SOCIOLINGUISTIC AND TRANSLATION ASPECTS OF RENDERING ITALIAN CODE-MIXING IN UKRAINIAN TRANSLATION: THE PROBLEM OF USING SURZHIK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17721/2663-6530.2026.50.221-231Keywords:
literary translation, code-switching, code-mixing, dilalia, mistilinguismo, Ukrainian Surzhyk, sociolinguistic equivalence, compensatory translation strategiesAbstract
The article examines literary translation as a complex sociosemiotic process of intercultural mediation, with particular attention to the challenges of rendering Italian code-mixing in Ukrainian translation. The study focuses on the interaction between the Italian literary standard, regional varieties, and autochthonous dialects within the framework of Gaetano Berruto’s model of dilalia and the concept of literary mistilinguismo. Drawing on the prose of Andrea Camilleri and the Ukrainian translation of the short story Tocco d’artista (The Artist’s Touch), the research explores the sociolinguistic, pragmatic, and axiological implications of using Ukrainian Surzhyk as a potential means of reproducing the linguistic heterogeneity of the source text. The analysis reveals significant functional and sociocultural differences between Italian dialectal code variation and Ukrainian Surzhyk. Direct substitution of Italian dialectal elements with Surzhyk may introduce additional historical and cultural connotations that are absent from the original, alter the pragmatic profile of literary characters, and shift the cultural and pragmatic parameters of the source text. Particular attention is paid to the ways in which dialectal and regionally marked elements are rendered in the Ukrainian translation of Camilleri’s short story. On the basis of the analysis, three compensatory translation strategies are identified: stylized colloquial speech, decentralized dialectal marking, and controlled foreignization accompanied, where necessary, by contextual glossing. These strategies make it possible to preserve the linguistic heterogeneity, pragmatic functions, and sociocultural specificity of the source text while avoiding unjustified sociolinguistic associations in the target language.
References
1. Зорівчак, Р. П. (1989). Реалія і переклад (на матеріалі англомовних перекладів української прози) [Realia and translation: Based on English translations of Ukrainian prose]. Видавництво при Львівському університеті.
2. Масенко, Л. (2019). Суржик: між мовою і язиком (2-ге вид., зі змін. і допов.) [Surzhyk: mizh movoiu i yazykom (Surzhyk: Between language and tongue)]. Видавничий дім «Києво-Могилянська академія».
3. Радчук, В. Д. (2005). Параметри перекладу: мова, стиль, культура [Parametry perekladu: mova, styl, kultura (Parameters of translation: Language, style, culture)]. Мовні і концептуальні картини світу [Movni i kontseptualni kartyny svitu (Linguistic and conceptual worldviews)], 18(2), 98–104.
4. Селіванова, О. О. (2008). Сучасна лінгвістика: напрями та проблеми [Suchasna linhvistyka: napriamy ta problemy (Modern linguistics: Trends and problems)]. Довкілля-К.
5. Ставицька, Л. (2001). Кровозмісне дитя двомовності чи мова-мутант? (Декілька поглядів на суржик) [Krovozmisne dytia dvomovnosti chy mova-mutant? (Dekilka pohliadiv na surzhyk) (The incestuous child of bilingualism or a mutant language? Several views on surzhyk)]. Критика [Krytyka (Critique)], 5(10 [48]), 20–24.
6. Alfonzetti, G. (2017). I parlanti plurilingui: Sopravvivenza e variazione del dialetto in Sicilia. Centro di studi filologici e linguistici siciliani.
7. Auer, P. (Ed.). (1998). Code-switching in conversation: Language, interaction and identity. Routledge.
8. Berruto, G. (1987). Lingua, dialetto, diglossia, dilalìa. In G. Holtus & J. Kramer (Eds.), Romania et Slavia adriatica: Festschrift für Žarko Muljačić (pp. 57–81). Helmut Buske Verlag.
9. Berruto, G. (2012). Sociolinguistica dell’italiano contemporaneo (2nd ed.). Carocci.
10. D’Agostino, M. (2007). Sociolinguistica dell’Italia contemporanea. Il Mulino.
11. Del Gaudio, S. (2026). Dialect and Ukrainian Russian mixed speech (“suržyk”): Distinguishing criteria and demarcation lines. Article 1. Current Issues of Ukrainian Linguistics: Theory and Practice, 52, 124–140. https://doi.org/10.17721/APULTP.2026.52.124-140
12. Gardner-Chloros, P. (2009). Code-switching. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609787
13. Grassi, C., Sobrero, A. A., & Telmon, T. (1997). Fondamenti di dialettologia italiana. Laterza.
14. Hentschel, G. (2024). Ukrainian and Russian in the lexicon of Ukrainian Suržyk: Reduced variation and stabilisation in central Ukraine and on the Black Sea coast. Russian Linguistics, 48, Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-023-09286-9
15. Kuznietsova, T. (2023). Surzhik in a multi-code situation, or who, when, and why knowingly uses the mixed subcode. Slavia Orientalis, 72(3), 581–597. https://doi.org/10.24425/slo.2023.147521
16. Magazzù, G. (2023). Translating non-standard language: Andrea Camilleri in English. Pázmány Papers – Journal of Languages and Cultures, 1(1), 236–253. https://doi.org/10.69706/PP.2023.1.1.14
17. Moretti, B., & Paccagnella, I. (2011). Mistilinguismo. In Enciclopedia dell’Italiano. Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana Treccani.
18. Russi, C. (2020). Sicilian elements in Andrea Camilleri’s narrative language: A linguistic analysis. Fairleigh Dickinson University Press.
19. Camilleri, A. (1994). La forma dell’acqua. Sellerio Editore.
20. Camilleri, A. (1998). Un mese con Montalbano. Arnaldo Mondadori Editore.
21. Каміллері, А. (2011). Почерк митця (А. Маслюх, пер. з італ.). Всесвіт, (5–6), 176–195.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Маргарита Добридник, Ольга Кромбет

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.









