Name:
Divya Parmar
Paper no: 208
Comparative Literature & Translation Studies
Roll no:
05
Enrollment no:
4069206420210024
Email id:
divyaparmaro7o12@gmail.com
Batch:
2021-23 M.A. sem: 4
Submitted to:
S. B. Gardi Department of English
Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University
Points to Ponder:
Introduction of Assignment Topic
Abstract of Article
Key points of Article
Explanation
Introduction of Assignment Topic
This Assignment Focuses on the topic Explanation of “Translation and Literature History : An Indian View” by Ganesh Devy. This artIcle is taken from Post-colonial Translation: Theory and Practice (Sussan Bassnett and Harish Trivedi). Here I put my understanding out of the entire article.
Abstract of the Article
Translation is the wandering existence of a text in a perpetual exile,' says J. Hillis Miller
The statement obviously alludes to the Christian myth of the Fall, exile and wandering. In Western metaphysics translation is an exile, a fall from the origin; and the mythical exile is a metaphoric translation, a post-Babel crisis". Given this metaphysical precondition of Western aesthetics, it is not surprising that literary translations are not accorded the same status as original works Western literary criticism provides for the guilt of translations for coming into being after the original; the temporal sequentiality is held as a proof of diminution of literary authenticity of translations. The strong sense of individuality given to Western individuals through systematic philosophy and the logic of social history makes them view translation as an intrusion of "the other" (sometimes pleasurable). This intrusion is desirable to the extent that it helps define one's own identity, but not beyond that point. It is of course natural for the monolingual European cultures to be acutely conscious of the act of translation. The philosophy of individualism and the metaphysics of guilt, however, render European literary historiography incapable of grasping the origins of literary traditions.
Key points of the article:
Role of Translation
Threefold Classification
Structural Linguistics
Translation Consciousness
Conclusion
Explanation of the Article:
The article discusses the significant impact of Bible translation on the English language and literature. The translation of the Bible into English was considered a revolutionary event as it not only made the holy text more accessible to the English-speaking population but also influenced the style of writing in the English language. First paragraph of the article also highlights the connection between the Bible and Protestant Christianity, which aimed to recover the original spirit of Christianity. By translating the Bible, Protestant England attempted to understand and follow the teachings of Christianity in their original form. Furthermore, the paragraph mentions the use of translation as a tool to recover a sense of order in English literature. Chaucer used translation to create his Canterbury Tales, while Dryden and Pope used it to restore order in their writing. Other European languages, such as German and French, also made similar attempts at using translation as a tool to improve their literary expressions.
This article highlights the significant role that translation plays in communicating literary movements across linguistic borders. The article mentions the tradition of Anglo-Irish literature, which emerged from the practice of translating Irish works into English initiated by Macpherson in the late eighteenth century. This tradition has given us writers such as Shaw, Yeats, Joyce, Beckett, and Heaney, who have contributed significantly to English literature. The article also discusses the convention of writing in Indian English literature, which was influenced by Indological activity and translation during the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Many Indian English writers have been able to translate works themselves, indicating the importance of translation in the development of literary traditions.
The article goes on to mention the impressive modern traditions of literature in settler colonies such as Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, which have emerged from the "translation" of settlers from their homelands to alien locations. The article further emphasises the importance of translation as a crucial condition for creativity in post-colonial writing in former Spanish colonies in South America, former colonies in Africa, and other parts of the world.
In summary, the article highlights that the origins of literary movements and traditions often involve various acts of translation. The practice of translation has played a crucial role in shaping the literary landscape across different cultures and languages.
This article discusses the challenges faced by the study of literary translation, particularly in the context of establishing a theory of literary history. The paragraph suggests that literary traditions often originate in translation, and repeated acts of translation give them substance. However, since translations are often perceived as unoriginal, little thought has been devoted to the aesthetics of translation. Additionally, critics have not taken a clear position about the exact placement of translations in literary history. The article goes on to explain that the interdependence between meaning and structure in the field of linguistics has been based on monolingual data and situations, making it difficult to apply to translation. Even the theoretical formulation proposed by structural linguistics is not adequate to unravel the complexities of translation. Roman Jakobson's threefold classification of translations suggests that a complete semantic equivalence is the final objective of a translation act, but this is not always possible. He maintains that only a "creative translation" is possible, a view supported by formalistic poetics, which considers every act of creation as a unique event.
The article highlights the challenges of establishing a theory of literary translation and the difficulties of achieving complete semantic equivalence in the translation process. The lack of a clear position on the placement of translations in literary history and the complexities of meaning and structure in translation add to the difficulty of studying literary translation.
The article discusses the relationship between structural linguistics, language, and translation. Structural linguistics views language as an open system of signs that acquires meaning through its relation to the culture and system to which it belongs. This theory views translation with scepticism, as it involves abstracting significance from one system of signs and merging it with another. However, the author argues that language is an open system that admits new signs and significance. This means that translation can be seen as a merger of sign systems, as the translator exploits the potential openness of language systems to bring closer materially different sign systems. By conceptualising a whole community of "translating consciousness," the author suggests that it is possible to develop a theory of interlingual synonymy and a more perceptive literary historiography.
The article discusses the concept of a "translating consciousness" and how it is prevalent in Third World countries where colonial languages have gained dominance. In India, for instance, several languages are used simultaneously by language communities as if they form a continuous spectrum of signs and significance. The article argues that theories of foreign-language acquisition do not adequately explain the use of multiple languages in translation activity, and that Chomsky's linguistics, with its focus on semantic universals, has limitations. The article suggests that the translating consciousness treats source and target languages as parts of a larger and continuous spectrum of various intersecting systems of verbal signs.
The article also references C. Catford's A Linguistic Theory of Translation, which proposes isolating various linguistic levels of translation and drawing upon a general linguistic theory for any theory of translation. The article notes that modern Western linguistics has connections with comparative studies for Europe, Orientalism for the Orient, and anthropology for the rest of the world.
This Further paragraph discusses how translation is not just a linguistic problem, but also an aesthetic and ideological problem that has a bearing on literary history. The author argues that literary translation is not simply a replication of a text in another verbal system of signs, but rather a replication of an ordered sub-system of signs within a given language in another corresponding ordered sub-system of signs within a related language. The act of translation is an attempt to revitalise the original in another verbal order and temporal space. The problems in translation study are similar to those in literary history, in that they involve the relationship between origins and sequentiality, which has not been tackled satisfactorily. However, literary communities with a "translating consciousness" may view the question of origins differently. The author notes that Indian literary communities possess this translating consciousness, as the foundation of modern Indian literature was laid through acts of translation by various writers.
The Conclusion stating that Indian literary traditions are essentially traditions of translation because Indian metaphysics believes in the migration of the soul from one body to another, and this belief guides Indian philosophies of the relationship between form and essence. Indian literary theory does not place much emphasis on originality, but rather on the writer's capacity to transform and revitalize the original. The paragraph suggests that Indian literary traditions are not tied to a specific historical period or time but are timeless because significance, even literary significance, is considered ahistorical in the Indian view. The idea of repeated birth being the substance of all animate creations suggests that Indian literary traditions value the recycling and reuse of elements such as plot, stories, and characters, and this is seen as a transformation and revitalization of the original rather than a lack of originality. Overall, the paragraph highlights the importance of translation and transformation in Indian literary traditions, which are shaped by Indian metaphysics and philosophies of form and essence.
Conclusion:
In the conclusion, is clear that translation is not merely a linguistic problem, but also an aesthetic and ideological one that is closely linked to questions of literary history and the relationship between origins and sequentiality. The act of translation involves the replication of an ordered sub-system of signs within a given language in another corresponding ordered sub-system of signs within a related language, and it is an attempted revitalization of the original in another verbal order and temporal space.
In the Indian literary context, the significance of a literary work is not subject to the laws of temporality, and literary significance is considered ahistorical. Indian literary theory does not place undue emphasis on originality, but rather values a writer's capacity to transform, translate, restate, and revitalize the original. Thus, Indian literary traditions can be seen as essentially traditions of translation.
These ideas demonstrate that the act of translation is a complex and nuanced process that involves not only linguistic considerations, but also aesthetic and ideological ones. The importance of cultural and historical contexts cannot be overlooked when approaching the act of translation, and understanding these contexts is crucial to achieving successful translations that can accurately convey the essence of the original work.
Word Count : 1803
Citation:
Bassnett, Susan and Trivedi, Harish. Post-colonial Translation: Theory and Practice. Routledge, 1999.
Singh, Madhu. "Translation and Literary History: An Indian View." Indian Literature, vol. 36, no. 4 (144), 1993, pp. 148-162.
No comments:
Post a Comment