Name :- Aarti Bhupatbhai Sarvaiya
Roll No :- 01
Enrollment No :- 4069206420220027
Sem :- 4(M.A.)
Batch :- 2022-2024
Paper No. :- 208
Paper Code :- 22415
Paper Name :- Comparative Literature & Translation Studies
Submitted to :- Smt. S. B. Gardi, Department of English,M.K.B.U.
Dated on :- 25 April , 2024
Email :- aartisarvaiya7010@gmail.com
"A Perspective from India on Translation and Literary History" by Ganesh Devy
Introduction
Translation is a complex and multifaceted process that extends far beyond mere linguistic transposition. It is a bridge between cultures, a means of preserving and disseminating knowledge, and a catalyst for literary innovation. This assignment delves into the intricate relationship between translation and literary history, with a particular focus on the Indian perspective. Guided by the seminal work of Ganesh Devy, "Translation and Literature History: An Indian View," we embark on an exploration of the pivotal role translation has played in shaping literary traditions across the world, and the unique lens through which Indian metaphysics and aesthetics view this transformative act.
Abstract
The article by Ganesh Devy, titled "Translation and Literature History: An Indian View," offers a thought-provoking examination of the complex interplay between translation and literary history. Drawing upon the Western metaphysical preconditions that view translation as an "exile" from the original, Devy challenges the notion of diminished authenticity associated with translated works. He argues that Indian literary traditions are inherently rooted in a "translating consciousness," where the act of translation is not merely a linguistic exercise but a revitalization of the original in a new temporal and cultural space.
Devy's central thesis revolves around the idea that Indian metaphysics embraces the migration of essence from one form to another, akin to the transmigration of the soul. This philosophical underpinning shapes Indian literary theory, which places less emphasis on originality and more on the writer's ability to transform and revitalize existing works. Consequently, Indian literary traditions can be viewed as timeless, transcending the constraints of historical periods and valuing the recycling and reuse of plot, characters, and stories as a means of transformation rather than a lack of originality.
Explanation
The concept of translation has long been a subject of intense scrutiny and debate within the realm of literary studies. While Western metaphysics has traditionally viewed translation as an "exile" from the original, a diminished form that falls short of the authenticity of the source text, Ganesh Devy's "Translation and Literature History: An Indian View" offers a refreshing and thought-provoking perspective.
Devy's central thesis revolves around the idea that Indian literary traditions are inherently rooted in a "translating consciousness." This consciousness stems from the Indian metaphysical belief in the migration of essence from one form to another, akin to the transmigration of the soul. This philosophical underpinning shapes Indian literary theory, which places less emphasis on originality and more on the writer's ability to transform and revitalize existing works.
The article begins by acknowledging the Western metaphysical preconditions that view translation as an "exile" from the origin, a fall from the original that diminishes the authenticity of the translated work. However, Devy challenges this notion, arguing that Indian literary traditions embrace the act of translation as a means of revitalization and transformation, rather than a diminution of authenticity.
One of the key points raised in the article is the significant role that translation has played in shaping literary movements and traditions across various cultures. The author cites examples such as the revolutionary impact of Bible translation on English language and literature, as well as the use of translation as a tool for literary restoration and creativity by writers like Chaucer, Dryden, and Pope. The emergence of Anglo-Irish literature and Indian English literature is also attributed to the practice of translation, with writers such as Shaw, Yeats, Joyce, Beckett, and Heaney contributing significantly to the English literary canon.
Devy further highlights the importance of translation in fostering the impressive modern literary traditions of settler colonies like Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, as well as post-colonial writing in former Spanish colonies, Africa, and other parts of the world. These examples underscore the profound influence that translation has had on the development and dissemination of literary movements across linguistic and cultural boundaries.
The article also delves into the theoretical underpinnings of translation, examining Roman Jakobson's threefold classification of translations. Jakobson suggests that complete semantic equivalence is the ultimate objective of a translation act, but he maintains that only a "creative translation" is possible, aligning with the formalistic view that every act of creation is inherently unique. This classification highlights the challenges of achieving complete semantic equivalence in translation and the complexities of meaning and structure involved in the process.
Devy further explores the limitations of structural linguistics in addressing the complexities of 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, making it skeptical of translation. However, the author argues that language's openness to new signs and significance allows for the merging of different sign systems through translation. He proposes the concept of a "translating consciousness," which treats source and target languages as parts of a continuous spectrum of intersecting systems of verbal signs.
This notion of a "translating consciousness" is particularly relevant in Third World countries where colonial languages have gained dominance. In India, for instance, multiple languages are used simultaneously by language communities, forming a continuous spectrum of signs and significance. Devy argues that theories of foreign-language acquisition and Chomsky's linguistics, with its focus on semantic universals, are insufficient to explain this translating consciousness. Instead, 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 touches upon the work of C. Catford, who proposed isolating various linguistic levels of translation and drawing upon a general linguistic theory for any theory of translation. Devy acknowledges the connections between modern Western linguistics and comparative studies for Europe, Orientalism for the Orient, and anthropology for the rest of the world.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Devy's "Translation and Literature History: An Indian View" offers a compelling challenge to the Western perception of translation as a mere "exile" from the original. By drawing upon Indian metaphysical and aesthetic perspectives, he argues that translation can be a powerful tool for revitalization and transformation, enriching literary traditions through the migration of essence and the continuous interplay of cultures. This unique lens highlights the dynamic nature of translation, its impact on shaping literary movements, and its role in fostering understanding and exchange across linguistic and cultural boundaries.
Devy's work urges us to move beyond the limitations of structural linguistics and embrace a "translating consciousness" that recognizes the interconnectedness of language systems and the inherent potential of translation to create new forms of artistic expression. By recognizing the transformative power of translation, we can better appreciate its profound influence on literary history and its role in building bridges between cultures.
Ultimately, Devy concludes that translation is not merely a linguistic problem but also an aesthetic and ideological issue with implications for literary history.
No comments:
Post a Comment