Перекладознавча концепція П. Куліша сформувалася на основі його перекладацької практики,
але на неї значно вплинули й тогочасне українське перекладознавство (Г. Квітка-Основ'яненко,
П. Гулак-Артемовський, Я. Головацький та М. Максимович), і німецька перекладознавча думка (Й.
Гердер, В. Гумбольдт, Ф. Шляєрмахер і А. Шлеґель). Міркування українського критика суголосні
міркуванням слов'янських критиків, утім П. Куліш дивився на проблеми відтворення ідентичності
тексту значно глибше. З погляду терміносистеми для П. Куліша головними критеріями
еквівалентного перекладу стають “поетичний дух і склад” твору. Крім того, П. Куліш фактично
одним із перших (якщо не першим) увів в українське перекладознавство термін “неперекладне”,
який став дуже популярний у теоретико-критичних дискусіях ХХ ст.
Panteleimon Kulish’s views on translation were based on his own experience of translations
and shaped under the influence of contemporary Ukrainian translation practice and scholarly
thought (observations by H. Kvitka-Osnovianenko, P. Hulak-Artemovskyi, Ya. Holovatskyi, and M.
Maksymovych; biblical texts in translation of P. Hulak-Artemovskyi, M. Maksymovych, V. Aleksandrov,
and P. Morachevskyi), as well as the German translation studies (ideas of J. Herder, W. Humboldt, F.
Schleiermacher, and A. Schlegel). The Ukrainian critic’s understanding corresponds to the views of
other Slavonic authors: some Czech critics considered translation as a significant power for creating
a new literature and nation and saw the roots of this strength in the language, but more detailed
criteria for evaluating translation quality weren’t discussed yet; Russian researchers emphasized
the significance of the author’s approach for the correct translation of his/her writings. P. Kulish
considered the problems of reproducing the identity of the text much deeper, drawing attention to
what makes any translation a different literary work and how the text may or should be modified with
respect to the specific features of the reader’s perception. In terms of translation studies of the time,
P. Kulish regarded the “poetic spirit and composition” of the text as the main criteria of the equivalent
translation. However, the term ‘composition’ does not only designate the formal structure of a text. It
is related to the concept that the form is shaped by the language and specific lingual means as well.
P. Kulish was aware of the semantic problems of translation, but available linguistic knowledge of the
time didn’t offer proper terms for their description. In addition, P. Kulish was actually one of the first (if
not the first) to introduce into Ukrainian translation studies the term ‘untranslatable’, which became
very popular in the theoretical and critical discussions of the 20th century.
