Bu makale, George Orwell'in Bin Dokuz Yüz Seksen Dört (1949) adlı distopik romanı ve yeniden çevirilerini, metnin yeniden çevireni Celâl Üster'in belirtmiş olduğu çevirisine yönelik açıklamaları doğrultusunda incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Üster çevirisinin ön sözünde yeniden çeviri ihtiyacının her zaman çeviri dilinin eskimesinden kaynaklanmadığına değinir. Bazen "çevirmenin çeviri duyarlılığının eskimesinin" ve "zamanla, o kitaba ya da yazara ilişkin kavrayışımızın değişmesinin, derinleşmesinin" yeniden çeviriyi gerektirebileceğini vurgular. Dahası, metni okuyan çevirmenin de okumasına göre metinlerin değişebileceği hususuna dikkatleri çeker. Bu sözleriyle aslında yeniden çeviri olgusunun temelinde yatan düşünceleri de ifade eder. Çalışma, metnin dört yeniden çevirisini karşılaştırmalı ele alarak bu iki ana düşünceyi irdeleyecektir. Metnin erek kültürde bilinen yedi farklı çevirisi bulunmaktadır. Buna karşın, çalışma kapsamı ulaşılabilen dört metinle sınırlandırılacaktır. Makaleye kuramsal çerçeve olarak "yeniden çeviri varsayımı" temel alınacaktır. İnceleme metnin kurgusunda önemli bir yere sahip olan ve yeni bir dil olarak okurların karşına çıkan "Yenisöylem" sözcük dağarcığı üzerinden gerçekleştirilecektir. Bu amaçla, kaynak metinde geçen "Yenisöylem" sözcüklerinden küçük bir terimce oluşturulacak ve erek metinlerdeki karşılıkları bulunacaktır. Terimceden bazı örnekler ışığında her bir erek metinde sözcüklerin nasıl çevrilmiş oldukları değerlendirilecek ve yeniden çeviri varsayımınaa yönelik düşünceler bağlamında sorgulanacaktır. Çalışmanın yeniden çeviri çalışmalarına ışık tutacağı ve çeviribilime değişik yansımaları olacağı düşünülmektedir

This paper aims to explore George Orwell’s dystopian novel called Nineteen Eighty Four (1949) and its retranslations in line with the explanations of the retranslator Celâl Üster on his retranslation. Üster mentions in his preface that the need for a retranslation doesn’t always stem from the aging of the translation’s language. He emphasizes that sometimes “the aging of the translator’s translation precision” and “the deepening, the change of our understanding related to that novel or its author in time” may require a new retranslation. Moreover, he draws attention to the issue that texts changes according to the reading of the translators reading them. With these words, he essentially expresses the ideas underlying the phenomenon of retranslation. This study will examine these two main ideas analyzing four retranslations of the text in comparison. There are seven different translations of the text in the target culture. Notwithstanding, its scope will be limited to the four target texts because of the accessibility. "Retranslation hypothesis" will be utilized as the theoretical framework for the paper. Analysis will be performed through the vocabulary of “Newspeak” that has a significant place in the fiction of the text and also emerges as a new language for the reader. For this purpose, a small terminology from “Newspeak” vocabulary of the novel will be formed and their translations will be found on the target texts. In the light of some examples from the terminology, how the words are translated in each target text will be evaluated and the ideas of retranslation hypothesis will be questioned. It is thought that this study will shed light on the researches of retranslation and bring different reflections into translation studies This study examines the language use called “newspeak” in George Orwell’s dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty Four (1949) which is seen as a masterpiece within the context of retranslation phenomenon. The research was carried out using the source text and four target texts in comparison and focused on language uses. The findings showed that retranslations emerge as a result of the increase in knowledge or awareness towards the source culture and text or its writer. The need for a retranslation doesn’t always stem from the aging of the translation’s language. It was also concluded that the prefaces and afterwords about translation written by retranslators are very significant in terms of describing the translation practice. The retranslator of the text, Celâl Üster writes two different prefaces for his retranslation. In the first one, he draws attention to the importance of the novel as a dystopic fiction and provides a long introduction about the content. In the second one which is entitled as “explanation about the translation”, he corrects an important mistake that took place in the previous publications and could influence the meaning of the text negatively. Then he explains his reasons for this retranslation of the source text which was rendered many times in the past. According to Üster, a retranslation is not always a direct result of the translation’s language that eventually ages. The aging of the translator’s translation precision and the deepening, the change of our understanding related to that novel or its author in time may require a new retranslation. These ideas also underpin the phenomenon of retranslation. Accordingly, this study searches whether the retranslator’s claims for a retranslation overlaps with the retranslation practices and retranslation hypothesis. The theoretical framework of the study is based on “retranslation” phenomenon which was brought forward for the first time by Antoine Berman (1990) and Paul Bensimon in a special issue of Palimpsestes in 1990s. In their articles, they mention that there are certain differences between the first translation and later translations. For Berman (1990), the first translations tend to erase the foreignness of the source text and may carry deficiencies and meaning loss. They are presented to the target readers as the texts similar to the ones written in their own language with the purpose of ensuring readability. Thus, the first translations entering to a different culture will have more chance of being acceptable and gaining a place. On the other hand, later translations become advantageous because of the fact that the first translations prepared or cleared the way for them. They mostly tend to contain foreignness and make necessary changes or additions in order to remedy the deficiencies of the previous translations. For this reason, they are seen as more successful translations by the target readers in terms of going closer to the source text. Moreover, as time passes and different retranslations occur, readers’ as well as translators’ understanding or awareness of the source text and author develops and which may help better translations come out. Koskinen and Paloposki (2003) claims that the change in needs and perceptions also may have a role in retranslation because each period has different reader expectations, translation precision and many other influences such as economic, cultural or linguistic changes. Paloposki and Koskinen (2004) call retranslation as a “hypothesis” because in their study the claims of retranslation weren’t explanatory enough. In this regard, this study searches and questions both the claims of retranslation hypothesis and the retranslator’s. A comparative method was utilized in the study. In the fictional word of the text, there is a new language use called “newspeak”. It is a different language which shortens, changes, combines some words of the source language or gives different meaning to them so as to serve a political function in line with the totalitarian leader’s aims. However, while this new language is difficult to understand even for the source language readers, translating it or making sense for translating out of it may contain several challenges. How different translators of the same target text coped with “newspeak” vocabulary and whether retranslations emerged because of the translator’s understanding developed are the focal points of this study. With this object in mind, a small terminology was created by analyzing “newspeak” vocabulary. Then, how each “newspeak” word was translated in four different retranslations published in 1974, 1984, 1985 and 2013 were examined comparatively. The target texts were chosen according to their accessibility. It was concluded that translators chose various ways such as not translating, translating partly, leaving the word in English, translating with a different meaning and providing explanations of the words when they come across “newspeak” vocabulary during the text. However, the last translation was the one which was translated in a way that shows more resemblance in meaning and also word formation process to the source text. The previous translations seem to be mostly undecided about how to translate or don’t show any general and certain understanding of the newspeak vocabulary formation strategies. Therefore, it can be said that retranslation emerged for the understanding and awareness of the source text and its writer deepened. Furthermore, the previous retranslations may have a significant role in the achievement of the retranslation. Consequently, in regard to these findings, it is possible to say that retranslation hypothesis is valid to some extent but needs to be searched in more comprehensive studies. The studies of retranslation are crucial in unfolding different dynamics lying behind retranslation phenomenon, but translation studies still lack detailed retranslation studies. Thus further researches on retranslation will bring new reflections. Additionally, the prefaces and afterwords of retranslators will hep increase the awareness of both translators and translation readers and also contribute to the development of translation studies.