cf. section 2.3.1). Consequently, the anonymous, rather literal translation

would be looked upon as poorer in comparison with the translation (adaptation) of

Desfontaines.

In his preface, the abbé additionally touches on the domesticating, liberal attitude in question

(ibid., pp. x-xviii), which is done in such manner that the English original and its ‘problems’ is

contrasted with Desfontaines’s translation and its ‘solutions’ (Valentin, 2011). He begins by

informing the reader that he had heard of the overwhelming success and ingenious, amusing

nature of the book (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. x-xii). As of February 1727, the idea of both reading

and translating the work began to form in his mind, but only if “je m’en sentisse capable & que

42

je le trouvasse conforme à mon goût” (ibid., p. xii). In the following paragraphs, Desfontaines

enumerates the problematic elements of the English translation (example 2 and 3) and points

out that he has taken liberties so as to render the work in accordance with the tastes of the

French readership (example 3):

Example 2

TTD Mais j'avouë que les trente premieres pages ne me firent aucun plaisir. L'arrivée de Gulliver dans l'empire de Lilliput, la description de ce païs & de ses habitants, qui n'avoient que six pouces de hauteur, & le détail circonstancié de leurs sentimens et de leur conduite à l’égard d'un étranger qui étoit pour eux un Géant, tout cela me parut assés froid & d'un mérite mediocre, & me fit craindre que tout l'ouvrage ne fut du même goût. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. xii-xiii)

Example 3

TTD Je ne puis neanmoins dissimuler ici que j'ai trouvé dans l'Ouvrage de M. Swift des endroits foibles & même très-mauvais, des allegories impénétrables, des allusions insipides, des détails puerils, des réflexions triviales, des pensées basses, des rédites ennuïeuses, des poliçonneries grossieres, des plaisanteries fades, en un mot, des choses qui, renduës litteralement en François, auroient paru indécentes, pitoïables, impertinentes, auroient révolté le bon goût qui régne en France, m'auroient moi-même couvert de confusion, & m'auroient infailliblement attiré de justes reproches, si j'avois été assez foible & assez imprudent pour les exposer aux yeux du Public. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. xv-xvi)

Valentin (2011) indicates that it is here that Desfontaines essentially slides from his descriptive

role into a judgemental one. The abbot’s criticism seems to centre especially on the

characteristics of the novel and Swift’s satire as described in section 2.2.1 and 2.2.2. He

disapproves of Swift’s lightness and acerbity (“des polissonneries grossières”; “des

plaisanteries fades”), of the detailed accounts and realism (“le detail circonstancié”; “des details

puérils”) and of the attention that was devoted to the human experience, interaction and thought

(“leurs sentimens”; “leur conduit à l’égard d’un étranger”; “réflexions triviales”;

“pensées basses”).

In example 3, the abbot additionally mentions the “bon goût qui régne en France”

(Desfontaines, 1727, p. xvi), an important sentence that would continue to resonate throughout

the remainder of the preface. On page xxxvi, for example, the abbé declares that

Gulliver’s Travels was by no means written for France, but for England. Subsequently, the

infelicities of the English original that he enumerates would not only shock the French

readership and its tastes, but would also mean for him to become a target of criticism if he had

left them as such. In other words, Desfontaines felt that alterations were necessary in order for

the French audience to enjoy it. Léger (2004) further emphasises that this links in to the

43

belles infidèles current that was predominant at the time. Desfontaines seems to refer to the

bon goût, to the expectations and tastes of the French audience in an endeavour to underpin his

modifications. As such, he felt that he needed to erase “tout ce qui m’a paru grossier et indécent”

(Desfontaines, 1727, p. xxxvii). Furthermore, the abbot not only mended the excerpts that he

thought were in need of it, but goes even beyond and fills in these gaps “par le secours de mon

imagination, et par de certains tours que je donnerais aux choses mêmes qui me déplaisaient”

(ibid., p. xviii). That information, he concludes, should be sufficient to disclose “le caractère de

ma Traduction” (ibid., p. xviii). Lastly, Desfontaines also seems to cast an additional ‘safety

net’ by asking the reader to excuse him if he might have overlooked anything that would seem

too shocking, for it is “naturel à un traducteur de se laisser gagner , et d'avoir quelquefois un

peu trop d'indulgence pour son auteur” (ibid., p. xvii – xviii).

Concomitantly to the criticism, however, Desfontaines admits that the work also has its virtues.

Thereby, he hints at the direction that he aspires his translation to go as well as the role that he

was to take up. According to Léger (2004, p. 528; 2002a, p. 183), that direction is to bring the

work into the allegoric category, almost rendering it as a moral fable. That might explain why

the excerpts where Swift’s satire was too bitter and too biting would be smoothened into an

amusing and astute piece of text. By the same token, the virtues that the abbé stresses are those

referring to the amusing, allegoric and fictional elements:

Example 4

TTD Mais, quand j'eus un peu plus avancé dans la lecture du Livre, mes idées changérent, & je reconnus qu'on avoit eu raison de me le vanter. J'y trouvai des choses amusantes et judicieuses, une fiction soûtenue, de fines ironies, des allegories plaisantes, une Morale sensée & libre, & par tout une Critique badine & pleine de sel; je trouvai en un mot un Livre tout-à-fait neuf & original dans son genre. Je ne balançai plus; je me mis à le traduire uniquement pour ma propre utilité, c'est-à-dire, pour me perfectionner dans la connaissance de la langue Angloise, qui commence à être à la mode à Paris, & que plusieurs personnes de distinction & de mérite ont depuis peu apprise.15 (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. xiii-xiv)

Aside from the (dis)approval of the work, example 2 through 4 also show that the abbot seems

to have been well-aware of the pivotal position that he found himself in. On the one hand,

Desfontaines was imbued with the belles infidèles and bon goût mind-set that were ubiquitous

in France (cf. sub-chapter 2.3) On the other hand, he was faced with a new, modern and

vernacular work that had crossed the Channel (McMurran, 2008, p. 159). Desfontaines, then,

15 Bold in all examples was added by the authors of this study

44

was the hinge that had to reconcile between these two and it would seem as if the preface already

gives away his hesitant attitude (cf. sub-chapter 2.3). The positive note on Gulliver’s Travels in

example 4, for example, is nullified some pages later (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. xx-xix) by

rebutting the sentence “un Livre tout-à-fait neuf & original dans son genre” (ibid., p. xiv) with

a series of works that are of the same kind. While it is true to say that Desfontaines attenuates

the enumeration with the suggestion that they are “d’un goût fort different” (ibid., p. xx), he

also puts an emphasis on the fictional edge of the work again. As such, he claims that the sole

thing that binds Gulliver to these works is the idea of an imaginary voyage and an alleged

country (ibid., p. xx). That seems to corroborate the idea that the abbot was attempting to

introduce Voyages de Gulliver as a fable rather than a realistic novel (cf. supra).

Whilst the abbé recognised the ingenious nature of the work, he was also aware of the dangerous

elements that were contained within it. However, he was not the only one to have noticed.

Indeed, Voyages de Gulliver is marked at the end by an approbation and a privilège du roi

(Appendix B) and was published in Paris. Thus, it leaves little doubt to the fact that the

translation had been scrutinised by the royal censors of the French censorial apparatus (cf.

section 2.2.4). Desfontaines also briefly touches on that censorial constraint in his Préface du

traducteur:

Example 5

TTD Certains esprits serieux et d'une solidité pesante, ennemis de toute Fiction, ou qui daignent tout au plus tolérer les Fictions ordinaires, seront peut-être rebutés par la hardiesse, & la nouveauté des suppositions qu'ils verront ici. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. xx-xxi)

Example 6

TTD Je crois donc que, pour toutes ces raisons, on ne doit pas censurer les Voyages de Gulliver, précisément parce que les fictions n'en sont pas croïables. Ce sont, il est vrai, des fictions chimeriques, mais qui fournissent de l'exercice à l'imagination, & donnent beau jeu à un Ecrivain, & qui, par cet endroit seul, doivent-être goûtées, si elles sont conduites avec jugement, si elles amusent, & sur tout si elles aménent une Morale sensée. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. xxvi-xxvii)

Léger (2002b) observes that it is at these points that Desfontaines attempts to defend his

translation against these ominous clouds that were hanging over it. In example 5, he not only

warns the reader and the censors of the harshness and modernity that might emerge in the work,

but also seems to further spread out the safety net for himself (cf. supra). In both example 5 and

6, then, Desfontaines continues to undermine any realism that might be attributed to the work.

45

The key word in both examples is once again ‘fiction’. The censorial apparatus as well as the

reader are to understand that his Voyages de Gulliver is a harmless, entertaining and fictional

work.

Before moving on to Desfontaines’s closing paragraphs, it is noteworthy that the abbot also

mentions the fourth voyage of Gulliver’s Travels. Parallel to both the contemporaneous and

subsequent studies, researches, reactions or bibliographies (cf. sections 2.4.2 and 2.6.2), it is

also Part IV that seems the hardest to fathom for the abbot. Marking it as a bold yet brilliant

chapter, he appears to especially have his doubts on the interaction between rational horses and

a stranded traveller (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. xxv-xxvi). As with the infelicities (cf. supra),

however, Desfontaines fills in the gaps himself by (1) concluding that the horses must have

been used so as to put man to the fore and (2) suggesting that this chapter is in fact not different

from other fables or tales (e.g. de La Fontaine) where beasts are able to speak or think (ibid.,

p. xxvi).

By the same token, the following examples adduce evidence that the abbé continues to

somewhat downplay the importance of Gulliver’s voyage to the Houyhnhnms. First,

Desfontaines puts forward the idea of Swift attacking human nature, hinting at the alleged

misanthropy that was described in sub-chapter 2.4. Then, he emphasises the light-hearted and

diverting nature of this part, as such steering the reader away from the biting satire and towards

a (moral) fable (Léger, 2004, p. 528; Léger, 2002a, p. 183). Whilst the abbot does not go as far

as calling it a fairy tale, he concludes that it is a witty store from which both the learned and the

masses can draw (moral) lessons:

Example 7

TTD Dans tous ces Voyages , & sur tout dans celui au Pays des Houyhnhnms, l'Auteur attaque l'Homme en général, & fait sentir le ridicule et la misere de l'esprit humain. (…) Toutes ces idées grandes & sérieuses sont pourtant traittées ici d'une maniere comique et burlesque. Ce ne sont point des Contes de Fées qui ne renferment d'ordinaire aucune conséquence pour la Morale, & qui en ce cas ne sont bons que pour amuser les enfans : encore devroit-on les leur interdire, de peur d'accoutumer leur esprit aux choses frivoles. En general toute fiction est insipide, lorsque l'utile n'en résulte point. Mais c'est, je crois, ce qu'on ne dira pas des fictions dont il s'agit ici : les gens d'esprit y trouveront du sel, & le commun des Lecteurs de l’amusement. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. xxx – xxxii)

46

In like manner, example 8 continues the misanthropic tone of voice: the land of the

Houyhnhnms is where Gulliver had been imbued with ideas of the depravity of human nature.

Furthermore, Desfontaines concludes his brief inspection of Part IV by undermining the realism

that Jonathan Swift had introduced (cf. supra). Whereas the Lemuel Gulliver as contrived by

Swift ends up a miserable man that can hardly stand to be amongst humans again, Desfontaines

assures the reader that these feelings would fade with time:

Example 8

TTD (…) & après avoir quitté le païs des Houyhnhnms, où il a entendu dire tant de mal de la Nature humaine, il ne la peut plus supporter, lorsqu'il retourne parmi les hommes. Mais il fait bien sentir ensuite que toutes les impressions s'effacent avec le tems. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. xxxix – xl)

As to the closing two paragraphs, Desfontaines’s makes his translator’s voice (Zhang, 2016;

Hermans, 2014) heard rather explicitly. Whilst he admits to having adjusted the English original

to the tastes of France, he would not go as far as calling his translation “un Ouvrage François”

(Desfontaines, 1727, p. xl). That idea is underpinned by observing that, notwithstanding some

modifications, a stranger will always retain “un peu de son accent et de ses manieres” (ibid.,

p. xl). On the one hand, it is true to say that ample references to England would indeed be

retained. For example, Desfontaines refers to the quarrelling between the Tories and the Whigs

(ibid., p. xxxviii), the “Cour d’Angleterre” (ibid., p. xxix) and the Anglicisms that he might

have involuntarily used (ibid., p. xxxiii). On the other hand, the examples above illustrate that

Desfontaines seems to have adhered to the liberal, belles infidèles current of the time (Léger,

2004). As such, he admits not only to have deleted or modified some excerpts, but also to have

made some additions so as to fill in these gaps (cf. supra). Thus, whilst strictly it might not be

“un Ouvrage François” (ibid., p. xl) altogether, it certainly responds to the bon goût of France.

Lastly, example 9 illustrates that Desfontaines seems to have been well-aware of the fact that

his preface was quite lengthy. This notwithstanding, the abbot quite paradoxically concludes

that he would all but disappear throughout the remainder of the work:

Example 9

TTD Si cette Préface paroît longue , le Public doit pardonner cette prolixité à un Ecrivain , qui va faire le personnage de Traducteur, & ne dire presque rien de lui-même, dans deux volumes. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. xl-xli)

47

It is with this phrase that the reader is ushered into Voyages de Gulliver. Throughout his Préface

du traducteur, Desfontaines has certainly disclosed on the original, his translation and his

position. However, it would seem that the reader is assured the he or she is still reading an

English work, albeit with some modifications to meet the bon goût.

Lastly, it should be noted that the analysis of the Préface du traducteur was carried out so as to

put it in a broader context and link it to the theoretical framework of chapter two.

This notwithstanding, it is undeniably that all four enarrative functions of Rooryck & Jooken

(2013) are readily apparent throughout the entire preface. Desfontaines refers for example to

(1) the Anglo-French connection, the author, the anonymous translation and Dutch translators

with an extra-diegetic voice, (2) the translational choices that he has made with a meta-

discursive voice, (3) the argumentation of Swift with an argumentative voice and (4) the

original work, its flaws and its virtues with an evaluative voice. The manner in and the degree

to which that enarrative voice might continue to resonate throughout the work, is what will be

further elaborated on in the following analysis of Part IV.

4.2 Enarrative voice in Part IV (Chapter I)

4.2.1 Meta-discursive level

4.2.1.1 Footnotes

As observed above (see section 2.6.3), footnotes are one of those elements within the

paratextual framework that can become rearranged in the wake of a work’s translation (Rooryck

& Jooken, 2013, p. 590). This analysis further corroborates their suggestion that it is especially

the peritext in which that rearrangement becomes apparent, as such disclosing the work that the

translator has carried out (ibid., p. 590). In the case of Gulliver’s Travels (1726), it is the

translation of Desfontaines (1727) especially in which the paratext has been systematically

reshuffled. A first example can be found in the lengthy preface of Desfontaines, as analysed

above. Another example, then, is given by the footnotes. Whilst both the original work and the

anonymous translation (1727) do not include any, the abbot decides to add seven, five of which

are to be found in Part IV. Throughout the footnotes in Voyages de Gulliver, the abbot seems

to walk a thin line between his role as a translator and the role of a commentator (Léger, 2002a).

48

The first footnote (example 10) that will be analysed is a note in which the translator’s voice

carries out a meta-discursive function. In other words, this footnote was used by the translator

so as to comment on his choices and strategies, thereby explicitly evoking his work as a

translator (Rooryck & Jooken, 2013, p. 593).

Example 10 (Footnote 1)

TTD (…) c’étoit ce qui produisoit les filoux, les voleurs, les pipeurs, les M. les parjures, les flâteurs, les suborneurs, les faussaires, les faux-témoins, les menteurs, les joüeurs, les imposteurs, les fanfarons, * les mauvaus Auteurs, les empoisoneurs, les impudiques, les précieux ridicules, les Esprits-forts. Il me fallut définir tous ces termes. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 197-198)16

__________________________________________________________________

* Il est un peu surprenant de trouver ici les mauvais Auteurs & les Précieux ridicules, en si mauvaise compagnie. Mais on n’a pû rendre autrements les mots de Scribling & de Canting. On voit que l’Auteur les a malignement confondus tous ensemble, & qu’il y a aussi joint exprés les Free-thinking, c’est-à-dire les esprits-forts, ou les incredules, dont il y a un grand nombre en Angleterre. Au reste il est aisé de concevoir que le desir de s’avancer dans le monde produit des esprits libertins, fait faire de mauvais Livres, & porte à écrire d’un stile précieux & affecté, afin de passer pour Bel-esprit. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 197-198).

The footnote of example number 10 is not only quite lengthy, but also demonstrates the

translator’s voice on two levels. In this section, the analysis will briefly turn its attention to the

footnote as introduced by Desfontaines, the enarrative voice of whom could be described as

meta-discursive. While it is true to say that the meta-discursive function is not the most

important or striking function in this example, it is present nonetheless. The abbot comments

on his translation of “Scribling” and “Canting” (Swift, 1726, p. 83), claiming that he has

translated both to the best of his abilities. Léger (2002a) duly notes that it is rather unlikely for

Desfontaines not to have known the translation of both terms. The length of the footnote seems

to corroborate that it was indeed introduced for other reasons than simply justifying his

translative choice17.

As to the typology of Maloney (2005), this footnote would classify as an allographic

interpretive note. It should be observed, however, that at first it might strike the reader as a mere

factual, explanatory note that was introduced by the translator. Then again, the weight of the

footnote is not to be situated on a meta-discursive level (cf. supra), which seems to imply that

there is more to it than a simple explanation. In the light of the extra-diegetic layer that it is

16 As the analysis is carried out on Part IV (Chapitre premier), page numbers of TTD excerpts correspond henceforth to the page numbers of the Tome Second in Voyages de Gulliver (Desfontaines, 1727). 17 For the analysis on an extra-diegetic level, see example 42

49

covered with (cf. infra), this footnote could thus be located in the category of the interpretive

notes. It not only provides a perspective on the author, but also sets the narrative in a social

context (ibid., p. 42). Lastly, this note seems to corroborate the Maloney’s (2005) suggestion

that his typology has no strict boundaries, but rather “porous and permeable” ones (p. 28). In the

case of this footnote, Desfontaines seems to walk the line between the factual and interpretive

category.

4.2.2 Argumentative level

The following examples will show that both in Desfontaines’s translation as in the anonymous

translation, the predominant enarrative voice that runs through the first chapter of Part IV fulfils

an argumentative function. That argumentative voice could roughly be situated on three levels

that have been elaborated upon in chapter two, viz. (1) the novelistic features, (2) the tastes of

the readership and (3) the alleged misanthropy.

4.2.2.1 Novelistic features

The matter of novelistic features is broached from the very start, with both translators letting

themselves be heard with regard to the realism that was introduced. Jonathan Swift’s Gulliver’s

Travels (1726) opens with a frontispiece that portrays Lemuel Gulliver, the alleged author of

the book (Appendix C). The portrait’s framework reads “Captain Lemuel Gulliver of Redriff,

Altat. Suae LVIII”18 and is accompanied by a label with a Latin maxim: “Compositum jus,

fasque animi, sanctosque recessus Mentis, et incoctum generoso pectus honesto”19.

The frontispiece is accompanied by the title page of the book, on which Lemuel Gulliver is

featured as the author of the book. He was “First a Surgeon, and then a Captain of several

SHIPS” and has travelled “into Several Remote Nations of the World” (Appendix A). Lastly,

the original English work also contains a letter from the publisher to the reader (Swift, 1726,

pp. iv-viii). Therein, a certain Richard Sympson asserts that he is a friend and family member

of Lemuel Gulliver, after which he briefly gives a biography of the latter as well as a short

overview of the nature of the work.

18 Fifty-eight years of age 19 Of well-judged justice, uprightness within the soul, given retirement to the holy places of the mind and with a breast imbrued with generous honesty (trans. based on Roberts, D. (2001). Introduction. In Swift, J., Gulliver’s Travels (p. vii). Hertfordshire: Wordsworth. and Madan, M. (1807). A New and Literal Traslation of Juvenal and Persius (p. 295). Oxford: Bliss, Bliss & Bliss.)

50

In Voyages de Gulliver (Desfontaines, 1727), on the other hand, a different approach is

opted for. The frontispiece and letter from the publisher to the reader is omitted altogether and

the book is immediately begun with a title page (Appendix D). Thereon, no Lemuel Gulliver is

mentioned as the author of the book, nor the fact that he has travelled into several remote

nations. Consequently, the tiny details that had been added by Jonathan Swift are disposed of

by Desfontaines, e.g. Gulliver’s age, his just and honest nature, and him as the writer of his

undertakings into several nations. The abbot’s title page is then followed by an epistle to

Madame La Marquise D*** and his Préface du traducteur (cf. supra).

In Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (Anon., 1727), then, a frontispiece was introduced

but it depicts an alternate portrait. The framework and label, for example, are omitted, so that

only a portrait of “L. Gulliver” remains (Appendix E). Moreover, the letter from the publisher

to the reader has been completely removed. This notwithstanding, some other details were kept

on the accompanying title page of the anonymous translation, for example that Gulliver was a

captain who travelled “en divers pays éloignez” (Appendix F).

The opposing argumentative voice of Desfontaines and diverging argumentative voice of the

anonymous translator are also reflected at the beginning of Part IV. The title page to Part IV of

Jonathan Swift largely reflects the title page of his book, again mentioning “Captain Lemuel

Gulliver” and his travels “into Several Remote Nations of the World” (Appendix G). In

addition, Swift goes into further detail and adds a map for the reader to situate Houyhnhnms

Land off the south coast of Australia. It was allegedly discovered in A.D. 1711 (Appendix H).

The opening page to Part IV of Voyages de Gulliver (Desfontaines, 1727) does not include a

title page nor a map. On the contrary, an illustration has been added on which a Houyhnhnm is

depicted, surrounded by Gulliver and two Yahoos (Appendix I). To some extent that

replacement seems to respond to the suggestion of Léger (2004, p. 528; 2002a, p. 183) that

Desfontaines has taken the rough edges off of Swift’s satiric work in his translation and reduces

it to a fable. In this case, it is not the satire but the realistic details of the title page and the

additional map that had to make way for an illustration.

In the anonymous translation then, Part IV runs fairly parallel to the English original. It begins

with a title page, on which the same details are mentioned as the one mentioned above, viz.

Lemuel Gulliver, who is a captain, sets out to various remote nations (Appendix J).

51

Furthermore, the map on which Swift had situated the Houyhnhnm Land is also included in the

edition of The Hague. Not only has it been duplicated, but parts of it have also been translated,

e.g. Pais des Houyhnhnms, Terre de Nuyts and Découvert A.D. 1711 (Appendix K).

As to the narrative proper, the enarrative voice of Desfontaines and the anonymous translator

can be found to fulfil an argumentative function too, by which Jonathan Swift’s argumentation

is sometimes reinforced, sometimes adjusted and sometimes even countered. One of these areas

in which both translators intervene, is that of the novelistic features as described in section

2.2.1. That can be noticed, for example, in the detailed description of the environment or the

actions that Gulliver carries out:

Example 11

ST The Land was divided by long Rows of Trees not regularly planted, but naturally growing; there was great plenty of Grass, and several Fields of Oats. (Swift, 1726, p. 6)20

TTA Je vis sur ma Route un grand nombre d’Arbres, qui me parurent être des productions de la Nature, parce que je ne remarquois aucun ordre dans leur Arrangement ; plusieurs Prez, & quelques Champs d’Avoine. (Anon., 1727, p. 105)21 TTD Je découvris de grands arbres, de vastes herbages & des champs où l’avoine croissoit de tous côtés. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 125)

Example 12

ST In return of which Favour, I will make you a Present of this Knife and Bracelet, (taking them out of my Pocket.) (Swift, 1726, p. 15) TTA Et vous n’obligerez pas un Ingrat, car je vous ferai present de ce Couteau & de ce Bracelet (que je pris hors de ma poche en prononçant ces derniers mots.) (Anon., 1727, p. 110) TTD En reconnaissance, je vous offre ce petit coûteau & ce bracelet. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 132)

In example 11, Swift meticulously describes the environment that Lemuel Gulliver is met with,

outlining the shape of the trees and the vastness of the nature around him. That attention to

detail is corroborated in example 12, where Gulliver’s action is explained in further detail. In

the former example, it would seem that Gulliver empirically takes in his environment and as

such somewhat responds to sub-chapter 2.1 of this study. What is also noteworthy is how the

trees are described as “naturally growing” (Swift, 1726, p. 6) rather than “regularly planted”

(ibid., p. 6).

20 As the analysis is carried out on Part IV (Chap. I), page numbers of ST excerpts correspond henceforth to the page numbers of Part IV in Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726). 21 As the analysis is carried out on Part IV (Chapitre I), page numbers of TTA excerpts correspond henceforth to the page numbers of the Tome Second in Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (Anon., 1727).

52

The anonymous translator largely copies the details of the English version and even takes it a

step further, as such applying his enarrative voice to reinforce Swift. The trees are described as

“productions de la Nature” (Anon., 1727, p. 105), in which no order is to be found. In

Desfontaines’s version, a counter-voice is given in that the detailed account and observation of

Gulliver are weakened. That would respond to his disapproval of the detailed accounts and

realism as announced in his Préface du traducteur (cf. supra). Moreover, the fact that these

trees were naturally growing rather than regularly planted is also deleted, which could be linked

to the brevitas technique of section 2.3.1 (McMurran, 2010, p. 74). A possible reason for that

might be that in Ancien Régime France, nature was still provided with a divine, religious

framework (La Branche, 2011, pp. 76-77). Thus, undermining that divine order might have

been somewhat too risky to be included in Desfontaines’s Voyages de Gulliver.

Some other examples of the abbot resorting to brevitas so as to omit details or thwart the

novelistic realism can be found in examples 1 through 9 of Appendix L. Contrariwise, the

anonymous translator does not only adopt or copy the realism as introduced by Swift but was

also as assiduous so as to supersede the latter’s descriptions. That would respond to the

amplificatio as described by McMurran (2010, p. 74). Notice, for example, how an indefinite

adverb of frequency becomes definite in Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver:

Example 13

ST (…) and expecting nothing less then to be murdered, as they often threatned me. (Swift, 1726, p. 4)

TTA (…) & attendant à tout moment qu’ils executeroient la menace de me tuer, qu’ils me faisoient reguliérement huit ou dix fois par jour. (Anon., 1727, pp. 103-104)

TTD (…) fort inquiet du sort qu’on me préparoit. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 124)

The enarrative voices of both translators also divert from Swift on a second level, viz. the

representation of the Houyhnhnms as a people inhabiting a nation. The denial of these features

to the Houyhnhnms might also be correlated to the alleged misanthropy (cf. infra), but would

also mean for the realism behind Gulliver’s fourth voyage to be nullified altogether. Above, it

was already observed how only Desfontaines opted for the omission of the additional map that

was included at the beginning of Part IV. The translatorial stance of both the anonymous

translator and the abbot is further unveiled in the following examples:

53

Example 14

ST His Men (…) set him on shore in an unkown Land. He travels up in the Country. (Swift, 1726, p. 1).

TTA Ses gens (…) le mettent à Terre dans un Pays inconnu. Il avance dans le Pays. (Anon., 1727, p. 101)

TTD Son Equipage (…) le met à terre sur un rivage inconnu. (omitted) (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 121)

Example 15

ST (…) fearing the Inhabitants might be provoked against me, (…) (Swift, 1726, p. 9) TTA (…) n’irritât les Habitans contre moi. (Anon., 1727, p. 106) TTD (…) de peur d’offenser ceux à qui ces animaux pouvoient appartenir. (Desfontaines, 1727,

p. 127)

It is in this part that Gulliver is set ashore following the mutiny that his crew had committed.

Afterwards, he travels inland and meets the inhabitants of the country, who are generally

referred to as such in the English original. That choice of wording in these examples is mirrored

in the anonymous translation with “Pays” (Anon., 1727, p. 101) and “Habitans” (ibid., p. 106),

whilst Desfontaines opts for an omission and a rather blurry description, viz. ‘those who these

animals belong to’. Furthermore, the anonymous translator was as diligent as to further clarify

Jonathan Swift’s position in example 16. Once again, the former decides to shift from the

indefinite towards the definite, whereas Desfontaines omits it altogether:

Example 16

ST (…) so very different (…) from those who might probably live in so remote a Climate. (Swift, 1726, p. 14)

TTA (…) si diferent (…) des Habitans d’un pays si éloigné. (Anon., 1727, pp. 109-110) TTD (omitted)

A third and final novelistic feature that has been subject to the enarrative voices of both

translators is that of human experience. In sub-chapter 2.1, it was described how the eighteenth

century built on the notions of empiricism and rationalism, which in return brought about a

stronger feeling of anthropocentrism. That was reflected not only in the novel, but especially in

the traveller’s tales, in which more attention was given to the (individual) character’s actions,

interactions and developments (cf. section 2.2.1). Examples 17 through 19 show that this was

reflected in Gulliver’s Travels (1726) and Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver, but that

Desfontaines tackled this differently. That responds to his prefatory disapproval of the attention

that was devoted to human experience, interaction and thought (cf. supra).

54

Example 17

ST In this desolate Condition, I advanced forward, (…) (Swift, 1726, p. 6) TTA Dans cette afreuse situation je gagnai le haut du Rivage, (…) (Anon., 1727, p. 104) TTD Je quittai les sables & montai sur une hauteur, (…) (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 125) Example 18

ST Upon the strength of this Reasoning, I ventured to address them in the following manner: (…) I am a poor distressed English Man, (…). (Swift, 1726, pp. 14-15)

TTA Ce beau & solide Raisonnement me fit prendre la Hardiesse de leur adresser le Discours suivant. (…) je suis un malheureux Anglois, (…). (Anon., 1727, p. 110)

TTD C’est ce qui me fit prendre la liberté de leur parler en ces termes : (…) je suis un pauvre Anglois, (…). (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 132)

In example 17 and 18, the Gulliver of the source text and the anonymous target text emotionally

opens up to the reader and reflects on himself and his situation. In Desfontaines’s translation,

on the other hand, the author’s voice is countered through a mitigating approach and by

reducing Gulliver’s experience to the bare minimum. Gulliver as portrayed by the abbot no

longer finds himself in a “desolate Condition” (Swift, 1726, p. 6) or an “afreuse situation”

(Anon., 1727, p. 104), but simply continues to advance. In like manner, the “Reasoning” (Swift,

1726, p. 6) or “Raisonnement” (Anon., 1727, p. 104) upon which Gulliver builds is discarded

in Desfontaines’s target text. Contrariwise, the “poor distressed English man” (Swift, 1726, p.

6) has been reduced in both translations by letting go of one of the two adjectives. Indeed, other

examples (e.g. 22, 23 and 24) seem to corroborate that when too many ‘problematic’ parts

follow in quick succession, the anonymous translator of The Hague raises his enarrative voice,

for example by mitigating or omitting.

4.2.2.2 Readership’s tastes

As discussed above, Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines announced in his Préface du

traducteur that he had expunged or modified some excerpts that the French readership would

have deemed too vulgar or shocking. In doing so, he responded to the domesticating and liberal

current that was predominant in France (cf. section 2.3.1). Conversely, it was also discussed

how things that were deemed improper in France might have been acceptable elsewhere.

Holland, for example, provided a more liberal context and works that had not passed French

censorship were often acceptable to be published there (Wilke, 2013, par. 18). The following

section will include both the Parisian and Hague publication in an endeavour to briefly analyse

how both translators have employed their enarrative argumentative voice to respond to their

55

readership’s tastes. A first subject that seems to have been altered in the translations of Part IV

(Chap. I), seems to be that of violence. In the following three examples, the translator’s voice

becomes comes to the fore in parts that relate to bloodshed, or (excessive) violence:

Example 19

ST (…) and expecting nothing less then to be murdered, (…). (Swift, 1726, p. 4) TTA (…) & attendant à tout moment qu’ils executeroient la menace de me tuer, (…). (Anon., 1727,

pp. 103-104) TTD (…) fort inquiet du sort qu’on me préparoit. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 124)

Example 20

ST (…) go to Madagascar for Recruits, several among them having died since my Confinement. (Swift, 1726, p. 4)

TTA (…) d’aler à Madagascar pour y faire des Recrues, quelques uns d’eux étant morts depuis qu’ils m’obligeoient à garder la Chambre. (Anon., 1727, p. 103)

TTD (…) d’aller à Madagascar pour augmenter leur troupe. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 123-124)

Example 21

ST (…) gave him a good Blow with the flat Side of it, for I durft not strike him with the Edge, (…) that I had killed or maimed any of their Cattle. (Swift, 1726, p. 9)

TTA (…) lui donnai un coup du plat de mon Epée, car je ne voulois pas le blesser, de peur que cette Action violente commise (…). (Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD (…) le frappai du plat, ne voulant pas le blesser, (…). (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 127)

Example 19 and 20 relate to the possible killing of Gulliver and the death of some recruits, both

of which have been fairly literally translated in the anonymous target text. On the contrary,

Desfontaines implicitly uses his argumentative voice in order to counter these explicit parts and

render them acceptable for his readership. As such, Gulliver is no longer worrying about him

being murdered, but about ‘the fate that awaited him’ (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 124). The ship

crew is no longer looking to replace its deceased recruits, but simply wishes to ‘increase their

numbers’ (ibid., pp. 123-124). In example 21, the degree of violence seems to lessen from the

top (ST) downwards (TTA and TTD). The source text is quite explicit and describes the act of

hitting, slashing and killing. The anonymous translator opts for a ‘softer’ translation by

mitigating the “good Blow” (Swift, 1726, p. 9) and the slashing “with the Edge” (ibid., p. 9)

and replaces the killing by “Action violente” (Anon., 1727, p. 106). Desfontaines heads in the

same direction, but also omits the act of killing altogether.

56

Other excerpts where the readership’s tastes are brought into play are these were Swift’s writing

becomes quite explicit and vulgar. In example 22, the bodies of the Yahoos are accurately

described, but the corporal references have been toned down in the anonymous translation as

well as in Desfontaines’s. The ‘acceptable’ limit for both, it would seem, is set at the breasts.

Quite surprisingly, this is also the first example in which the anonymous translator decides to

delete a reference altogether, whereas Desfontaines replaces it with ‘other parts of their body’

(Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 126-127).

Example 22

ST (…) nor any thing more than a sort of Down on the rest of their Bodies, except about the Anus, and Pudenda. Their Dugs hung between their Fore-feet, and often reached almost to the ground as they walked. (Swift, 1726, p. 8)

TTA (omitted) leurs Mamelles pendoient entre leurs pieds de devant & touchoient presque à terre quand elles marchoient. (Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD (…) seulement un peu de duvet en plusieurs endroits de leur corps. Leurs mamelles pendoient entre leurs deux pattes de devant, & quelquefois touchoient la terre, lorsquelles marchoient. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 126-127)

By the same token, examples 23 and 24 illustrate how Swift turns to the scatological in order

to describe the reactions of the Yahoos upon their first encounter with Gulliver. The translator’s

voice of Desfontaines appears to slightly diverge from Swift so as to adapt these passages to

the bon goût. The anonymous translator omits both, which seems to further suggest that a quick

succession of ‘problematic’ elements are places where the author’s voice is most heavily

countered or completely muzzled.

Example 23

ST Several of this cursed Brood leapt up in the Tree, from whence they began to discharge their Excrements on my Head : (…) (Swift, 1726, p. 9)

TTA (omitted) TTD (…) aussi-tôt ils sautent aux branches de l’arbre, & commençent à décharger sur moi leur

ordure. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 128)

Example 24

ST However, I escaped pretty well, (…), but was almost stifled with the Filth, which fell about me on every side. (Swift, 1726, pp. 9-10)

TTA (omitted) TTD Mais tout-à-coup il se mirent tous à fuïr. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 128)

57

Lastly, the domesticating way of translating not only implied for some parts to be mended so

as to adhere to the bon goût, but also for translators such as Desfontaines or d’Ablancourt to

take liberties or introduce a certain level of idiomaticity (cf. section 2.3.1). That ‘Frenchifying’

voice also shines through in certain excerpts of Part IV (Chapter I). Example 25 is taken from

the very beginning of the fourth voyage, in which Gulliver agrees to set out on another journey.

In order to depict the beginning of this undertaking, Swift resorts to a number of elements that

are especially adapted to his English readership:

Example 25

ST (…) accepted an advantageous Offer made me to be Captain of the Adventure, a stout Merchant-man of 350 Tuns22: (…) (Swift, 1726, p. 2).

TTA (…) acceptai une offre fort avantageuse qui me fut faite d’être Capitaine du Hazardeux, Vaisseau Marchand de 350 Tonneaux : (…). (Anon., 1727, pp. 101-102)

TTD Mais je fus malheureusement tenté de faire encore un voyage, surtout lorsque l’on m’eut offert le titre flâteur de Capitaine, sur l’Avanture, Vaisseau Marchand de trois cens cinquante tonneaux. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 122)

Example 26

ST (…) one James Welch came down to my Cabbin (…). (Swift, 1726, pp. 4-5) TTA (…) un certain Jaques Welch vint me trouver (…). (Anon., 1727, p. 104) TTD (…) un certain Jacque Welch entra (…). (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 124)

Example 27

ST They rowed about a League23; (…). (Swift, 1726, p. 5) TTA Ils firent environ une lieuë à force de Rames, (…). (Anon., 1727, p. 104) TTD Après avoir fait environ une lieuë dans la Chalouppe, (…). (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 124)

In the light of the Francophone audience, both translators seem to have understood that the

English terms of examples 25 through 27 could not be left as such. Thus, the anonymous

translator and Desfontaines decided to bring these references closer to their home culture by

domesticating the name of the ship, the unit of volume, the first name of a character and a unit

of distance. Notwithstanding the fact that nothing is made more explicit, their voice could be

regarded as fulfilling a clarifying function. Both translators felt that it was sufficiently clear for

their readership to translate these terms with their French equivalents.

22 The tonnage of a ship was “originally the charge for the hire of a ship at so much a ton of its burthen” and “remained the standard of ship measurement until 1773, when more accurate limits of measurement were established”. (The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea, 2007, “tonnage”). 23 “A measurement of distance, long defunct. A league at sea measured 3.18 nautical miles, or 5.8 kilometres”. (The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea, 2007, “league”).

58

It should be noted, however, that example 25 also encompasses additional argumentative

functions. In the anonymous target text, the position that Swift has put Gulliver in is further

reinforced by means of the ship’s name. Rather than boarding “the Adventure” (Swift, 1726, p.

2), Gulliver embarks on his adventure with the “Hazardeux”. Subsequently, the dangerous

nature of his undertaking is emphasised, which might have tapped into the readership’s

excitement for traveller’s tales even more (cf. section 2.2.1). The argumentative voice of

Desfontaines, on the other hand, contradicts the idea of an adventure and portrays the beginning

of a fourth voyage as a tenuous task that Gulliver was “malheureusement” (Desfontaines, 1727,

p. 122) obliged to take on.

Other examples in the first chapter of Part IV further show the diligence of the anonymous

translator and the liberties that Desfontaines took in his translation. Example 28, for example,

show how the latter applies his argumentative voice so as to make “Bucaneers” (Swif, 1726, p.

3) more explicit for the French audience and underscoring the ill nature of these “bandits”

(Desfontaines, 1727, p. 123). The second example illustrates how the anonymous translator

adds to the English original, whilst Desfontaines takes a liberal stance. He remodels and

remoulds the excerpts, smoothens it and brings in a singing rhythm (cf. section 2.3.1), which

would presumably have pleased more to the French readership than what Swift had written.

Example 28

ST (…) for I found afterwards that most of them had been Bucaneers. (Swift, 1726, p. 3) TTA (…) ceux que je pris à mon Bord ayant presque tous été Boucaniers. (Anon., 1727, p. 102) TTD (…) dont la plus grande partie, étoit composée de bandits, qui avoient été Boucaniers.

(Desfontaines, 1727, p. 123)

Example 29

ST I told them, I was their Prisoner, and would submit. (Swift, 1726, p. 3) TTA Je leur dis que je me reconnoissois leur prisonnier, & que je leur promettois la plus entiére

soumission. (Anon., 1727, p. 103) TTD Je leur dis que mon sort étoit entre leurs mains, & que je consentois d’avance à tout ce qu’ils

voudroient. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 123)

4.2.2.3 Alleged misanthropy

A third and final matter on which both translators have applied their argumentative voice, is

that of the alleged misanthropy that Swift would have exhibited throughout the Voyage to the

Houyhnhnms (cf. section 2.4). Part IV is often described as the most bitter and hardest, not

59

uncommonly because criticism has aligned Gulliver’s views with Swift’s or has observed it as

a general attack on human nature (Harrison, 2003; Just, 2002, par. 10-12). The following

example duly shows how Desfontaines especially resorts to three solutions so as to somewhat

opposes that alleged misanthropy, viz. (1) by avoiding to assign human-like characteristics,

actions or emotions to the Houyhnhnms, (2) by avoiding to characterise the Yahoos as

animalistic and (3) by avoiding to characterise Gulliver as inferior to the Houyhnhnms.

In the introductory paragraph of the first chapter of Part IV, both the source text and the

anonymous target text describe the Yahoos as being animalistic, followed by illustrating how

Gulliver makes the acquaintance of the Houyhnhnms. In the target text of Desfontaines, on the

other hand, that argumentation is diverged from. “Animal” (Swift, 1726, p. 1; Anon., 1727, p.

101) has been omitted, and the spelling of Yahoo Frenchified to “Yahou” (Desfontaines, 1727,

p. 121). Furthermore, the active engagement of the Houyhnhnms is weakened by stating that

they merely came up to Gulliver:

Example 30

ST The Yahoos a strange Sort of Animal described. The Author meets two Houyhnhnms (Swift, 1726, p. 1).

TTA Description d’un Etrange Animal nommé Yahoo. L’auteur rencontre deux Houyhnhnms. (Anon., 1727, p. 101)

TTD Description des Yahous. Deux Houyhnhnms viennent au devant de lui. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 121)

In example 31, both Swift and the anonymous translator take Gulliver’s impression of the

Yahoos from an ‘animalistic’ to a ‘monstrous’ level. In his translation, the abbot challenges that

viewpoint again and decides to replace it by a personal pronoun:

Example 31

ST The ugly Monster, (…) lifted up his Fore-paw, whether out of Curiosity or Mischief, I could not tell. (Swift, 1726, pp. 8-9)

TTA Le vilain Monstre (…) leva sa pate de devant, sans que je susse si c’étoit par Mechanceté ou par simple Curiosité. (Anon., 1727, p. 107)

TTD A mon aspect, il (…) leva sur moi sa pate de devant. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 127) The following excerpts further disclose on the direction that both translators pull their text in.

In example 32, Swift opts for a broader term24 by referring to the Houyhnhnms as “Creatures”

(Swift, 1726, p. 15). In addition, their neighing is described in such manner that it would seem

24 A Dictionary of Environment and Conversation (2017), for example, defines “creature” as “A living organism.”

60

as if they are talking to one another. Both the broader term and the conversational aspect are

rather literally translated in the anonymous target text, by which the translator seems to act in

accordance with Swift’s argumentation. In the translation of the abbot, on the other hand, the

term by which the Houyhnhnms are referred to is narrowed down to “animaux” (Desfontaines,

1727, p. 132). Furthermore, the seeming conversation has been omitted altogether, by which

their neighing hints at nothing more than mere neighing.

Example 32

ST The two Creatures stood silent while I spoke (…) they neighed frequently towards each other, as if they were engaged in serious Conversation. (Swift, 1726, p. 15)

TTA Les deux Créatures gardérent un profond silence pendant que je parlois (…) ils se hennirent plusieurs fois l’un à l’autre, ni plus ni moins que s’ils étoient engagez dans une serieuse conversation. (Anon., 1727, p. 110)

TTD Les deux animaux parurent écouter mon discours avec attention (…) ils se mirent à hannir tour à tour, tournés l’un vers l’autre. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 132)

In addition, the abbé extrapolates this to their language as a whole. Notice the following

example, in which the richness of their language has been discarded and the term itself reduced

to some mere “hannissemens” (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 132):

Example 33

ST (…) their Language expressed the Passions very well (…). (Swift, 1726, p. 15) TTA (…) leur Langage exprimoit fort bien les passions (…). (Anon., 1727, p. 110) TTD (…) leurs hannissemens étoit significatifs (…). (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 132)

In examples 34 through 36, the notions of amplificatio and brevitas as described by McMurran

(2010, p. 74) come to the fore, which is reflected by excerpts of the English original that are

rendered either more or less explicit. In the case of Desfontaines, that amplification relates to

the subtly underscoring of the fact that it concerns horses (“l’autre Cheval”; “les deux

chevaux”). Conversely, the anonymous translator inserts an explicitation so as to take the

position of Swift even further. The neutral Houyhnhnm-Gulliver relationship of the source text

has been altered to one of subordination, between two masters and their follower. The emotional

side too is further emphasised by adding “extremement” (Anon., 1727, p. 111).

61

Example 34

ST Then the Bay tried me with a second Word (…). (Swift, 1726, p. 16) TTA Ensuite le Bay-brun essaya ma Capacité à l’égard d’un second mot (…). (Anon., 1727, p. 111) TTD L’autre Cheval, qui étoit Bay, sembla vouloir m’apprendre un autre mot (…). (Desfontaines,

1727, p. 133) Example 35

ST (…) they both appeared amazed at my Capacity. (Swift, 1726, p. 16) TTA (…) mes deux Maîtres me parurent extremement étonnez de l’habileté de leur Disciple.

(Anon., 1727, p. 111) TTD (…) les deux chevaux me trouverent de l’intelligence. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 134)

On the other hand, the technique of brevitas is also recurrently used. The following translation

by Desfontaines could be taken as an interesting example therein, in that it also bundles a

number of other features that have been discussed thus far. Whereas the anonymous translator

fairly keeps to the source text of Swift, Desfontaines discards most of the details and takes the

liberty of smoothening the whole into one sentence. The abbé thus thwarts the realism, responds

to his readership’s tastes (cf. supra) but also dilutes the whole series of investigative actions

that the horses undertake vis-à-vis Gulliver. While it is true to say that their surprise was

somewhat maintained, their active engagement is downgraded to a mere observation:

Example 36

ST The grey Steed rubbed my Hat all round with his right Fore-hoof, and discomposed it so much, that I was forced to adjust it better, by taking it off, and settling it again ; whereat both he and his Companion (who was a brown bay) appeared to be much surprized, the latter felt the Lappet of my Coat, and finding it to hang loose about me, they both looked with Signs of Wonder (Swift, 1726, p. 13)

TTA Le Cheval gris toucha mon Chapeau de tous côtez avec la Corne de son pied droit de devant, & le decompensa tellement, que je fus obligé de l’oter pour le rajuster ; Action qui me parut jetter ce Cheval aussi bien que son Compagnon ( qui étoit un Baybrun ) dans un Etonnement inexprimable ; Celui-ci toucha le pan de mon Habit, & trouvant qu’il ne faisoit pas partie de mon corps, donna encore de nouvelles marques de sa surprise. (Anon., 1727, p. 109)

TTD Mon chapeau paroissoit les surprendre, aussie-bien que les pans de mon juste-au-corps. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 131)

Another manner in which the alleged misanthropy seems to have been countered, is by avoiding

to put or show Gulliver in an inferior position compared to the Houyhnhnms. Thus far, it has

been illustrated how the argumentative voice of the anonymous translator of reinforces the

argumentation of Jonathan Swift, which is reflected amongst others by the amplificatio

(e.g. example 34). Then again, the abbé Desfontaines applies himself seemingly often to

attenuate or contradict the position of the original author. In the following examples,

expressions of Gulliver submitting to the Houyhnhnms or giving signs of holding them in too

62

high an esteem have been altered. Gulliver as presented by Swift and the anonymous translator

quite modestly puts himself in a submissive position vis-à-vis the Houyhnhnms. The abbot, on

the contrary, only keeps the beginning of the sentence, seems to consider the latter part too

gaudy and omits “to expect his farther Commands” (Swift, 1726, p. 12). In example 37, the said

esteem of Gulliver for the Houyhnhnms appears to be too touchy a subject to touch on, so

Desfontaines mitigates the polite and humble tone of voice in his translation:

Example 37

ST (…) I turned back, and came near him, to expect his farther Commands. (Swift, 1726, p. 12) TTA (…) je retournai sur mes pas & vins vers lui, pour atendre ses ordres. (Anon., 1727, pp. 108-

109) TTD (…) je me retournai & m’approchai de lui, (omitted) (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 130)

Example 38

ST Gentlemen, (…) I make bold to let your Worships know, (…). (Swift, 1726, pp. 14-15) TTA Messieurs, (…) je prens la liberté de dire à Vos Seigneuries, (…). (Anon., 1727, p. 110) TTD Messieurs les Chevaux, (…) j’ai l’honneur de vous dire en la mienne, (…). (Desfontaines,

1727, p. 132)

Lastly, it should be noted that the argumentative voices of both translators are not unanimous

throughout the first chapter of Part IV. While it is true to say that the above examples have

provided a general overview of their approach, other examples can be found that fine-tune or

even refute their usual argumentation. As such, the anonymous translator was found to

sometimes omit excerpts in which too many problematic elements follow in quick succession.

In example 39, the anonymous translator as well as Desfontaines render the author’s voice more

explicit by adding to their translations. As such, the Houyhnhnms are not only presented as

compassionate beings, but Gulliver is also put in the submissive position that Desfontaines

would otherwise camouflage or remove. In this case, it almost appears as if Gulliver has to be

granted permission by his ‘masters’ for him to rest.

Example 39

ST I (…) gave him to understand (…) that I was weary and not able to walk faster; upon which, he would stand a while to let me rest. (Swift, 1726, p. 17)

TTA Je (…) lui donnai à entendre que j’étois las, & qu’il ne m’étoit pas possible d’aller plus loin ; surquoi il eut la bonté de s’arrêter un peu pour me donner le tems de me reposer. (Anon., 1727, p. 111)

TTD Je (...) lui donnai à entendre comme je le pûs, que j’étois bien las & avois de la peine à marcher ; sur quoi il s’arrêta charitablement, pour me laisser reposer. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 134)

63

In like manner, Desfontaines slightly alters his course in example forty. It has been observed

how the abbot has his argumentative voice be heard in excerpts where the Yahoos might be

presented as (too) animalistic in Swift’s argumentation (cf. supra). In this case, however,

Desfontaines appears to leave some room for doubt as poil refers either to body hair or to animal

fur. Contrariwise, the anonymous translator renders the Dean’s position more explicit by adding

“de ces Animaux” (Anon., 1727, p. 106), which in return somewhat mismatches with the

human-like “Cheveux” (ibid.).

Example 40

ST The Hair of both Sexes was of several Colours (…). (Swift, 1726, p. 8) TTA Les Cheveux de ces Animaux, tant de l’un que de l’autre sexe, étoient de diferentes couleurs :

(…). (Anon., 1727, p. 106) TTD Le poil des uns & des autres étoit de diverses couleurs, (…). (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 127)

4.2.3 Evaluative level

4.2.3.1 Footnotes

Example 41 (Footnote 2)

TTD (…) sur tout s’il avoit l’esprit tant foit peu élevé, just & bien fait, & s’il n’étoit ni bourru, ni effeminé, ni brutal, ni capricieux, ni débauché, ni ignorant. * (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 206)

__________________________________________________________________ * Je ne crois pas qu’aucun Lecteur s’avise de prendre à la lettre cette mordante hyperbole. La Noblesse Angloise, selon M. de S. Evrémont, possede la fine fleur de la politesse, & on peut dire en general que les Seigneurs Anglois sont les plus honnêtes gens de l’Europe. Ils ont presque tous l’esprit orné, ils font beaucoup de cas des Gens de lettres, ils cultivent les sciences, & il y en a peu qui ne soient en état de composer des Livres. Il ne faut donc prendre cet endroit que comme une pure plaisanterie, ainsi que la plûpart des autres traits satyriques répandus dans cet Ouvrage. Si quelque esprit plus malfait étoit d’humeur de les apliquer serieusement à la Noblesse Françoise, ce seroit encore une bien plus grande injustice. Ce sont les hommes de néant, qui ont fait fortune ou par leurs peres ou par eux-mêmes, à qui ces traits peuvent convenir, & non pas aux personnes de qualité, qui en France comme ailleurs, sont la portion de la République, la plus vertueuse, la plus moderée, & la plus polie. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 206-207)

Parallel to the first footnote, the second one that Desfontaines decided to add to his Voyages de

Gulliver can be situated on two levels of enarrative functions, viz. an evaluative and an extra-

diegetic one. In this case, the predominant enarrative voice of Desfontaines is extra-diegetic

(cf. example 43), but the latter also judges the text that he is translating and thus projects an

evaluative voice. It is this footnote, Léger (2002a, pp. 193-194) comments, that establishes a

64

link with the translative direction that Desfontaines would seem to aspire in the preface: that of

a fable or a moral allegory. Subsequently, the abbot underscores that such a “mordante

hyperbole” (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 206) should not be taken too seriously. The reader is to

understand the excerpts – and by extension the majority of all satiric excerpts – on which the

footnote carries as nothing more than a witticism.

Upon considering the typology of Maloney (2005), it would seem that this allographic footnote

rests on an interpretive basis. Contrary to example 10, it seems to exert a more far-reaching

effect on the commitment of the reader to the text (ibid., p. 42). Whereas the former starts out

as an explanation, the latter immediately urges the reader into a certain direction, viz.

Desfontaines’s direction. On an evaluative level, that means that the translator gives his

perspective on the work and its satiric excerpts.

4.2.4 Extra-diegetic level

4.2.4.1 Footnotes

Example 42 (Footnote 1)

TTD (…) que cet amour du luxe, de la bonne chere & du plaisir, étoit le principe de tous les mouvemens de nos Yahous ; que pour y atteindre, il falloit s’enrichir ; que c’étoit ce qui produisoit les filoux, les voleurs, les pipeurs, les M. les parjures, les flâteurs, les suborneurs, les faussaires, les faux-témoins, les menteurs, les joüeurs, les imposteurs, les fanfarons, * les mauvaus Auteurs, les empoisoneurs, les impudiques, les précieux ridicules, les Esprits-forts. Il me fallut définir tous ces termes. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 197-198)

____________________________________________________

* Il est un peu surprenant de trouver ici les mauvais Auteurs & les Précieux ridicules, en si mauvaise compagnie. Mais on n’a pû rendre autrements les mots de Scribling & de Canting. On voit que l’Auteur les a malignement confondus tous ensemble, & qu’il y a aussi joint exprés les Free-thinking, c’est-à-dire les esprits-forts, ou les incredules, dont il y a un grand nombre en Angleterre. Au reste il est aisé de concevoir que le desir de s’avancer dans le monde produit des esprits libertins, fait faire de mauvais Livres, & porte à écrire d’un stile précieux & affecté, afin de passer pour Bel-esprit. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 197-198).

The first footnote was already discussed on a meta-discursive level in example 10, but it was

also noted that it contained within it another enarrative function. In this section, its extra-

diegetic side will be described, viz. the side by which Desfontaines integrates contextual

references and thus breaks away from the narrative (Rooryck & Jooken, 2013, p. 593). Indeed,

the footnote in example 42 could be ascribed to the extra-diegetic level for the abbot seizes this

65

opportunity – under the guise of an explanation (cf. supra) – to elaborate on the author, England

and the “esprits libertins” (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 198). Not only does the abbé explicitly

disapprove of the free, incredulous spirits that England abounds with, he also links these

libertine spirits to (stylistic) developments in the literary world (cf. section 2.2.1). Léger (2002a)

further asserts that Desfontaines uses this footnote to lash the “décadence des lettres et surtout

(…) la préciosité et la néologie” (p. 191). As to the typology of Maloney (2005), then, it was

already described above that this footnote has both explanatory and interpretive features.

Example 43 (Footnote 2)

TTD (…) sur tout s’il avoit l’esprit tant foit peu élevé, just & bien fait, & s’il n’étoit ni bourru, ni effeminé, ni brutal, ni capricieux, ni débauché, ni ignorant. * (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 206)

_________________________________________________________________ * Je ne crois pas qu’aucun Lecteur s’avise de prendre à la lettre cette mordante hyperbole. La Noblesse Angloise, selon M. de S. Evrémont, possede la fine fleur de la politesse, & on peut dire en general que les Seigneurs Anglois sont les plus honnêtes gens de l’Europe. Ils ont presque tous l’esprit orné, ils font beaucoup de cas des Gens de lettres, ils cultivent les sciences, & il y en a peu qui ne soient en état de composer des Livres. Il ne faut donc prendre cet endroit que comme une pure plaisanterie, ainsi que la plûpart des autres traits satyriques répandus dans cet Ouvrage. Si quelque esprit plus malfait étoit d’humeur de les apliquer serieusement à la Noblesse Françoise, ce seroit encore une bien plus grande injustice. Ce sont les hommes de néant, qui ont fait fortune ou par leurs peres ou par eux-mêmes, à qui ces traits peuvent convenir, & non pas aux personnes de qualité, qui en France comme ailleurs, sont la portion de la République, la plus vertueuse, la plus moderée, & la plus polie. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 206-207)

At first sight, it appears that this second, rather verbose footnote also defuses the satire that was

introduced by Jonathan Swift (Léger, 2002a). In example 41, that was already observed on an

evaluative level, but it would seem that things become more complicated when Desfontaines’s

enarrative voice becomes extra-diegetic. The abbot touches upon the English nobility, a certain

“M. de S. Evrémont” (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 206) and the French nobility. Quite paradoxically,

Desfontaines had criticised the English world of the “esprits-forts” (ibid., p. 198) a mere ten

pages earlier, even stating that they were at the root of “de mauvais Livres” and “un stile

précieux & affecté” (ibid., p; 198). In this example, however, there is room for an appraisal of

the English nobility and their ability to write books. That appraisal is underpinned by an

association to Saint-Évremond, a rather open-minded spirit himself who had to flee France and

take shelter across the Channel (Léger, 2002a, p. 193). Thus, it would seem that the abbot is

treading on thinner ice here than he was at the very beginning of Voyages de Gulliver. The

readership that is being addressed might explain this altered course: whilst it was still a potential

readership in the Préface du traducteur, it has become a familiarised one by the time they

66

encounter this footnote (Léger, 2002a, p. 194). But Desfontaines takes it one step further, which

is why the French nobility is brought into play. By page 206, the abbot thought it safe enough

not only to mask Swift’s satire, but also to hint at a satiric disapproval of the French nobility

(ibid., p. 194). The more complicated arrangement of this footnote seems to corroborate its

place as an interpretive note in Maloney’s (2005) typology, with the abbé cautiously yet

distinctly taking a position and as such exercising and influence on the readership (cf. example

41).

Example 44 (Footnote 3)

TTD L’agrément & la justesse des similitudes, la richesse & l’exactitude des descriptions, la liaison & la vivacité des Images, voilà l’essence & le caractére de leur Poësie. Mon Maître me recitoit quelquefois des morceaux admirables de leurs meilleurs Poëmes ; c’étoit en vérité tantôt le stile d’Homére, tantôt celui de Virgile, tantôt celui de * Milton. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 237) _______________________

* Poëte Anglois Auteur du Paradise Lost ; c’est-à-dire, du Paradis perdu, Poëme fameux & trés-estimé en Angleterre. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 237)

Example 44 illustrates the third footnote that was introduced by Desfontaines in Part IV.

Contrary to the former two, this footnote is markedly shorter in length. As it succinctly gives

the reader some more information on John Milton, this footnote has been categorised as

fulfilling an extra-diegetic function. It should be noted, though, that Homer, Virgil and Milton

have been added by Desfontaines to his translation. None of these three were textually present

in the English original, nor in the anonymous translation into French. Thus, their addition could

be regarded as an amplificatio (Léger, 2002a, p. 188).

That raises the question why the abbot has decided to add these three authors and scribble the

reader a short note on the last one. Léger (2002a, p. 188) indicates that it was included so as to

render the text even more English, which would tap into the Anglo-French connection of section

2.3.2. The footnote then, seems to reinforce the abbot’s amplificatio: it is not just an English

poet, but his poem is also “fameux & trés-estimé en Angleterre” (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 237).

The addition of a Latin and Greek author, then, not only gives it some more esteem, but also

responds to Desfontaines’s education in and predilection for the classical era (McMurran, 2008,

p. 150; Léger, 2002a, p. 188). In brief, it would seem that both the ‘amplified’ excerpt and the

footnote of example 44 are a case of Desfontaines flaunting his knowledge rather than assisting

the reader (Léger, 2002a, p. 188).

67

The category that this footnote would belong too, seems to be that of the allographic factual

note, as the reader is provided with supportive information on the main text (Maloney, 2005,

pp. 29-30). In addition, this factual note takes the form of an explanatory note, as the reader is

given an explanation of John Milton, “Poëte Anglois” and “Auteur du Paradise Lost”

(Desfontaines, 1727, p. 237).

Example 45 (Footnote 4)

TTD * Nec si miserum Fortuna Sinonem Finxit, vanum etiam mendacemque improba finget. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 281) ______________________ * Virg. AEneïd. l. 2. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 281)

The abbot’s education in and predilection for the classical era emanates yet again in the fourth

footnote. The Latin phrase itself is present in the English original (p. 187), the anonymous

translation (p. 213) and Desfontaines’s translation (p. 281) and would translate as “Though

Fortune has made Sinon wretched, she has not made him untrue and a liar”25. However, the

abbé is the only one of these three to have added a footnote so as to refer to the source text, viz.

Virgil’s Aeneid (approx.. 30 B.C. – 19 B.C.). Consequently, he makes his translator’s voice

explicitly heard as extra-diegetic. Léger (2002a, p. 187) remarks that English criticism has

generally acknowledged the Latin citation of the Aeneid as an attempt to emphasise the fictional

nature of Gulliver’s travels. Parallel to Sinon, it is well possible that he might have deviated

from the truth. That would imply that Desfontaines, by means of his footnote, disregards the

citation altogether so as to flaunt his knowledge, as in example 44 (Léger, 2002a, p. 187).

In accordance with the typology of notes as suggested by Maloney (2005), this footnote

corresponds to the allographic factual category. Desfontaines takes a step back from the

narrative in order to present the reader with a factual source. As such, he is not only clarifying

the Latin sentence, but also encourages the reader’s involvement (Maloney, 2005, p. 31).

Furthermore, the factual footnote contains the source text and thus takes the form of an

intertextual note (ibid., p. 30).

25 trans. Kearney, D. (2010). Gulliver’s Travels - With an Introduction and Contemporary Criticism (p. 329). San Francisco: Ignatius Press

68

Example 46 (Footnote 5)

TTD Par exemple, * une troupe de Pyrates est poussée par la tempête, je nesçai où. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 285) ______________________ * Allusion à la conquête du Mexique par les Espagnols, qui exercerent des cruautés inoüies à l’égard des Naturels du païs. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 285)

In the fifth and final footnote of Part IV, Desfontaines equally puts on an enarrative voice that

fulfils an extra-diegetic function. The abbot adds a footnote to “une troupe de Pyrates” and

refers to the conquest of Mexico by the Spanish conquistadors. Thus he withdraws from the

narrative proper and integrates a contextual reference. Then why would the abbot mention an

event that had unfolded some two centuries before his translation of Gulliver’s Travels? Léger

(2002a, p. 194) notes how the footnote of Desfontaines arises in the conclusion of the book. In

the original English work, it is here that Lemuel Gulliver explains how he would have never

thought of enlarging “his Majesty’s Dominion by my Discovery” (Swift, 1726, p. 192). Gulliver

then underpins his idea by hinting at the brutal, murderous practices of colonisation (ibid., pp.

192-193). Once again, the addition of this footnote seems to be rather superfluous. It is absent

in both the English original and the anonymous translation, seeing that the contemporaneous

readership would have certainly fathomed what Gulliver was alluding to (Léger, 2002a, p. 195).

As such, Desfontaines goes back on the prefatory promise that he would disappear from the

work altogether (example 9), save for the expunging of some satiric excerpts and puzzling

allegories here and there (Léger, 2002a, p. 195).

As to Maloney’s (2005) typology of notes, this footnote would fall into the category of the

allographic, factual note. As with examples fourteen and fifteen, the abbot informs the reader

on a piece of narrative. Its form responds to the sub-category of the historical note, in which a

historical event is elaborated on (ibid., pp. 29-30). In this case, the footnote alludes to the early

sixteenth-century conquest of Mexico by the Spanish conquistadors (e.g. Hernán Cortés), who

adopted a particularly violent attitude vis-à-vis the Aztecs (Prescott, 2014).

69

5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The present study has homed in on the cultural, literary and censorial context of eighteenth-

century England and France, followed by a consideration of the predominant translation

practices of the eighteenth century. In that prospect, France especially and its belles infidèles

were paid closer attention to. Lastly, an overview was given of Gulliver’s Travels (1726) and

Jonathan Swift, Voyages de Gulliver (1727) and Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines and

Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (Anon., 1727) and the translator that could have

possibly been behind it. Of all three works, the epitext (e.g. reviews and letters), peritext (e.g.

Desfontaines’s Préface du traducteur and footnotes) and the narrative proper of Part IV

(Chapter I) were taken into consideration.

A systematic analysis was carried out on the basis of two typologies, viz. a typology of

enarrative functions as proposed by Rooryck & Jooken (2013) and a typology of notes as

proposed by Maloney (2005). In said analysis, additional attention was paid to the Préface du

traducteur of Desfontaines as well as to the five footnotes that he had added to Part IV.

Moreover, an additional thirty excerpts were taken from all three books so as to compare and

analyse them according to the former typology. The footnotes were first categorised by the

enarrative typology and then briefly discussed in the light of Maloney’s (2005) typology.

As to the analysis proper, one of the main research questions was what impact Desfontaines’s

altered paratextual framework would have. The most important paratextual element that the

abbot seems to use in – or rather introduce to – his translation is peritextual, viz. the lengthy

Préface du traducteur. Desfontaines seizes this prefatory opportunity to touch on the original

work, the original author, his translation and the work that he has taken on as a translator (cf.

Valentin, 2011; Hayes, 2009, pp. 7-9). In addition, the preface was also used so as to steer and

guide the reader (cf. Maloney, 2005, p. 16) in his interpretation of and attitude towards the

undertakings of Lemuel Gulliver. As such, the abbot stresses the problematic nature of some

parts in the original, but also the work that he has carried out to either add to, alter or omit these

excerpts to meet the French bon goût. That suggests that his translatorial attitude responds to

that of the domesticating, liberal belles infidèles current of the time (Léger, 2004). On the other

hand, the abbé also mentions the ‘good’ parts of Gulliver’s Travels, by which he refers in

particular to the fictional, fabulous and allegoric side of the work. That appears to corroborate

the suggestions of Léger (2004, 2002a) that this is the direction that Desfontaines wishes to

70

nudge the reader in. In brief, the abbot touches on so many matters that his Préface du

traducteur seems to lack a definite direction. That is reflected by the presence of all four

enarrative functions of Rooryck & Jooken (2013), with the abbot touching for example on his

translational choices (meta-discursive), on the argumentation of Swift (argumentative), on the

original work and its flaws (evaluative) and on the anonymous translation of Holland (extra-

diegetic). His closing paragraphs are exemplary therein, in that the abbots declares how he

would thenceforth disappear from the work altogether. That is refuted, however, by the analysis

of the footnotes and the narrative parts.

In addition, Part IV contains five footnotes in which the enarrative voice of Desfontaines

becomes explicitly apparent. All five were attributed to the extra-diegetic category of Rooryck

& Jooken (2013) and footnote 1 and 2 respectively fulfilled an additional meta-discursive and

an evaluative function. With regard to the typology of Maloney (2005), three footnotes were

deemed strictly factual (footnote 3 through 5), one strictly interpretive (footnote 2) and one as

having features of both the factual and the interpretive category (footnote 1). The latter two in

particular seem to pose an interesting case. Not only are they the most verbose footnotes of

Part IV, but their ambiguous nature is also reflected in both the enarrative functions of Rooryck

& Jooken (2013) and the typology of Maloney (2005). As such, they carry out extra-diegetic

functions (e.g. by referring to England or the free spirits), but also have Maloney’s interpretive

features, by which the stronger involvement of the translator comes to the fore. That is reflected

in that Desfontaines also comments on his translative choices in footnote 1 (meta-discursive)

and on (an excerpt of) the book in footnote 2 (evaluative).

Lastly, other peritextual elements that were altered in the translations are the frontispiece, the

additional map, the title pages and the letter from the publisher to the reader. All of these

modifications are situated on an argumentative level, in that both authors apply their enarrative

voice vis-à-vis the novelistic realism that Jonathan Swift had introduced in Gulliver’s Travels.

Desfontaines predominantly contradicts the argumentation of Swift, in that the frontispiece is

omitted, as are the title page and the additional map to Part IV. Moreover, the title page to the

book is also mitigated and an illustration is added by which the fabulous character seems to be

hinted at again (cf. Léger, 2004, p. 528; Léger, 2002a, p. 183). The anonymous translation, on

the other hand, largely continues or reinforces the argumentation of Jonathan Swift, for example

by keeping most elements of the title page to the book and to Part IV, but also by including and

71

translating the additional map. Then again, the frontispiece was slightly altered in that certain

elements were omitted.

The second key question of this study was what translatorial changes Gulliver’s Travels (1726)

had undergone in its two translations into French and how these changes could be categorised

according to the typology of Rooryck & Jooken (2013). In total, thirty examples with each

containing three excerpts (ST, TTD and TTA26) were analysed in further detail so as to trace

the enarrative voices of Desfontaines and the anonymous translator. All of these excerpts were

attributed to the argumentative category, for most additions, alterations or ommisions related to

the argumentation of Jonathan Swift on three levels, viz. the novelistic features, the human

experience and the alleged misanthropy. Previous studies have generally dubbed Desfontaines’s

translation a belle infidèle (e.g. Valentin, 2011; Léger, 2004; Just, 2002; Léger, 1996), which

the analysis of chapter four and the corpus of excerpts (Appendix L) seem to corroborate. On

all three levels, examples were found in which the abbot renders explicit, mitigates, contradicts

or smoothens Swift’s argumentation. The anonymous translation, on the other hand, is typically

acknowledged to be a more faithful, literal translation (e.g. McMurran, 2008, p. 153; Real, 2000

as cited in Just, 2002, par. 32; Léger, 1996, p. 92). The lion’s share of the examples in chapter

four of this study and in the corpus of excerpts (Appendix L) seem to further assert the idea that

the anonymous translator stays closer to the source text and to the argumentation of Swift on

all three levels. In addition, three examples were discussed in which the latter translator even

reinforces the author’s position by means of more definite explicitations (e.g. on realism and

on Gulliver’s position vis-à-vis the Houyhnhnms).

While it is true to say that most examples seem to hint at Desfontaines altering, adding and

omitting and the anonymous translator adhering closer to the English original, it should be noted

that some exceptions are made too, in particular in the case of the anonymous translator.

In excerpts (e.g. example 22 & 24) that refer to corporal or scatological vulgarity and that follow

in quick succession, he appears to omit whereas Desfontaines mitigates. Conversely, two

examples (39 and 40) illustrate how the abbé also changes his usual course on the level of

alleged misanthropy.

26 Source text, target text Desfontaines and target text anonymous

72

In brief, the enarrative voices of both Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines and the anonymous

translator resonate throughout the first chapter of Part IV, albeit in different ways. Moreover,

the former adds an additional layer to his translation by means of a preface and footnotes, by

which his hesitant position becomes all the more visible. The various directions, enarrative

functions and footnotes suggest how a hesitant Desfontaines was translating a modern

vernacular work (McMurran, 2008, p. 159), but kept close to his ‘classical’ predilection and

education all the same (McMurran, 2008, pp. 150-151). This notwithstanding, the abbot was

undeniably an important hinge in this period of transition, as such introducing France to a lighter

side of English literature, albeit in his infidèle manner (McMurran, 2008, p. 151). The analysis

of excerpts from Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver, on the other hand, shows the different

context that this work was translated in, with more freedom and tolerance for the argumentation

of Jonathan Swift to be transferred into French.

By means of this triangular comparison between the original and two translations into French,

the present study has given more insight into both translations, translators and the epochal

context that they were living in. That might additionally be useful to provide a different

perspective on Gulliver’s Travels and its legacy. Furthermore, an additional connection was

drawn between the Préface du traducteur, the footnotes and the narrative proper in the

translation of Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines. This notwithstanding, this study

undoubtedly had its shortcomings. The use of two typologies has certainly helped to categorise

the textual and paratextual elements, but also meant for certain excerpts or examples to be

attributed one function. Whilst all book excerpts were put in the argumentative category, it is

undeniably that some also contained within them other enarrative functions. For example, some

also implicitly manifested a negative appreciation for the alleged misanthropy as put forward

in Part IV (evaluative) or brought contextual, French references into the translation (extra-

diegetic).

Lastly, it is hoped that the present research might spark additional studies on the topic. It would

be worthwhile, for example, to explore the following questions:

(1) Was the anonymous translation actually published in The Hague?

Could the translator be traced by means of a stylometric approach?

(2) What was the impact of other, lesser-known authors on eighteenth-century satire and/or

translating?

73

Has that impact been cushioned over time by the avid interest in more seminal writers

and works?

(3) What was the impact of secondary translations of Gulliver’s Travels?

Did these secondary translations mean for the portrait of Lemuel Gulliver to elsewhere

live on in a different manner?

In other words, a more in-depth analysis of the anonymous translation into French, of the lesser-

known satirists of the eighteenth century (cf. Marshall, 2009, p. viii-ix) or of secondary

translations of Gulliver’s Travels (cf. Just, 2002, par. 42) might be a fruitful domain for future

research.

74

REFERENCE LIST

Primary sources

Swift, J. (1726). Travels into several remote nations of the world. In Four parts, by Lemuel Gulliver. London: B. Motte

Swift, J. (1727). Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver, en divers pays éloignez. (Anonymous, Trans.) The Hague: P. Gosse & J. Neaulme.

Swift, J. (1727) Voyages de Gulliver. (Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines, Trans.). Paris: Hypolite-Louis Guerin.

Secondary sources

Backscheider, P. R. & Ingrassia, C. (2005). A Companion to the Eighteenth-Century English Novel and Culture. Malden, Oxford, Victoria: Blackwell Publishing.

Bartkuvienė, L. (2017). English Literary History of the Eighteenth Century. [PDF file, 56 pp.]. Retrieved from http://www.flf.vu.lt

Bibliothèque nationale de France. (2018). Jean Neaulme (libraire prétendu). [Web page]. Retrieved from http://data.bnf.fr

Bibliothèque nationale de France. (2018). Pierre Gosse (libraire prétendu). [Web page]. Retrieved from http://data.bnf.fr

Black, J. (1996). Cultural History and the Eighteenth Century. XVII-XVIII. Bulletin de la société d’études anglo-américaines des XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles, 42, 7-20. doi:10.3406/xvii.1996.1319

Block, E. A. (1953). Lemuel Gulliver: Middle-Class Englishman. Modern Language Notes. 68(7). 474 – 477. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org

Boulaire, F. (2002). Jonathan Swift : Angleterre, Irlande et patriotisme protestant, 1688-1735. In Boulaire, F., & Carey, D. (Eds.) Les voyages de Gulliver : Mondes lointains ou mondes proches (pp. 13-33). Caen : Presses universitaires de Caen. doi:10.4000/books.puc.341

Broomans, P. (2006). Martha Muusses en de drie M's. Over de studie naar cultuurbemiddeling. In P. Broomans, S. van Voorst, S. I. Linn, M. Vogel, & A. Bay (Eds.). Object: Nederlandse literatuur in het buitenland. Methode: onbekend. (pp. 56 - 70). Groningen: Barkhuis Publishing.

Brown, G. S. (2003). Reconsidering the Censorship of Writers in Eighteenth‐Century France: Civility, State Power, and the Public Theater in the Enlightenment. The Journal of Modern History, 75(2), 235-268. doi:10.1086/380139

Carpentier, L., & Jooken, L. (2017). Cross-Channel paratextual framing : An analysis of the paratext of Les Liaisons dangereuses (1782) and its first translation into English (1784). Retrieved from https://lib.ugent.be

Colley, L. J. (2018) 18th-century Britain, 1714–1815. In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved as PDF from https://www.britannica.com

Creature. (2017). In A Dictionary of Environment and Conversation. Retrieved from http://www.oxfordreference.com

Du Sorbier, F. (1986). Heurs et malheurs du roman anglais en France au XVIIIe siècle. Le continent européen et le monde anglo-américain aux XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles. Actes du Colloque - Société d'études anglo-américaines des 17e et 18e siècles, 1986, 119-131. doi:10.3406/xvii.1986.2244

75

Foulet, L. (1913). Correspondance de Voltaire (1726-1729). Paris: Libraire Hachette et Cie. Retrieved from https://archive.org

Fox, C. (2003). The Cambridge Companion to Jonathan Swift. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://books.google.be

Geleijns, E. (s.d.). Gosse. [Web article]. Retrieved from https://www.kb.nl Genette, G. (1997). Paratexts: Tresholds of interpretation. (Jane E. Lewin, Trans.). Cambridge,

New York, Melbourne: Cambridge University Press. Green, J. & Karolides, N. J. (2005). Encyclopedia of Censorship, New Edition. New York: Facts

On File, Inc. Retrieved from https://archive.org Grootendorst, J. (s.d.). Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Jean Néaulme en de uitgave van de Emile.

[Web article]. Retrieved from https://www.kb.nl Halimi, S. (2010). La censure en Angleterre au XVIIIe siècle : obstacle à la diffusion de l’écrit?.

XVII-XVIII. Revue de la société d'études anglo-américaines des XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles. Diffusion de l’écrit dans le monde anglophone. Spreading the Written Word in the English-Speaking World, 17-32. doi:10.3406/xvii.2010.2476

Hammond, B. S. (2004). Jonathan Swift and Popular Culture: Myth, Media, and the Man. [Review of the book Jonathan Swift and Popular Culture: Myth, Media, and the Man by Ann Cline Kelly]. The Modern Language Review. 99(3). 746-747. doi:10.2307/3739013

Harrison, B. (2003). Houyhnhnm Virtue. Journal of Literature and the History of Ideas, 1(1), 35–64. doi:10.1353/pan.0.0095

Harth, P. (1976). The Problem of Political Allegory in "Gulliver's Travels". Modern Philology. 73(4). S40-S47. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org

Hayes, J. C. (2009): Translation, Subjectivity and Culture in France and England, 1600-1800. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Retrieved from https://www.sup.org

Hill, A. S. (1868). Review. The North American Review, 106(218). 68–128. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org

Hermans, T. (2014). Irony’s Echo. In Hermans, T. (Ed.), The Conference of the Tongues (pp. 52-85). London, New York: Routledge. (Original work published in 2007)

Journal des Sçavans, Apr.-Jun. (1727). Paris: Chaubert. Retrieved from https://babel.hathitrust.org

Journal des Sçavans, Jul.-Sept. (1727). Paris: Chaubert. Retrieved from https://babel.hathitrust.org

Just, M. M. (2002). The Reception of Gulliver’s Travels in Britain and Ireland, France, and Germany. In Boulaire, F., & Carey, D. (Eds.), Les voyages de Gulliver : Mondes lointains ou mondes proches (pp. 81-100). Caen : Presses universitaires de Caen. doi :10.4000/books.puc.341

Kishlansky, M. A. & Morill, J. S. (2018) The later Stuarts. In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved as PDF from https://www.britannica.com

La Branche, S. (2011). La variabilité du climat : entre punition "divine" et fluctuation naturelle. In La Branche, S. (Ed.), Le changement climatique: Du méta-risque à la méta-gouvernance (pp. 76-79). Paris: Lavoisier.

Lambe, P. J. (1985). Biblical Criticism and Censorship in Ancien Régime France: The Case of Richard Simon. The Harvard Theological Review, 78(1/2), 149-177. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org

League. (2007). In The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea. Retrieved from http://www.oxfordreference.com

76

Léger, B. (1996). Soumission et assujettissement : la fidélité chez les traducteurs et « théoriciens » de la traduction française dans la première moitié du XVIIIe siècle. TTR : traduction, terminologie, rédaction, 9(2), 75–101. doi:10.7202/037259ar

Léger, B. (2002a). Les notes du traducteur des Voyages de Gulliver : détonation et « détonnement ». Lumen. 21. 179–198. doi:10.7202/1012274ar

Léger, B. (2002b). Desfontaines travesti : une « Dame angloise » traduit les Avantures de Joseph Andrews de Fielding (1743). TTR : traduction, terminologie, rédaction, 15(2), 19–48. doi:10.7202/007477ar

Léger, B. (2004). Nouvelles aventures de Gulliver à Blefuscu : traductions, retraductions et rééditions des Voyages de Gulliver sous la monarchie de Juillet. Meta, 49(3), 526–543. doi:10.7202/009377ar

Le Roy Ladurie, E. (12 - 18.09.1986). Tous les feux du Soleil [Review of the works Louis XIV by François Bluche; Un nouveau Colbert by Roland Mousnier]. Le Vif/L’Express. 12 - 18.09.1986. 135–137.

Letters of The Marquise du Deffand, Vol. IV. (1810). London: Longman, Hurst, Rees and Orme. Retrieved from https://archive.org

Mackintosh, R. J. (1836). Memoirs Of The Life Of Sir James Mackintosh Vol. 2. London: Edward Moxon. Retrieved from https://archive.org

Maloney, E. J. (2005). Footnotes in Fiction: A Rhetorical approach. Dissertation. Columbus: The Ohio State University.

Marshall, A. (2009). The Practice of Satire in England, 1650-1770. Dissertation. The Pennsylvania State University, The Graduate School – Department of English

Marshall, A. (2010). The State of Swift Studies 2010. Eighteenth-Century Life. 34(2), 83-105. Retrieved from https://muse.jhu.edu

Marshall, A. (2011). Rethinking Jonathan Swift [Review of the works Jonathan Swift in the Company of Women by Louise Barnett; Swift and Pope: Satirists in Dialogue by Dustin Griffin; Jonathan Swift in Print and Manuscript by Stephen Karian; Swift, the Book, and the Irish Financial Revolution: Satire and Sovereignty in Colonial Ireland by Sean D. Moore; Politics and Literature in the Age of Swift: English and Irish Perspectives by Claude Rawson]. Eighteenth-Century Studies. 44(3). 405–411. doi: 10.1353/ecs.2011.0010

Marshall, A. (2014). Gulliver’s Travels by Jonathan Swift [Review of the book Gulliver’s Travels by David Womersley]. The Scriblerian and the Kit-Cats. 47(1). 40–42. doi: 10.1353/scb.2014.0052.

Marshall, A. (2018). Jonathan Swift, “Master of Controversy”. [Review of the book Jonathan Swift: The Reluctant Rebel by John Stubbs]. Huntington Library Quarterly, 81(1). 157–160. doi:10.1353/hlq.2018.0006.

Mason, H. T. & Birkett, J. (2016). French Literature: The 18th Century To The Revolution Of 1789. In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved as PDF from https://www.britannica.com

Méthivier, H. (1981). L'Ancien Régime. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. Retrieved from https://gallica.bnf.fr

McMurran, M. H. (2008). Translation as Offence: The Case of Desfontaines. Translation and Literature, 17(2), 150-164. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org

McMurran, M. H. (2010). The Spread of Novels: Translation and Prose Fiction in the Eighteenth Century. New Jersey, Oxfordshire: Princeton University Press

Mercure de France, Tome XII, Janvier-juin 1727. (1968). Genève: Slatkine Reprints. Retrieved from https://babel.hathitrust.org

77

Morgan, S. (2006). Jonathan Swift: A Portrait [Review of the book Jonathan Swift: A Portrait by Victoria Glendenning]. The Missouri Review, 29(3), 177–179. doi:10.1353/mis.2007.0020.

Mullan, J. & Cordner, M. (2017). English Literature: The 18th Century. In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved as PDF from https://www.britannica.com

Nies, F. (2013). La France, pays ouvert : l'afflux de richesses exogènes par la traduction au XVIIIe siècle. Revue d'Histoire littéraire de la France, 113(1), 55-70. doi:10.3917/rhlf.131.0055

Nisard, C. (1853). Les ennemis de Voltaire: l’Abbé Desfontaines, Fréron, La Beaumelle. Paris: Amyot. Retrieved from https://archive.org

Novel. (2015). In The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms. Retrieved from http://www.oxfordreference.com

O’Brien, K. (2009). Women and Enlightenment in Eighteenth-Century Britain. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://scholar.google.be

Oz-Salzberger, F. (2006). The Enlightenment in Translation: Regional and European Aspects. European Review of History—Revue européenne d'Histoire, 13(3), 385-409. doi:10.1080/13507480600893122

Pincus, S. (2012). Rethinking Mercantilism: Political Economy, the British Empire, and the Atlantic World in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries. The William and Mary Quarterly, 69(1), 3-34. doi:10.5309/willmaryquar.69.1.0003

Poitou, J. (2017). Censure en France sous l'Ancien Régime [Web article]. Retrieved from http://j.poitou.free.fr/

Popkin, D. J. & Higonnet, P. L. (2018). France, 1715–89. In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved as PDF from https://www.britannica.com

Popkin, D. J. & Shennan, J. H. (2018). France, 1490–1715. In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved as PDF from https://www.britannica.com

Prescott, W. H. (2014) The History of the Conquest of Mexico. Adelaide: The University of Adelaide Library. Retrieved from https://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au (Original work published in 1843).

Quintana, R. et al. (2017). Jonathan Swift: Anglo-Irish Author and Clergyman. In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved as PDF from: https://www.britannica.com

Razzell, P. E. (1965). Population Change in Eighteenth-Century England. A Reinterpretation. The Economic History Review, 18(2), 312-332. doi:10.2307/2592097

Rooryck, G. & Jooken, L. (2013). Le péritexte des traductions anglaises du Discours sur les Sciences et les Arts de Jean-Jacques Rousseau: la voix énarrative du traducteur. META, 58(3), 589–606. Retrieved from https://biblio.ugent.be

Rooryck, G. & Jooken, L. (2014). La Mettrie en anglais, une traduction travestie. Revue d'histoire littéraire de la France, 114(2), 284-303. doi:10.3917/rhlf.142.0284.

Sackett, S. J. (1973). Gulliver Four: Here We Go Again. Bulletin of the Rocky Mountain Modern Language Association. 27(4). 212-218. doi:10.1353/rmr.1973.0021

Sheridan et al. (1801). The Works of the Rev. Jonathan Swift, Volume XII. London: Johnson et al. (Northwestern University Library). Retrieved from https://babel.hathitrust.org.

Sheridan et al. (1801). The Works of the Rev. Jonathan Swift, Volume XIII. London. (Northwestern University Library). Retrieved from https://babel.hathitrust.org

Sheridan et al. (1801). The Works of the Rev. Jonathan Swift, Volume XIV. London. (Northwestern University Library). Retrieved from https://babel.hathitrust.org.

78

Stellwagen, A. W. (1889). J. Van Effen, De Hollandsche Spectator. Groningen: J. B. Wolters. Retrieved from https://archive.org

Spiessens, A. (2013). Translation as argumentation: ethos and ethical positioning in Hoess’s Commandant of Auschwitz. TRANSLATION STUDIES, 6(1), 3-18.

Thacker, C. (1967). Swift and Voltaire. Hermathena. 104. 51-66. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org

Thompson, M. S. (2009) Jonathan Swift’s Childhoods. Éire-Ireland. 44(1&2). 10-36. doi:10.1353/eir.0.0039

Todorov, T. (2006). L'esprit des Lumières. [Web article] Retrieved from http://expositions.bnf.fr/lumieres/arret/02.htm

Tonnage. (2007). In The Oxford Companion to Ships and the Sea. Retrieved from http://www.oxfordreference.com

Valentin, M. (2011). Jonathan Swift and His Infidel Translator Desfontaines. Munich: GRIN Verlag. Retrieved from https://www.grin.com

Venuti, L. (1995). The Translator’s Invisibility – A History of Translation. London, New York : Routledge. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu

Voltaire. (1733). Letters concerning the English Nation. London: Davis & Lyon. Retrieved from https://archive.org

Wheeler, C. B. (1913). The English Humourists of the Eighteenth Century – A Series of Lectures by W. M. Thackeray. Oxford: The Clarendon Press. Retrieved from https://archive.org

Wilke, J. (08.05.2013). Censorship and Freedom of the Press. [PDF File, 23 pp.] Retrieved from http://ieg-ego.eu

Zhang, Q. (2016). Translator’s Voice in Translated Texts. Journal of Literature and Art Studies. 6(2). 178–185. doi:10.17265/2159-5836/2016.02.007

79

APPENDICES

Appendix A: The title page to Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726)27

27 In Swift, J. (1726). Travels into several remote nations of the world. In Four parts, by Lemuel Gulliver. London: B. Motte

80

Appendix B: Approbation and privilège du roi in Voyages de Gulliver (Desfontaines, 1727)28

28 In Swift, J. (1727). Voyages de Gulliver. (Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines, Trans.). Paris: Hypolite-Louis Guerin.

Figure 2: Approbation and privilège du roi (1)

81

Figure 3: Privilège du roi (2)

82

Figure 4: Privilège du roi (3)

83

Appendix C: Frontispiece to Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726)29

29 In Swift, J. (1726). Travels into several remote nations of the world. In Four parts, by Lemuel Gulliver. London: B. Motte

84

Appendix D: Title page to Voyages de Gulliver (Desfontaines, 1727)30

30 In Swift, J. (1727). Voyages de Gulliver. (Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines, Trans.). Paris: Hypolite-Louis Guerin.

85

Appendix E: Frontispiece to Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (Anon., 1727)31

31 In Swift, J. (1727). Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver, en divers pays éloignez. (Anonymous, Trans.) The Hague: P. Gosse & J. Neaulme.

86

Appendix F: Title page to Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (Anon., 1727)32

32 In Swift, J. (1727). Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver, en divers pays éloignez. (Anonymous, Trans.) The Hague: P. Gosse & J. Neaulme.

87

Appendix G: Title page to Part IV of Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726)33

33 In Swift, J. (1726). Travels into several remote nations of the world. In Four parts, by Lemuel Gulliver. London: B. Motte

88

Appendix H: Additional map to Part IV of Gulliver’s Travels (Swift, 1726)34

34 In Swift, J. (1726). Travels into several remote nations of the world. In Four parts, by Lemuel Gulliver. London: B. Motte

89

Appendix I: Opening illustration to Part IV of Voyages de Gulliver (Desfontaines, 1727)35

35 In Swift, J. (1727). Voyages de Gulliver. (Pierre-François Guyot Desfontaines, Trans.). Paris: Hypolite-Louis Guerin.

90

Appendix J: Title page to Part IV of Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver (Anon., 1727)36

36 In Swift, J. (1727). Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver, en divers pays éloignez. (Anonymous, Trans.) The Hague: P. Gosse & J. Neaulme.

91

Appendix K: Additional map to Part IV of Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver

(Anon., 1727)37

37 In Swift, J. (1727). Voyages du Capitaine Lemuel Gulliver, en divers pays éloignez. (Anonymous, Trans.) The Hague: P. Gosse & J. Neaulme.

92

Appendix L: Corpus of excerpts

I. Excerpts relating to the novelistic features

Realism

Example 1

ST We set sail from Portsmouth upon the Second Day of August, 1710; on the Fourteenth, we met with Captain Pocock of Bristol, at Tenariss, who was going to the Bay of Campechy, to cut Logwood. On the Sixteenth, he was parted from us by a Storm; I heard since my Return, that his Ship foundered, and none escaped, but one Cabbin-Boy. He was an honest man, and a good Sailor, but a little too positive in his own Opinions, which was the Cause of his Destruction, as it hath been of several others. For if he had followed my Advice, he might have been safe at home with his Family at this time, as well as myself. (Swift, 1726, pp. 2-3).

TTA Nous partimes de Portsmouth le second d'Aoust 1710, le quatorziéme nous rencontrâmes le Capitaine Pocock qui aloit à la Baye de Campêche pour y couper du Bois du même nom. Le 16. nous fumes separez de lui par une Tempête; j'apris à mon Retour que son Vaisseau avoit coulé à fond ; & que de tout l'Equipage il n'y avoit qu'un seul Mousse qui se fut sauvé. C'étoit un honête Homme & un fort bon Marinier, mais un peu trop positif dans ses sentimens, ce qui fut la cause de sa perte, comme ce l'a été de celle de plusieurs autres. Car s'il avoit suivi mon Avis, il seroit peut être à present comme moi sain & sauf au milieu de sa Famille. (Anon., 1727, p. 102)

TTD Je dis adieu à ma pauvre femme qui étoit grosse, & m’étant embarqué à Portsmouth, je mis à la voile le 2. d’Août 1710. (omitted) (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 122)

Example 2

ST I had Fifty Hands on board, and my Orders were, that I should trade with the Indians, in the South-Sea, and make what Discoveries I could. (Swift, 1726, p. 3)

TTA Tout l’Equipage de mon Vaisseau consistoit en vingt-cinq Hommes , & mes ordres portoient que je trafiquerois avec les Indiens de la Mer du Sud, & que je tacherois de faire quelques nouvelles Decouvertes. (Anon., 1727, pp. 102-103)

TTD (omitted)

Example 3

ST They sent me down Victuals and Drink, and took the Government of the Ship to themselves. (Swift, 1726, p. 4)

TTA Ils m’envoyerent à manger & à boire, & se chargérent du Gouvernement du Vaisseau.. (Anon., 1727, pp. 103-104)

TTD (omitted)

93

Example 4

ST They sailed many Weeks, and traded with the Indians, but I knew not what Course they took, being kept a close Prisoner in my Cabbin, and expecting nothing less then to be murdered, as they often threatned me. (Swift, 1726, p. 4)

TTA Cette espèce de prison dura quelques semaines, pendant lesquelles ils firent commerce avec les Indiens, sans que je sçusse quel Course ils prenoient, étant étroitement gardé dans ma Cabane, & attendant à tout moment qu’ils executeroient la menace de me tuer, qu’ils me faisoient reguliérement huit ou dix fois par jour. (Anon., 1727, pp. 103-104)

TTD Cependant, j’étois prisonnier dans ma chambre, fort inquiet du sort qu’on me préparoit. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 124)

Example 5

ST They forced me into the Long-boat, letting me put on by best Suit of Cloaths, which were as good as New, and a small Bundle of Linnen, but no Arms except my Hanger ; and they were so civil as not to search my Pockets, into which I conveyed what Money I had, with some other little Necessaries. (Swift, 1726, p. 5)

TTA Quand il eut fait sa Comission, lui & ses Compagnons me forcèrent à descendre dans la Chaloupe, en me permettant de mettre mon meilleur Habit, & de prendre avec moi un petit paquet de Linge, mais point d’Armes excepté mon Epée : ils eurent même la politesse de ne pas visiter mes poches, dans lesquelles j’avois mis tout mon Argent, & quelques aures Bagatelles. (Anon., 1727, p. 104)

TTD On me fit descender dans la Chalouppe, après m’avoir permis de faire mon paquet & d’emporter mes hardes. On me laissa mon sabre , & on eut la politesse de ne point visiter mes poches , où il y avoit quelque argent. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 124)

Example 6

ST They all swore, they knew no more than myself, but said, that the Captain (as they called him) was resolved, after they had sold the Lading, to get rid of me in the first Place, where they could discover Land. They pushed off immediately, advising me to make haste, for fear of being overtaken by the Tide, and so bad me Farewell. (Swift, 1726, p. 5)

TTA Ils me protestérent tous qu’ils le savoient aussi peu que moi, mais me dirent que le Capitaine (comme ils l’apelloient) avoit resolu, après s’être défait des Marchandises, de me mettre à Terre sur la premiére Côte que nous decouvririons. Eu prononçant ces mots, ils s’éloginérent de moi, me disant en guise d’Adieu, que si je ne voulois pas être surpris par la Marée, je ferois fort bien de ne pas rester long-tems dans l’endroit où j’étois. (Anon., 1727, p. 104)

TTD Ma foi, me répondirent-ils, nous ne sçavons pas plus que vous, mais prenez garde que la marée ne vous surprenne, adieu. Aussi-tôt la Chalouppe s’élogina. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 124-125)

Example 7

ST The Land was divided by long Rows of Trees not regularly planted, but naturally growing; there was great plenty of Grass, and several Fields of Oats. (Swift, 1726, p. 6)

TTA Je vis sur ma Route un grand nombre d’Arbres, qui me parurent être des productions de la Nature, parce que je ne remarquois aucun ordre dans leur Arrangement ; plusieurs Prez, & quelques Champs d’Avoine. (Anon., 1727, p. 105)

TTD Je découvris de grands arbres, de vastes herbages & des champs où l’avoine croissoit de tous côtés. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 125)

94

Example 8

ST They climbed high Trees, as nimbly as a Squirrel, for they had strong extended Claws before and behind, terminating in sharp points, hooked. They would often spring, and bound, and leap with prodigious Agility. (Swift, 1726, pp. 7-8)

TTA Je les voyois grimper sur de hauts Arbres avec autant d’Agileté qu’auroit pu faire un Ecureuil ; car ils avoient de fortes pates qui se terminoient en pointes crochues. Ils sautoient fort loin & couroient d’une prodigieuse vitesse. (Anon., 1727, pp. 105-106)

TTD Ils sautoient, bondissoient, & grimpoient aux arbres, avec l’agilité des écureüils, ayant des griffes aux pattes de devant & de derriere ; (…) (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 126)

Example 9

ST In return of which Favour, I will make you a Present of this Knife and Bracelet, (taking them out of my Pocket.) (Swift, 1726, p. 15)

TTA Et vous n’obligerez pas un Ingrat, car je vous ferai present de ce Couteau & de ce Bracelet (que je pris hors de ma poche en prononçant ces derniers mots.) (Anon., 1727, p. 110)

TTD En reconnaissance, je vous offre ce petit coûteau & ce bracelet. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 132)

Depicting the Houyhnhnms as a people or inhabitants of a nation

Example 10

ST His Men conspire against him, confine him a long time to his Cabbin, set him on shore in an unkown Land. He travels up in the Country. The Yahoos a strange Sort of Animal described. The Author meets two Houyhnhnms (Swift, 1726, p. 1).

TTA Ses gens conspirent contre lui, le tiennent pendant quelque tems renfermé dans la Cabane, & le mettent à Terre dans un Pays in-connu. Il avance dans le Pays. Description d’un Etrange Animal nommé Yahoo. L’auteur rencontre deux Houyhnhnms. (Anon., 1727, p. 101)

TTD Son Equipage se révolte, l’enferme, l’enchaîne, & puis le met à terre sur un rivage inconnu. Description des Yahous. Deux Houyhnhnms viennent au devant de lui. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 121)

Example 11

ST They all swore, they knew no more than myself, but said, that the Captain (as they called him) was resolved, after they had sold the Lading, to get rid of me in the first Place, where they could discover Land. They pushed off immediately, advising me to make haste, for fear of being overtaken by the Tide, and so bad me Farewell. (Swift, 1726, p. 5)

TTA Ils me protestérent tous qu’ils le savoient aussi peu que moi, mais me dirent que le Capitaine (comme ils l’apelloient) avoit resolu, après s’être défait des Marchandises, de me mettre à Terre sur la premiére Côte que nous decouvririons. Eu prononçant ces mots, ils s’éloginérent de moi, me disant en guise d’Adieu, que si je ne voulois pas être surpris par la Marée, je ferois fort bien de ne pas rester long-tems dans l’endroit où j’étois. (Anon., 1727, p. 104)

TTD Ma foi, me répondirent-ils, nous ne sçavons pas plus que vous, mais prenez garde que la marée ne vous surprenne, adieu. Aussi-tôt la Chalouppe s’élogina. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 124-125)

95

Example 12

ST But I drew my Hanger, and gave him a good Blow with the flat Side of it, for I durft not strike him with the Edge, fearing the Inhabitants might be provoked against me, if they should come to know, that I had killed or maimed any of their Cattle. (Swift, 1726, p. 9)

TTA Mais de peur d’Equivoque, je mis Flamberge au vent, & lui donnai un coup du plat de mon Epée, car je ne voulois pas le blesser, de peur que cette Action violente commise à l’égard d’un Animal qui pouvoit leur apartenir, n’irritât les Habitans contre moi. (Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD Je tirai mon sabre & le frappai du plat, ne voulant pas le blesser, de peur d’offenser ceux à qui ces animaux pouvoient appartenir. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 127)

Example 13

ST UPON the whole, the Behaviour of these animals was so orderly and rational, so acute and judicious, that I at last concluded they must needs be Magicians, who had thus metamorphosed themselves upon some design, and seeing a stranger in the way, were resolved to divert themselves with him; or perhaps were really amazed at the sight of a Man so very different in Habit, Feature and Complection from those who might probably live in so remote a Climate. (Swift, 1726, p. 14)

TTA En un mot, toutes les maniéres de ces Animaux me parurent si sages & si marquées au coin de l’intelligence, que je conclus qu’il faloit necessairement qu’ils fussent des Magiciens, qui s’étoient ainsi metamorphosez eux-mêmes, & qui voyant un Etranger, avoient formé le Dessein de se diverter de moi, ou qui peut être étoient réellement étonnez à la vuë d’un Homme si diferent en Habit & en Figure des Habitans d’un pays si éloigné. (Anon., 1727, pp. 109-110)

TTD Enfin la contenance & les manieres de ces deux animaux me parurent si raisonnables, si sages, si judicieuses, que je conclus en moi-même qu'il falloit que ce fussent des Enchanteurs , qui s’étoient ainsi transformés en chevaux avec quelque dessein, & qui trouvant un étranger sur leur chemin,avoient voulu se divertir un peu à ses dépens ; où avoient peut-être été frappés de sa figure, de ses habits, & de ses manieres. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 131-132)

Human experience

Example 14

ST In this desolate Condition, I advanced forward, and soon got upon firm Ground, where I sate down on a Bank to rest myself, and consider what I had best to do. (Swift, 1726, p. 6)

TTA Dans cette afreuse situation je gagnai le haut du Rivage, où je m’assis pour me reposer un peu, & pour reflêchir sur le parti que je devois prendre. (Anon., 1727, p. 104)

TTD Je quittai les sables & montai sur une hauteur, pour m’asseoir & déliberer sur le parti que j’avois à prendre. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 125)

Example 15

ST Upon the whole, I never beheld in all my Travels so disagreeable an Animal nor one against which I naturally conceived so strong an Antipathy. (Swift, 1726, p. 8)

TTA Tout compté, je ne me souviens pas d’avoir vu dans aucun de mes Voyages des Animaux plus desagréables, no contre lesquels j’aye senti une plus forte Antipathie. (Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD Enfin dans tous mes voyages, je n’avois jamais vû d’animal si difforme & si degoûtant. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 127)

96

Example 16

ST So that thinking I had seen enough, full of Contempt and Aversion, I got up and pursued the beat Road, hoping it might direct me to the Cabbin of some Indian. (Swift, 1726, p. 8)

TTA N’ayant donc que trop satisfait ma curiosité, je poursuivis mon chemin, espérant qu’il me conduiroit à la Cabane de quelqu’Indien. (Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD Après les avoir suffisamment considerés, je suivis le grand chemin, dans l’esperance qu’il me conduiroit à quelque hutte d’Indien. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 127)

Example 17

ST In the midst of this Distress, I observed them all to run away on a sudden as fast as they could, at which I ventured to leave the Tree, and pursue the Road, wondring what it was that could put them into this Fright (Swift, 1726, p. 10)

TTA Au milieu de cet embaras, quel ne fut pas mon Etonnement, quand je vis ces Animaux se sauver à toutes Jambes, & me laisser librement poursuivre ma Route, sans qu’il me fut possible de comprendre la cause d’un changement si soudain ? (Anon., 1727, p. 107)

TTD Alors je quittai l’arbre & poursuivis mon chemin, étant assés surprise qu’une terreur soudaine leur eut ainsi fait prendre la fuite. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 128)

Example 18

ST Upon the strength of this Reasoning, I ventured to address them in the following manner: Gentlemen, if you be Conjurers, as I have good Cause to believe, you can understand any Language; therefore I make bold to let your Worships know, that I am a poor distressed English Man, driven by his misfortunes upon your Coast, and I entreat one of you, to let me ride upon his Back, as if he were a real Horse, to some House or Village, where I can be relieved. (Swift, 1726, pp. 14-15)

TTA Ce beau & solide Raisonnement me fit prendre la Hardiesse de leur adresser le Discours suivant. Messieurs, si vous êtes des Enchanteurs, comme il y a grande aparence, vous entendez toutes sortes de Langues, c’est pourquoi je prens la liberté de dire à Vos Seigneuries, que je suis un malheureux Anglois, que ses infortunes ont amené sur vos Côtes, & je conjure un de vous deux de me permettre de le monter comme s’il étoit réellement Cheval, & de me porter à quelque Maison ou à quelque Village. (Anon., 1727, p. 110)

TTD C’est ce qui me fit prendre la liberté de leur parler en ces termes : Messieurs les Chevaux, si vous êtes des Enchanteurs, comme j’ai lieu de le croire, vous entendés toutes les langues ; ainsi j’ai l’honneur de vous dire en la mienne, que je suis un pauvre Anglois, qui par malheur ai échoüé sur ces côtes, & qui vous prie l’un ou l’autre, si pourtant vous êtes de vrais cehvaux, de vouloir souffrire que je monte sur vous, pour chercher quelque village ou quelque maison, où je me puisse retirer. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 132)

97

II. Excerpts relating to the readership’s tastes

Bloodshed and violence

Example 19

ST This they made me swear to do, and then they unbound me, only fastening one of my Legs with a Chain near my Bed, and placed a Centry at my Door with his Piece charged, who was commanded to shoot me dead, if I attempted my Liberty. (Swift, 1726, p. 4)

TTA Ils exigérent de moi que je confirmasse cette promesse par serment ; après quoi ils me deliérent, à un de mes Bras près qu’ils atachérent avec une Chaine à mon Lit, & placérent une sentinelle avec un Fusil chargé à ma porte, avec ordre de tirer sur moi, dès que je ferois le moindre éfort pour me détacher. (Anon., 1727, p. 103)

TTD Ils m’obilgérent d’en faire serment, & puis me deliérent, se contentant de m’enchaîner un pié au bois de mon lit, & de poster un sentinelle à la porte de ma chambre, qui avoit ordre de me casser la tête, si j’eusse fait quelque tentative pour me mettre en liberté (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 123)

Example 20

ST But first they resolved to sell the Goods in the Ship, and then go to Madagascar for Recruits, several among them having died since my Confinement. (Swift, 1726, p. 4)

TTA Mais avant que de rien entreprendre, ils étoient dans l’intention de vendre les Marchandises qui étoient dans le Vaisseau, & puis d’aler à Madagascar pour y faire des Recrues, quelques uns d’eux étant morts depuis qu’ils m’obligeoient à garder la Chambre. (Anon., 1727, p. 103)

TTD Ils resolurent de vendre d’abord la cargaison du Vaisseau, & d’aller à Madagascar pour augmenter leur troupe. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 123-124)

Example 21

ST They sailed many Weeks, and traded with the Indians, but I knew not what Course they took, being kept a close Prisoner in my Cabbin, and expecting nothing less then to be murdered, as they often threatned me. (Swift, 1726, p. 4)

TTA Cette espèce de prison dura quelques semaines, pendant lesquelles ils firent commerce avec les Indiens, sans que je sçusse quel Course ils prenoient, étant étroitement gardé dans ma Cabane, & attendant à tout moment qu’ils executeroient la menace de me tuer, qu’ils me faisoient reguliérement huit ou dix fois par jour. (Anon., 1727, pp. 103-104)

TTD Cependant, j’étois prisonnier dans ma chambre, fort inquiet du sort qu’on me préparoit. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 124)

Example 22

ST But I drew my Hanger, and gave him a good Blow with the flat Side of it, for I durft not strike him with the Edge, fearing the Inhabitants might be provoked against me, if they should come to know, that I had killed or maimed any of their Cattle. (Swift, 1726, p. 9)

TTA Mais de peur d’Equivoque, je mis Flamberge au vent, & lui donnai un coup du plat de mon Epée, car je ne voulois pas le blesser, de peur que cette Action violente commise à l’égard d’un Animal qui pouvoit leur apartenir, n’irritât les Habitans contre moi. (Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD Je tirai mon sabre & le frappai du plat, ne voulant pas le blesser, de peur d’offenser ceux à qui ces animaux pouvoient appartenir. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 127)

98

Example 23

ST When the Beast felt the smart, he drew back, and roared so loud, that a Herd of at least forty came flocking about me from the next Field, houling and making odious Faces; but I ran to the Body of a Tree, and leaning my Back against it, kept them off, by waving my Hanger. (Swift, 1726, p. 9)

TTA Cependant le coup que j’avois donné à cette Bête fut assez douloureux, pour qu’elle le prit la fuite, en jettant des cris, qui atirérent hors du champ voisin une quarantaine d’Animaux de la même sorte, dont je fus regardé d’assez mauvais œil. De peur d’insulte néanmoins je me mis le dos contre un Arbre, & fis le Moulinet avec mon Epée, quoi qu’à dire le vrai je ne fusse rien moins qu’à mon Aise. (Anon., 1727, pp. 106-107)

TTD L’animal se sentant frappe se mit à fuïr & à crier si haut, qu’il attire une quarantain d’animaux de sa sorte, qui accoururent vers moi, en me faisant des grimaces horribles. Je courus vers un arbre & me mis le dos contre, tenant mon sabre devant moi : (…) (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 127-128)

Vulgarity

Example 24

ST I HAD several Men died in my Ship of Calentures, so that I was forced to get Recruits out of Barbadoes, and the Leeward Islands, where I touched by the Direction of the Merchants who employed me, which I had soon too much cause to repent; for I found afterwards that most of them had been Bucaneers. (Swift, 1726, p. 3)

TTA Des Fievres chaudes m’emportérent tant de monde, que je fus obligé de toucher aux Barbades pour y faire de nouvelles Recrues. Mais je ne tardai guéres à me repentir du choix que je fis, ceux que je pris à mon Bord ayant presque tous été Boucaniers. (Anon., 1727, p. 102)

TTD Les maladies m’enleverent pendant la route une partie de mon equipage, en sorte que je fus obligé de faire une recruë aux Barbades et aux Iles de Leeward, où les Négocians, dont je tenois ma Commission , m’avoient donné ordre de moüiller. Mais j’eus bien-tôt lieu de me repentir d’avoir fait cette maudite recruë, dont la plus grande partie, étoit composée de bandits, qui avoient été Boucaniers. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 122-123)

Example 25

ST Their Shape was very singular, and deformed, which a little discomposed me, so that I lay down beind a Thicket to observe them better. (Swift, 1726, p. 7)

TTA Ils étoient d’une Figure fort vilaine & tout à fait extraordinaire. J’en eus un peu peur, & pour les mieux considerer, je me cachai derriére un Buisson. (Anon., 1727, p. 105)

TTD Leur figure me parût surprenante & quelques-uns s’étant un peu approchés, je me cachai derriere un buisson pour les mieux considerer. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 126)

99

Example 26

ST Some of them coming forward near the place where I lay, gave me an Opportunity of distinctly marking their Form. Their Heads and Breasts were covered with a thick Hair, some frizzled and others lank, they had Bears like Goats, and a long ridge of Hair down their Backs and the fore-parts of their Legs and Feet, but the rest of their Bodies were bare, so that I might see their Skins, which were of a brown buff Colour. (Swift, 1726, p. 7)

TTA Quelques uns d’eux s’étant aprochez de la place où j’étois, j’eus ocasion de les voir distinctement. Leurs Têtes & leurs Poitrines étoient couvertes de Cheveux : ils avoient des Barbes pareilles à celles des Boucs, & leur corps étoit generalement parlant couleur de peau de Bufle. (Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD De longs cheveux leur tomboient sur le visage; leur poitrine, leur dos, & leurs pattes de devant étoient couverts d’un poil épais : ils avoient la barbe au menton comme des boucs, mais le reste de leurs corps étoit sans poil, & laissoit voir une peau très-brune. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 126)

Example 27

ST They had no Tails, nor any Hair at all on their Buttocks, except about the Anus; which, I presume, Nature had placed there to defend them as they sate on the Ground; for the Posture they used, as well as lying down, and often stood on their hind Feet. (Swift, 1726, p. 7)

TTA (omitted) TTD Ils n’avoient point de queuë : ils se tenoient tantôt assis sur l’herbe, tantôt couchés & tantôt

debout sur leurs pattes de derriere. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 126)

Example 28

ST The Females were not so large as the Males, they had long lank Hair on their Faces, nor any thing more than a sort of Down on the rest of their Bodies, except about the Anus, and Pudenda. Their Dugs hung between their Fore-feet, and often reached almost to the ground as they walked. (Swift, 1726, p. 8)

TTA Les Femelles étoient plus petites que les Males : leurs Mamelles pendoient entre leurs pieds de devant & touchoient presque à terre quand elles marchoient. (Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD (…) ; les fémelles étoient un peu plus petites que les mâles ; elles avoient de fort longs cheveux, & seulement un peu de duvet en plusieurs endroits de leur corps. Leurs mamelles pendoient entre leurs deux pattes de devant, & quelquefois touchoient la terre, lorsquelles marchoient. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 126-127)

Example 29

ST Several of this cursed Brood leapt up in the Tree, from whence they began to discharge their Excrements on my Head : (…) (Swift, 1726, p. 9)

TTA (omitted) TTD (…) aussi-tôt ils sautent aux branches de l’arbre, & commençent à décharger sur moi leur ordure.

(Desfontaines, 1727, p. 128)

Example 30

ST However, I escaped pretty well, by sticking close to the Stem of the Tree, but was almost stifled with the Filth, which fell about me on every side. (Swift, 1726, pp. 9-10)

TTA (omitted) TTD Mais tout-à-coup il se mirent tous à fuïr. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 128)

100

Frenchification

Example 31

ST I left my poor Wife big with Child, and accepted an advantageous Offer made me to be Captain of the Adventure, a stout Merchant-man of 350 Tuns: (…) (Swift, 1726, p. 2).

TTA Je laissai ma Femme enceinte, & acceptai une offre fort avantageuse qui me fut faite d’être Capitaine du Hazardeux, Vaisseau Marchand de 350 Tonneaux : (…). (Anon., 1727, pp. 101-102)

TTD Mais je fus malheureusement tenté de faire encore un voyage, surtout lorsque l’on m’eut offert le titre flâteur de Capitaine, sur l’Avanture, Vaisseau Marchand de trois cens cinquante tonneaux. (…) (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 122)

Example 32

ST I HAD several Men died in my Ship of Calentures, so that I was forced to get Recruits out of Barbadoes, and the Leeward Islands, where I touched by the Direction of the Merchants who employed me, which I had soon too much cause to repent; for I found afterwards that most of them had been Bucaneers. (Swift, 1726, p. 3)

TTA Des Fievres chaudes m’emportérent tant de monde, que je fus obligé de toucher aux Barbades pour y faire de nouvelles Recrues. Mais je ne tardai guéres à me repentir du choix que je fis, ceux que je pris à mon Bord ayant presque tous été Boucaniers. (Anon., 1727, p. 102)

TTD Les maladies m’enleverent pendant la route une partie de mon equipage, en sorte que je fus obligé de faire une recruë aux Barbades et aux Iles de Leeward, où les Négocians, dont je tenois ma Commission , m’avoient donné ordre de moüiller. Mais j’eus bien-tôt lieu de me repentir d’avoir fait cette maudite recruë, dont la plus grande partie, étoit composée de bandits, qui avoient été Boucaniers. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 122-123)

Example 33

ST I told them, I was their Prisoner, and would submit. (Swift, 1726, p. 3) TTA Je leur dis que je me reconnoissois leur prisonnier, & que je leur promettois la plus entiére

soumission. (Anon., 1727, p. 103) TTD Je leur dis que mon sort étoit entre leurs mains, & que je consentois d’avance à tout ce qu’ils

voudroient. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 123)

Example 34

ST Upon the Ninth Day of May 1711. one James Welch came down to my Cabbin; and said he had Orders from the Captain, to set me a-shore. (Swift, 1726, pp. 4-5)

TTA Le 9. May 1711 , un certain Jaques Welch vint me trouver, & dit qu’il avoit ordre du Capitaine de me mettre à Terre.. (Anon., 1727, p. 104)

TTD Le 9. de Mai 1711. un certain Jacque Welch entra & me dit, qu’il avoit reçû ordre de Monsieur le Capitaine , de me mettre à terre. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 124)

Example 35

ST They rowed about a League; and then set me down on a Strand. (Swift, 1726, p. 5) TTA Ils firent environ une lieuë à force de Rames, & puis me mirent sur le Rivage. (Anon., 1727, p.

104) TTD Après avoir fait environ une lieuë dans la Chalouppe, on me mit sur le rivage. (Desfontaines,

1727, p. 124)

101

III. Excerpts relating to the alleged misanthropy

Assigning human-like characteristics, actions or emotions to the Houyhnhnms

Example 36

ST I fell into a beaten Road, where I saw many Tracks of human Feet, and some of Cows, but most of Horses. (Swift, 1726, p. 6)

TTA Je tombai dans un grand Chemin, où je vis plusieurs Traces d’Hommes, quelques unes de Vaches, mais un nombre bien plus considerable de celles de Chevaux. (Anon., 1727, p. 105)

TTD Après avoir marché quelque temps, je tombai dans un grand cehmin,où je remarquai plusieurs pas d’hommes & de chevaux, & quelques-uns de vaches. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 125)

Example 37

ST The Horse started a little when he came near me, but soon recovering himself, looked full in my Face with manifest Tokens of Wondet : He viewed my Hands and Feet, walking round me several times. (Swift, 1726, p. 10)

TTA Le Cheval me parut un peu effrayé en me voyant, mais se remettant d’abord de sa crainte, il considera mon Visage avec de manifestes marques d’etonnement : il regarda avec atention mes mains & mes pieds, & fit plusieurs fois le tour de mon corps.(Anon., 1727, p. 107)

TTD Le cheval s’étant approché de moi s’arrêta, recula, & ensuite me regarda fixement, paroissant un peu étonné. Il me considera de tous côtés, tournant plusieurs fois autour de moi. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 128)

Example 38

ST While He and I were thus employed, another Horse came up; who applying himself to the first in a very formal Manner, they gently struck each others right Hoof before, neighing several times by turns, and varying the Sound, which seemed to be almost articulate. (Swift, 1726, p. 11)

TTA Sur ces entrefaites arrive un second Cheval, qui s’aproche de l’autre d’un Air dégagé & honête, lui hennit quelques sons, qui me parurent Articulez, & en reçoit une Reponse du même genre. (Anon., 1727, p. 108)

TTD Sur ces entrefaites arriva un autre cheval, qui salua le premier très-poliment; l’un & l’autre se firent des honnêtetez réciproques, & se mirent à hannir en cent façons differentes, qui sembloient former des sons articulez. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 129)

Example 39

ST THE two Horses came up close to me, looking with great Earnestness upon my Face and Hands. (Swift, 1726, p. 13)

TTA Les deux Chevaux s’aprochérent de moi ; regardant avec beaucoup d’atention mon Visage & mes mains. (Anon., 1727, p. 109)

TTD Les deux chevaux me serrérent de près, & se mirent à considerer mon visage & mes mains. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 131)

102

Example 40

ST The grey Steed rubbed my Hat all round with his right Fore-hoof, and discomposed it so much, that I was forced to adjust it better, by takin git off, and settling it again ; whereat both he and his Companion (who was a brown bay) appeared to be much surprized, the latter felt the Lappet of my Coat, and finding it to hang loose about me, they both looked with Signs of Wonder (Swift, 1726, p. 13)

TTA Le Cheval gris toucha mon Chapeau de tous côtez avec la Corne de son pied droit de devant, & le decompensa tellement, que je fus obligé de l’oter pour le rajuster ; Action qui me parut jetter ce Cheval aussi bien que son Compagnon ( qui étoit un Baybrun ) dans un Etonnement inexprimable ; Celui-ci toucha le pan de mon Habit, & trouvant qu’il ne faisoit pas partie de mon corps, donna encore de nouvelles marques de sa surprise. (Anon., 1727, p. 109)

TTD Mon chapeau paroissoit les surprendre, aussie-bien que les pans de mon juste-au-corps. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 131)

Example 41

ST They were under great Perplexity about my Stockings, which they felt very often, neighing to each other, and using various Gestures, not unlike those of a Philosopher, when he would attempt to solve some new and difficult Phaenomenon (Swift, 1726, pp. 13-14)

TTA Ils étoient l’un & l’autre fort embarrassez de mes Souliers & de mes Bas, qu’ils avoient fort attentivement examinez, se hennissant l’un à l’autre, & faisant diferens gestes, qui ne ressembloient pas mal à ceux que fait un Philosophe qui tâche d’expliquer quelque Phenomène nouveau & difficile. (Anon., 1727, p. 109)

TTD Mes souliers & mes bas leur donnoient de grandes inquiétudes: ils les flairérent & les tâtérent plusieurs fois & firent à ce sujet plusieurs gestes semblables à ceux d’un Philosophe, qui veut entreprendre d’expliquer un Phenoméne. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 131)

Example 42

ST The two Creatures stood silent while I spoke, seeming to listen with great Attention ; and when I had ended, they neighed frequently towards each other, as if they were engaged in serious Conversation. (Swift, 1726, p. 15)

TTA Les deux Créatures gardérent un profond silence pendant que je parlois, & parurent m’écouter avec beaucoup d’atention ; & quand j’eus fait, ils se hennirent plusieurs fois l’un à l’autre, ni plus ni moins que s’ils étoient engagez dans une serieuse conversation. (Anon., 1727, p. 110)

TTD Les deux animaux parurent écouter mon discours avec attention , & quand j’eûs fini, ils se mirent à hannir tour à tour, tournés l’un vers l’autre. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 132)

Example 43

ST I plainly observed that their Language expressed the Passions very well, and their Words might with little Pains be resolved into an Alphabet more easily than the Chinese. (Swift, 1726, p. 15)

TTA Je remarquai que leur Langage exprimoit fort bien les passions, & que les mots en pouvoient plus aisément être reduits en Alphabet que ceux des Chinois. (Anon., 1727, p. 110)

TTD Je compris alors clairement que leurs hannissemens étoit significatifs, & renfermoient des mots, dont on pourroit peut-être dresser un alphabet aussi aisé que celui des Chinois. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 132)

103

Example 44

ST I COULD frequently distinguish the Word Yahoo, which was repeated by each of them several times; and altho’ it was impossible for me to conjecture what it meant; yet while the two Horses were busy in Conversation, I endeavoured to practice this Word upon my Tongue; and as soon as they were silent, I boldy pronounced Yahoo in a loud Voice, imitating at the same time, as near as I could, the Neighing of a Horse, at which they were both visibly surprized, and the Gray repeated the same Word twice, as if he meant to teach me the right Accent, wherein I spoke after him as well as I could, and found myself perceivably to improve every time, though very far from any Degree of Perfection (Swift, 1726, pp. 15-16)

TTA Je leur ouïs plusieurs fois prononcer le mot de Yahoo ; & quoi qu’il me fut impossible de deviner ce qu’il signifioit, j’essaiai neanmoins, pendant que ces deux Messieurs étoient en conversation de le prononcer à mon Tour. Dès que je remarquai qu’il se taisoient, je dis à haute voix Yahoo, imitant en même tems, le plus qu’il m’étoit possible, le Hennissement d’un Cheval ; ce qui ne les surprit pas mediocrement tous deux, & le gris repeta trois fois le même mot, comme s’il avoit voulu m’apprendre le veritable Accent, en quoi je l’imitai de mon mieux, & trouvai que chaquefois je prononçois moins mal, quoique je fusse encore fort loint du point de perfection. (Anon., 1727, p. 111)

TTD Je les entendis souvent repeter le mot Yahou, dont je distinguai le son, sans en distinguer le sens ; quoi que tandis que les deux chevaux s’entretenoient, j’eusse essayé plusieurs fois d’en chercher la signification. Lors qu’ils eurent cessé de parler, je me mis à crier de toute ma force, Yahou, Yahou, tâchant de les imiter. Cela parût les surprendre extrêmement, & alors le Gris-pommelé répetant deux fois le même mot, sembla vouloir m’apprendre comment il le falloit prononcer ; je répetai après lui le mieux qu’il me fut possible, & il me parût que, quoi que je fûsse très-éloigné de la perfection de l’accent & de la prononciation, j’avois pourtant fait quelques progrès. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 133)

Example 45

ST Then the Bay tried me with a second Word, much harder to be pronounced ; but reducing it to the English Orthography, may be spelt thus Houyhnhnms. (Swift, 1726, p. 16)

TTA Ensuite le Bay-brun essaya ma Capacité à l’égard d’un second mot dont la prononciation étoit bien plus difficile : je veux dire celui de Houyhnhnm. (Anon., 1727, p. 111)

TTD L’autre Cheval, qui étoit Bay, sembla vouloir m’apprendre un autre mot beaucoup plus difficile à prononcer, & qui étant réduit à l’ortographe Angloise, peut ainsi s’écrire, Houyhnhnm. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 133)

Example 46

ST I did not succeed in this so well as in the former, but after two or three farther Trials, I had better fortune; and they both appeared amazed at my Capacity. (Swift, 1726, p. 16)

TTA Je ne reussis pas si bien dans ce mot que dans l’autre; mais après deux ou trois Essays, cela alla mieux & mes deux Maîtres me parurent extremement étonnez de l’habileté de leur Disciple. (Anon., 1727, p. 111)

TTD Je ne réussis pas si bien d’abord dans la prononciation de ce mot, que dans celle du premier; mais après quelques essais, cela alla mieux, & les deux chevaux me trouverent de l’intelligence. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 134)

104

Example 47

ST AFTER some farther Discourse ; which I then conjectured might relate to me, the two Friends took their Leaves with the same Compliment of striking each other’s Hoof, and the Gray made me signs that I should walk before them, wherein I thought it prudent to comply, till I could find a better Director. (Swift, 1726, pp. 16-17)

TTA Après quelques autres Discours, qui à ce que je conjecturai, me regardoient, les deux Amis prirent congé l’un de l’autre ; le Cheval gris me fit signe de marcher devant lui, en quoi je jugeai à propos de lui obéïr, jusqu’à ce que j’eusse trouvé un meilleur Guide. (Anon., 1727, p. 111)

TTD Lorsqu’ils se furent encore un peu entretenus, (sans doute à mon sujet ) ils prirent congé l’un de l’autre avec la même cérémonie qu’ils s’étoient abordés. Le Bay me fit signe de marcher devant lui, ce que je jugeai à propos de faire, jusqu’à ce que j’eusse trouvé un autre conducteur. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 134)

Characterising the Yahoos as animalistic

Example 48

ST His Men conspire against him, confine him a long time to his Cabbin, set him on shore in an unkown Land. He travels up in the Country. The Yahoos a strange Sort of Animal described. The Author meets two Houyhnhnms (Swift, 1726, p. 1).

TTA Ses gens conspirent contre lui, le tiennent pendant quelque tems renfermé dans la Cabane, & le mettent à Terre dans un Pays in-connu. Il avance dans le Pays. Description d’un Etrange Animal nommé Yahoo. L’auteur rencontre deux Houyhnhnms. (Anon., 1727, p. 101)

TTD Son Equipage se révolte, l’enferme, l’enchaîne, & puis le met à terre sur un rivage inconnu. Description des Yahous. Deux Houyhnhnms viennent au devant de lui. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 121)

Example 49

ST Their Shape was very singular, and deformed, which a little discomposed me, so that I lay down beind a Thicket to observe them better. (Swift, 1726, p. 7)

TTA Ils étoient d’une Figure fort vilaine & tout à fait extraordinaire. J’en eus un peu peur, & pour les mieux considerer, je me cachai derriére un Buisson. (Anon., 1727, p. 105)

TTD Leur figure me parût surprenante & quelques-uns s’étant un peu approchés, je me cachai derriere un buisson pour les mieux considerer. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 126)

Example 50

ST They climbed high Trees, as nimbly as a Squirrel, for they had strong extended Claws before and behind, terminating in sharp points, hooked. They would often spring, and bound, and leap with prodigious Agility. (Swift, 1726, pp. 7-8)

TTA Je les voyois grimper sur de hauts Arbres avec autant d’Agileté qu’auroit pu faire un Ecureuil ; car ils avoient de fortes pates qui se terminoient en pointes crochues. Ils sautoient fort loin & couroient d’une prodigieuse vitesse. (Anon., 1727, pp. 105-106)

TTD Ils sautoient, bondissoient, & grimpoient aux arbres, avec l’agilité des écureüils, ayant des griffes aux pattes de devant & de derriere ; (…) (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 126)

105

Example 51

ST The Females were not so large as the Males, they had long lank Hair on their Faces, nor any thing more than a sort of Down on the rest of their Bodies, except about the Anus, and Pudenda. Their Dugs hung between their Fore-feet, and often reached almost to the ground as they walked. (Swift, 1726, p. 8)

TTA Les Femelles étoient plus petites que les Males : leurs Mamelles pendoient entre leurs pieds de devant & touchoient presque à terre quand elles marchoient. (Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD (…) ; les fémelles étoient un peu plus petites que les mâles ; elles avoient de fort longs cheveux, & seulement un peu de duvet en plusieurs endroits de leur corps. Leurs mamelles pendoient entre leurs deux pattes de devant, & quelquefois touchoient la terre, lorsquelles marchoient. (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 126-127)

Example 52

ST So that thinking I had seen enough, full of Contempt and Aversion, I got up and pursued the beat Road, hoping it might direct me to the Cabbin of some Indian. (Swift, 1726, p. 8)

TTA N’ayant donc que trop satisfait ma curiosité, je poursuivis mon chemin, espérant qu’il me conduiroit à la Cabane de quelqu’Indien. (Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD Après les avoir suffisamment considerés, je suivis le grand chemin, dans l’esperance qu’il me conduiroit à quelque hutte d’Indien. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 127)

Example 53

ST The Hair of both Sexes was of several Colours, brown, red, black and yallow. (Swift, 1726, p. 8) TTA Les Cheveux de ces Animaux, tant de l’un que de l’autre sexe, étoient de diferentes couleurs :

les uns les avoient bruns, d’autres roux, d’autres noirs, & d’autres enfin jaunes. Anon., 1727, p. 106)

TTD Le poil des uns & des autres étoit de diverses couleurs, brun, rouge, noir & blond. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 127)

Example 54

ST The ugly Monster, when he saw me, distorted several ways every Feature of his Visage, and started as at an Object he had never seen before; then approaching nearer, lifted up his Fore-paw, whether out of Curiosity or Mischief, I could not tell. (Swift, 1726, pp. 8-9)

TTA Le vilain Monstre ne m’eut pas plutôt aperçu, qu’il fit plusieurs grimaces, dans lesquelles je crus deméler son Etonnement : puis s’aprochant de moi, il leva sa pate de devant, sans que je susse si c’étoit par Mechanceté ou par simple Curiosité. (Anon., 1727, p. 107)

TTD A mon aspect, il s’arrrêta, fit une infinite de grimaces, & parût me regarder comme une espece d’animal qui lui étoit inconnuë : ensuite il s’approcha, leva sur moi sa pate de devant. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 127)

106

Characterising Gulliver as inferior to the Houyhnhnms

Example 55

ST We stood gazing at each other for some time ; at last I took the Boldness, to reach my Hand towards his Neck, with a Design to stroak it, using the common Style and Whistle of Jockies when they are going to handle a strange Horse. (Swift, 1726, pp. 10-11)

TTA Nous fumes l’un & l’autre pendant quelques minutes dans cette situation ; à la fin je pris la hardiesse d’étendre la main sur son Cou, dans le dessein de le flater, en me servant de cette sorte de siflement & de mots ; qui sont en suage parmi les Maquignons, quand ils veulent manier un Cheval étranger. (Anon., 1727, p. 107)

TTD Nous nous considerâmes l’un l’autre pendant un peu de tems; enfine je pris la hardiesse de lui metre la main sur le cou, pour le flatter, sifflant & parlant, à la façon des Palfreniers, lorsqu’ils veulent caresser un cheval (Desfontaines, 1727, pp. 128-129)

Example 56

ST I was amazed to see such Actions and Behaviours in Brute Beasts, and concluded with myself, that if the Inhabitants of this Country were endued with a proportionable Degree of Reason, they must needs be the wisest People upon Earth. (Swift, 1726, p. 12)

TTA Je ne sçaurois exprimer la surprise où je fus en voyant faire de pareilles choses à des Bêtes brutes, & je conclus que si les Habitans du païs étoient douez d’un Dégré de raison proportionné à cette superiorité ordinaire que les Hommes ont sur les Chevaux, il faloit necessairement qu’ils fussent le plus sage Peuple de la Terre. (Anon., 1727, p. 108)

TTD Surpris de voir des bêtes se comporter ainsi, je me dis à moi-même puisqu’en ce païs-ci les bêtes ont tant de raison, il faut que les hommes y soient raisonnables au suprême degré. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 130)

Example 57

ST But the first, who was a Dapple-Gray, observing me to steal off, neighed after me in so expressive a Tone, that I fancied myself to understand what he meant, whereupon I turned back, and came near him, to expect his farther Commands. (Swift, 1726, p. 12)

TTA Je m’esquivois déjà tout doucement, quand le premier des deux Chevaux, qui étoit un gris pommelé, remarquant ma fuite, se mit à hennir après moi d’un Ton si absolu, que je m’imaginai entendre ce qu’il vouloit dire ; sur quoi je retournai sur mes pas & vins vers lui, pour atendre ses ordres. (Anon., 1727, pp. 108-109)

TTD Mais l’un des deux qui étoit gris-pommelé, voïant que je m’en allois, se mit à hannir après moi d’une façon si expressive, que je crus entendre ce qu’il vouloit ; je me retournai & m’approchai de lui, (…) (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 130)

107

Example 58

ST Upon the strength of this Reasoning, I ventured to address them in the following manner: Gentlemen, if you be Conjurers, as I have good Cause to believe, you can understand any Language; therefore I make bold to let your Worships know, that I am a poor distressed English Man, driven by his misfortunes upon your Coast, and I entreat one of you, to let me ride upon his Back, as if he were a real Horse, to some House or Village, where I can be relieved. (Swift, 1726, pp. 14-15)

TTA Ce beau & solide Raisonnement me fit prendre la Hardiesse de leur adresser le Discours suivant. Messieurs, si vous êtes des Enchanteurs, comme il y a grande aparence, vous entendez toutes sortes de Langues, c’est pourquoi je prens la liberté de dire à Vos Seigneuries, que je suis un malheureux Anglois, que ses infortunes ont amené sur vos Côtes, & je conjure un de vous deux de me permettre de le monter comme s’il étoit réellement Cheval, & de me porter à quelque Maison ou à quelque Village. (Anon., 1727, p. 110)

TTD C’est ce qui me fit prendre la liberté de leur parler en ces termes : Messieurs les Chevaux, si vous êtes des Enchanteurs, comme j’ai lieu de le croire, vous entendés toutes les langues ; ainsi j’ai l’honneur de vous dire en la mienne, que je suis un pauvre Anglois, qui par malheur ai échoüé sur ces côtes, & qui vous prie l’un ou l’autre, si pourtant vous êtes de vrais cehvaux, de vouloir souffrire que je monte sur vous, pour chercher quelque village ou quelque maison, où je me puisse retirer. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 132)

Example 59

ST When I offered to slacken my Pace, he would cry Hhuun, Hhuun; I guessed his meaning, and gave him to understand, as well as I could, that I was weary and not able to walk faster; upon which, he would stand a while to let me rest. (Swift, 1726, p. 17)

TTA Quand je marchois trop lentement, il me crioit Hhuun, Hhuun ; Je devinai sa pensée, & lui donnai à entendre que j’étois las, & qu’il ne m’étoit pas possible d’aller plus loin ; surquoi il eut la bonté de s’arrêter un peu pour me donner le tems de me reposer. (Anon., 1727, p. 111)

TTD Comme je marchois fort lentement, il se mit à hannir, hhuum hhuum. Je compris sa pensée, & lui donnai à entendre comme je le pûs, que j’étois bien las & avois de la peine à marcher ; sur quoi il s’arrêta charitablement, pour me laisser reposer. (Desfontaines, 1727, p. 134)