Umberto Eco hem kendi ülkesinde hem de dünyada tanınan yazar, edebiyatçı, göstergebilimci, tarihçi ve bir halk entelektüelidir. Dönemin önde gelen edebiyatlarını müzik, edebiyat ve görsel sanat örnekleriyle takip ettiği için, bu tür eserlere eleştirel bir yaklaşım sağlayacak bir yöntem önermektedir. Bilimsel ve metodolojik bir bakış açısına dayanan bu çalışmada, erken sanat estetiğinin temelini oluşturan "açıklık" anlayışını vurgular ve sanat eserini anlama sürecini analiz eder. Bu çerçevede, "çokluk", "çoğulluk" ve "çokanlamlılık" kavramlarına özel bir vurgu yaparak, çalışmayı anlamlandırma sürecinde odağı yazardan okuyucuya kaydırır. Bu çalışmada Eco’nun “Açık Yapıt” adlı eserinin farklı çevirmenlerce yapılan çevirilerinin karşılaştırmalı incelemesi yapılacaktır. Makale dil ve çeviri kavramlarına yaklaşımları girişle ve bilgilendirmeyle başlayacak, eserin ülkemizde yapılan çeviri yorumları ve farklı çevirilerinin incelenmesi ile yorumlamalarıyla son bulacaktır. Yapılan çalışmada Eco’nun üzerinde durduğu yöntem ve tekniklerle hareket edilmiş, okur öncelikli bir yaklaşım belirlenmiş, eserin farklı çevirmenlerce yapılan çevirileri eleştirileri yapılmıştır. Çalışmanın amacı yapılan çevirileri eleştirmekten çok, daha iyi okura nasıl ulaşılacağının, okurun anlam dünyasına nasıl daha kolay seslenileceğine dair çözüm önerileri sunmaktır. Eserin Türkçeye üç ayrı çevirisinin olması, buradaki dil ve çeviri macerası çalışmanın temelini teşkil etmiştir. Çevirilerde yapılan hatalar, çevirinin önemini ve farkını anlatmak, böylesi bir eserin hak ettiği değerin verilmesi açısından olumlu bir yaklaşımdır. Buradaki asıl amaç ise çeviri metinlerdeki eksikleri göstermek, bu başyapıtın çevirileri ile ilgili yapıcı eleştirileri sunmak ve anısına katkıda bulunmaktır. Nitekim yapılan her çeviri bir çabadır ve okurla eseri buluşturma amacındadır.

Umberto Eco is a well-known writer, literary sch translated texts, to present constructive criticisms about the translations of this masterpiece and to contribute to Eco's memory. Conceptual/Theoretical Framework Related to Study Subject: In the study, information was given about Eco's life and works, translation criticism, translation strategies, detailed explanations were made on the translation and reviews of the work called Open Work by different translators in our country. Work; Introduction, Umberto Eco, Translation Criticism, Translation Strategies, Translations of Open Work in Our Country, Open Artwork, Analysis and Conclusion sections. While criticizing the translation works, the method of comparison was applied and information was given about the structures and contributions of the expressions of words and expressions, starting from the differences between sections in the translated works. Tables were used to show the difference between translations more concretely. Method: In this study, in which the comparative translation analysis of Umberto Eco's "Open Work" was made, discourse-oriented translation criticism approach was adopted theoretically and the translational equivalence strategy of translation scientist Mona Baker was applied. In addition, in translation studies, including Baker's equivalence approach in translation; the applications of grammatical, textual and usable equivalence classifications at lexical and supra-lexical levels are included. The method to be followed in providing the word-level equivalence strategy in translation is "localization". In the study, Baker's method, problems encountered in providing equivalence between source and target language will be examined with comparative examples both in terms of linguistics and discourseoriented translation approach. Findings and Discussion: The finding here is that the language of the translated work is compatible and understandable with the native language of the reader, that is, "equivalence in translation". As a matter of fact, the words used in different cultures in the source language may not have equivalent in the target language or some meaning confusion may occur. In order to avoid losses in translation, when the exact equivalent of these words cannot be found, as it should be done in cultural translations, it has been observed that a similar or original version of this word is used in the work, and a word-level equivalence is tried to be achieved with footnotes or explanations made at the end of the chapter. Therefore, as all translation theorists have always stated, it is quite clear that there can be no full equivalence in translation. Regardless of the results of the reviews of the work by different translators, it was determined that the closest translation to the equivalent was tried to be presented. However, although this is the purpose in translation, it is inevitable to experience unwanted results in cases where the necessary sensitivity is not shown as a result of translation studies. Conclusion and Suggestions: When comparing the translations of Eco's work "Open Work" by Nilufer Ugur Dalay, Pınar Savas and Tolga Esmer with a critical point of view, the following determinations can be made: Due to long sentences, non-compliance with the rules of punctuation and spelling and the ambiguity caused by grammatical mistakes, equivalence in translation could not be achieved at the desired rate. In addition, incorrect and inaccurate word choices, subject verb mismatches, and an unoriginal interpretation in translation. Pınar Savas's translation stands out in terms of simplicity, clarity, fluency and naturalness. Tolga Esmer's translation is important in terms of being up-to-date and understandable with its explanatory broad footnotes. In this sense, three different translation criticisms of Eco's work called "Open Artwork" are also important in terms of the message the work actually wants to tell. Open Work is a masterpiece that needs to be examined in terms of expanding one's own perspective and examining works of art and people more deeply. The suggestions for translation and translation criticism to be made in the future are as follows: Since each translation will be independent from each other and the idea that there will be no equivalence in translation, it is very natural that the studies conducted are different from each other. However, the point to be reached here is to present the most understandable translation for the reader and the most suitable for interpretation. Every effort made in the name of translation cannot be denied in terms of sustainability of productivity and contribution to literature. However, the main recommendation is that when a translation is revealed, it is ne disturbing motivation. Indeed, it is always easier to criticize an event than to do. In this study, attention has been paid to the situations mentioned. In the field of translation cr