Chapter I Introduction CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

1.1 Preliminaries

1.2 Translation in English

1.3 Tradition of Translation in India

1.4 Tradition of Translation in Maharashtra

1.5 Linguistic Approach to Translation

1.6 Cultural Approach to Translation

1.7 History of Translation Studies in Europe

1.8 History of Translation Studies in India

1.9 Aims and Objectives

1.10 Hypothesis

1.11 Scope and Limitations of the Research

1.12 Justification for Research

1.13 Pedogogical Implications 1.1 Preliminaries

This introductory chapter explains the different translations theories in India and the world. It also narrates the short history of translations in India and abroad. Though it is difficult to define translation in specific words, one can give various definitions to show the different ideas related to translations. Oxford dictionary of English language defines translation as ‘The action or process of turning something from one language into another”. It is true that dictionary is not basically meant to define terms like translation. Yet the dictionary has used the word ‘something’ which needs to be explained here. According to this defmition anything from a simple word to a work of art can be covered under this term translation. This covers a vast area and may mislead the basic concept of translation as we view it generally.

Catford has defined it as “translation is the replacement of textual material of one language in another language”. According to this defmition material is replaced. A work of art does not contain only material. It has style and diction in it, which needs to be taken into consideration in translation. Otherwise it will be dry and dead translation.

Another significant theorist of translation is Eugene A. Nida who stated that “the closest natural equivalent to the message of the source language first in meaning and second in meaning”. Nida has expanded the scope of translation from something to meaning and style. Translators like Gauri Deshpande, Sudhakar Marathe, Dilip Chitre, Santosh Bhoomkar who translated various Marathi works have written about their experiences in translation processes. A well known Marathi writer Sunita Deshpande stated that ‘Translation is more demanding than creative writing because you are responsible for someone else’s thought and writing there”.

Gideon Toury defines translation in the Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics as

“Translating is an act or a process which is performed or which occurs over and across systemic borders. In the widest of its possible entity which is a constituent of a certain cultural system is transformed into another semiotic entity which forms at least a potential element of another cultural system, providing that some informational core retained invariant under transformation and on its basis a relationship known as equivalence is established between the resultant and initial entities”.

This definition seems to be more inclusive because it relates translation to a process of transforming semiotic substance from one language to another language. Any defmition or description of translation should be descriptive rather than prescriptive. Because one text can be judiciously translated in various ways depending upon the reading of the source language text by a translator.

These opinions are of crucial importance because the present research is based on the actual translations of Marathi texts into Enghsh. There are people like Lata Manaswini who believe that translator has to transgress his own personality into the personality of the writer inorder to make it real. Such metaphysical ideas may not always be usefiil in a research work like this. But practical experiences of the above translators would certainly guide the work. Translation activity which started on a small note in the begiiming of the last century has now become an industry.

Term translation and transcreation are sometimes intermingled to mean the same activity. But there is a sharp difference between the two. Translation is generally a change in the language of the source text into the language of the target text whereas transcreation is a new cration. V.V.Shirwadkar transcreated Shakespeare’s ‘King Lear’ as "•TZ^yici' in Marathi.

P.L. Deshpande transcreated Shaw’s ‘Pygmalion’ ‘eft Berolt Bretch’s ‘Three Penny

Opera’ as ‘#T Transcreation changes the style, characters, names into local colours and names.

1.2 Translation in English

Translation of text from one language to another language has been an eye old practice. Texts chosen for such translations were from the then dominant language. Texts from language like Greek, Latin, Arabian, Sanskrit were chosen for translations. Trend changed with the spread of English rules in various parts of the world. Texts from English were taken up for translation. There are traditions of translation in all the parts of the world. It will not be out of place to write about the translation practises out of India in order to place the study in proper perspective. The story of the ‘Tower of Babel’ is significant in this cormection.

“According to the ‘Bible’, the descendants of Noah decided after the great flood to settle down in a plain in the land of Shinar. There they committed the great sin. Instead of setting up a society that fits God’s will, they decided to challenge His authority and build a tower that could reach Heaven. However this plan was not completed as God recognizing their wish regained control over them through a linguistic stratagem. He caused them to speak different languages so as not to understand each other. Then he scattered them all over earth. After that incident, the number of languages increased through diversion and people started to look for ways to communicate, hence the birth of translator.” This story shows that the God also disliked the idea of one language all over the world. This naturally gave birth to the translation of expressions from one language to another language knowingly or unknowingly.

Romans were also impressed by Greek language. They learned Greek in order to be able to translate Greek texts into Latin. According to Eric Jacobson ‘Translation is a Roman invention’. The history of civilisation tells us that Roman and Greek civilisations were the most ancient civilisations in the world.

‘The Old Testament’ was originally written in Hebrew. There were many Jews then who did not know Hebrew language. It was therefore necessary to translate Hebrew Old Testament into Greek for the common readers of Roman and Greek empires. King Alfred’s contribution to translation activity is notable. He himself was a translator of texts into vernacular for easy acceptability in the public. He believed that the language which all understand easily must have important books available to all. His ideas were taken up by the people from Africa, Ireland, Italy and Germany. ‘The Norman Conquest’ of England in 1066 slowed down the practise for some years. English people had to depend on the translations and imitations from French, Latin, Italian, and Scandalviyan countries till the 14* Century.

The age of English prose translation began in the 15''’ Century. According to Theodore Savory, the reign of Elizabeth I was the great age of translation in England. Barclay’s ‘The Ship of Fools’ is significant in this coimection. Thomas Shelton translated Don Quixote of Cervantes from Spanish into EngUsh. Wayat and Surrey translated poems from Petrarch. John Florio’s translation of Montaigne’s Essays showed to the people of England that essay was a rich and a practicable form of literature for translation. George

Chapman translated Vergil’s ‘Iliad’ into English. His ‘Homer’ was published in 1616. These two translations are often quoted by the scholars in the field.

The publication of the ‘English Bible’ has been the most important event in translation studies. The first translation of the complete Bible was produced by John Wycliffe between 1381 and 1384. A commission of translators under Henry VIII brought out the ‘Great Bible’ in 1539. The task of the ‘Bible’ translation was completed in 1611. Since that date ‘The Authorised Version of Bible’ has retained as the greatest of English translations.

John Dryden devoted last 20 years of his life in translating the ancient classics. He translated Ovid, Vergil, Lucian, Bacascio and Chaucer. His translation of Vergil in 1697 is considered to be the masterpiece of translation. Dryden was also the first major English theorist on translation.

Alexander Pope was an important figure in the field of translation in the 18"’ Century. He translated Illiad and Odyssey. Another important name of the period is William Cowper who put ‘Homer’ into English verse. The 19* century saw flowering of translation activity in Europe. One of the important names during this time is Thomas Carlyle. He translated Gothe’s ‘Wilhelm Meister’ into

Enghsh in 1824. The period also witnessed outstanding poets like Byron, Shelley, Longfellow, D.G.rossetti and Robert Browning involved in translations. Edward Fitzgerald translated Rubaiyat of Khayyam from Persian into English which enjoys great fame even today. H.W. Longfellow’s translation of Dante’s ‘Divine Comedy’ was also well accepted.

Translation has turned into an industry in the 20**’ century. Writers, critics, layman and scholars have taken up to translation. It made the general public aware of great and vast literature in multitude of languages. The translations of Tolstoy, Dostovsky, Anton Chekov, Strindberg, Ibsen, and Tagore have made these great literary figures widely known to the world.

Shreedevi K. Nair observes,

“Translation has brought the different nations closer to each other in this century than can ever be hoped. In so far as international communication is indispensability for the progress of mankind, translations are bound to play a very crucial role in the years to come.” (Page, 42)

English people translated classic works from Greek, Roman, American and Sanskrit languages during the first phase of their empire expansion programme. The ruler instincts in

English people looked at it as a cultural activity. It is a well known fact that W.B. Yeats voluntarily translated Rabindranath Tagore’s Geetanjali in English.

1.3 Tradition of Translation in India

Indian civilisation has been one of the most ancient civilisations in the world. It has had many languages and cultures for thousands of years now. Sanskrit, Arbhamagadhi, Pali, Urdu languages with various other sublanguages existed simultaneously in the land. Languages like Persian and Arabian also came to India with the Mughal rulers. A lot of literature was produced in these languages from time to time. When the people migrated from one region to another region they had to learn the language of the new land. Naturally Indians have been multilingual for centuries now. Translation was a part of their everyday existence.

The two epics Mahabharata and Ramayana were retold in various Indian languages by the various people in India. Every Indian language has its own version of Mahabharata and Ramayana. The most notable example of translations in the pre-colonial India is that of of Gunadhya. He had composed stories in the fifth century in is another example of stories in Pali. These stories were later developed in Sanskrit. The source texts taken up for linguistic transformation in those days were generally in Sanskrit, Tamil or Persian. The best examples of such transformations were ‘Pampa - Bharata’ of Pampa in

Kannada (10* Century) ‘Kamba Ramayanam’ of Kamban in Tamil (11* Century), ‘Vilanka Ramayana’ by Sarala Dasa in Oriya (14"’ Century) ‘Aryabharata’ by Morpant in Marathi.

During the Mughal period, Persian became the language of the ruler Badayuni translated the ‘Ramayana’ into Persian while Dara Shukah helped translate the ‘Upnishadas’, the ‘Bhagvad Gita’ and the ‘Yogavashishta Ramayan’ into Persian by a team of translators. The fables like Panchtantra were rendered into Pahalvi, from Pahalvi into old Syriac and then into Arabic and from Arabic into the European languages. The first phase of translation practises in India was marked by translators from one Indian language to another Indian language.

The arrival of English in India expanded this practice to the translation of Indian texts to English. Foreign language English came into translation practice for the first time in the history of translation. Sir WiUiam Jones was the first English person to prove that there were many similarities between Sanskrit and Enghsh. He translated Kalidas’s ‘Shakuntala’ into English in 1789. It started a long tradition of British and American scholars translating from Sanskrit, Tamil, and Pali. Charles Wilkins translated the ‘Bhagwadgita’. Rameshchandra Dutt translated ‘Lays of Ancient India’ in 1894. If one looks into the text picked for translation in the initial time, one notice that only the texts of cuUural importance were chosen for translation. The English people wanted to show their solidarity with the Indian people through such practices.

The scene changed after independence. After independence government of India decided to support translation. The Sahitya Akademi took upon itself the gigantic task of translating world classics as well as major Indian literary works into all Indian languages. The earliest translations of modem Indian languages into English are ‘The Puppet’s Tale’ by Manik Bandopadhyay (1968) from Bangla, and ‘Wild Bapu of Garambhi’ (1968) by Shridhar Pendase from Marathi. Sahitya Akademi has often pubhshed several translations. The

National Book Trust launched the Adan Pradan (3TT^ trr) for the translations of English novels and short stories into twelve Indian languages. As a result we have Premchand available in Kannada and Basheer in Asamiya. Very recently the National Book Trust has included English for translation. The private enterprises like Macmillan, Asia Publishing House, Sangam Books, and Jaico Books have also published translated works.

The translation of Indian poetry into EngUsh is one of the remarkable activities in the post independence period. One of the most representative anthologies of Indian poetry has been ‘The Oxford Anthology of Modem Indian Poetry’ (1994) edited by Dharwadkar and A.K.Ramanujan. The volume contains 105 poems translated by 67 translators from 14 Indian 6 languages. Indian Council for Cultural Relations (ICCR) published the four volumes of

‘Indian Poetry Today’. The Feminist Press at University of New^ York published two volumes o f‘Women Writing in India’ compiled and edited by Susie Tharu and K. Latika.

The anthologies like ‘An Anthology of Marathi Poetry’ edited by Dilip Chitre, Signposts, ‘Bengali Poetry since Independence’ edited by Prabal Kumar Basu, ‘An Anthology of Modem Hindi Poetry’ edited by Kailash Vajpeyi are noteworthy. These are some of the notable translations from and into Indian languages. It is an ongoing activity all over the world. It has acquired the status of movement in India.

Sujit Mukarjee rightly points out,

“Fifty years of new nationhood have produced many problems for India and also many solution, inherited from many centuries that preceded the twentieth has been that we have always translated. Language is one of our greatest wealth and translation enables us to continue to speak or write or read to each other. As has been said in many other contexts, in such diversity is our security, durability and unity.” (Page, 52)

1.4 Tradition of Translation in Maharashtra

When we speak about the tradition of translation in Maharashtra, we mean only the translations between Marathi and English. Translation is called ‘Bhashantar’ in Marathi. It also is called ‘W cTT’, “zto’ or ‘Dnyaneshwari’ is the unique example of independent transcreation in ancient Marathi literature. Therfore other examples such as Moropant’s ‘Geetaraya’, Vaman Pandits ‘Samshloki’, Vitthal Bidkar’s ‘Rasmanjiri’, Mukteshwara’s ‘Samovi’ and Husein Ambar Khan’s ‘Samovi’. All these transcreations were from Sanskrit into Marathi and the purpose of such transcreations was mostly religious. The source texts of these transcreations are ‘Bhagwad Gita’ and ‘Bhagwad’. Keshav Pandit the contemporary of Dnyaneshwara translated a ‘Mahanubhava’ text ‘Leelacharitra’ from Marathi into Sanskrit.

Translation activity in Maharashtra picked speed after the arrival of English people in India. English works were translated into Marathi in the first phase. Mahadeo Shastri Kolhatkar translated Shakespeare’s ‘Othello’ in Marathi in 1867. Nilkanth Janardhan Kirtane translated Shakespeare’s ‘Tempest’ in Marathi around 1857. Translating English literature into Marathi continues even today. V.D. Karandikar’s ‘irar (translation of

Shakespeare’s ‘King Lear’) Sadanand Rege’s ^ iTTWcR ^iiRa’ (translation of O Neil’s

‘Mourning Becomes Electra’), N.G. Gore’s ^ ^ 7^’ (translation of Krishna Hathising’s ‘With No Regrets’) are some of the remarkable examples of books translated from English into Marathi. These translations from English into Marathi guided Marathi literature. Marathi writers adopted ideas, style and techniques from European literature and tried to use them in their works.

The translation of English resulted in translation of works from other Indian languages into Marathi and vice versa. Prof Vasant Deo has translated the poems of Balkavi,

Kusumagraj, Borkar and Padgaonkar in Hindi. Dr. Damaodar Khadase has translated

(‘3T^’) and “3W’ (“WTT’) into Hindi. Prof Vasant Deo also translated ‘Ghashiram Kotwal’ from Marathi into Hindi. Vijay Bapat has translated some short stories from Marathi into Hindi titled as ^ ^ in 1969. Pradnyanand Saraswati’s tJiRThmpm’ in

Marathi, Vasant Patil’s t (translation of Harivanshray Bacchan’s autobiography), Chandrakant Patil’s ctilqai’ (translation of some new poets in

Marathi) are notable examples of translation of Hindi literature into Marathi. Dr. Uma

Kulkami has translated Kannada novels such as ^-'^TrT’ (translation of Shivram

Karantha’s novel) (translation of Shivram Karantha’s

(translation of Dr. S. L. Bhairappa’s novel) into Marathi.

In the multicultural and multilingual Indian scenario, translation is the only way to be in contacts with each other. Many writers have contributed to translate Marathi literature into EngUsh with a hope to get international fame. The most ancient book in Marathi literature ‘Gathasaptashati’ was translated into Enghsh by BengaU ideologist Radhagovinda Basak in

1956. Gauri Deshpande’s The Dread Departure’ (translation of Satish Alekar’s ('H5iRqfui'),

Jayant Karve’s ‘Ghashiram Kotwal’ (translation of Vijay Tendulkar’s ^^hrw'),

‘Poems of Vinda’ (translation of V. D. Karandikar’s poem by himself), ‘Chakra’ by Gauri

Deshpande (translation of Jayant Dalvi’s (‘'^ ’), Ian Rayside’s ‘Wild Bapu of Garambhi’

(translation of S. N. Pendse’s (‘'Il(=l1')l WT^J^’), Sudhakar Marathe’s ‘Cocoon’ (translation of

Bhalchandra Nemade’s (‘^t^T^’), Dilip Chitre’s ‘The Immortal Experience of Being’

(translation of Jnandev’s (‘anicTTpR’), Dilip Chitre’s another famous rendering of Sant

Tukaram’s Poems ‘Says Tuka’, ‘No Entry for the New Sun’ translation from Modem Marathi

Dalit Poetry edited by Arjun Dangle, ‘The Branded’ (translation of Laxman Gaikwad’s by P.A. Kolharkar), Santosh Bhoomkar’s ‘The Outcaste’ (translation of Sharankumar Limbale’s ‘3W>

‘3TTWT’), A. K. Kamat’s Upra (An Outsider) (translation of Laxman Mane’s “^TO’) are some of the examples of translation of Marathi literature into English. Some of the notable translations of Marathi works into Enghsh can be mentioned here. Gauri Deshpande translated Jaywant Dalvi’s as Chakra’, Sunita Deshpande’s ‘srrt

nft’ as ‘Something That Pine For’. Sudhakar Marathe translated Bhalchandra Nemade’s

as ‘Cocoon’. Venkatesh Madgulkar’s (Village Without Walls), Vishram

Bedekar’s ‘W W ’ (Battelfield), M .S. Joshi’s ‘3Tfr^ (Anandi Gopal) are also translated into English. The list by no means is conclusive.

Hierarchical relationship is conceived in the translation activity. It was believed for a long time that Sanskrit in India and English in Europe were the superior languages in the world. Hence translators were expected to translate writings from these two languages into other regional and national languages. Though there is no resemble support to this statement it worked for some years. The world has changed lot versions linguistic theories have shovm that all languages are similar. Now the trend has reversed. Writings from regional languages have been translated into other regional languages. For Example- Shivaji Sawant’s has been translated into all major Indian languages.

1.5 Linguistic Approach to Translation

As shown above translation is basically a linguistic activity. Many linguists have tried to find out the process of translation. Early attempts to translation can be traced back to

Cecero (106 BC to 43 BC) and Horace (65 BC to 8 BC). The question was whether a translator should be faithful to the original text through a ‘literal approach’ or have a ‘free approach’. The linguistic approach to translation focuses on the meaning and equivalences. The structural linguistic approach is found in the work of Roman Jackobson, Eugene Nida, Newmark, Koller, Vinay Darbelnet, and Catford. Where as fiinctional linguistic approach of Katharina Reiss, Justa Holz Mantari, Vermeer, Mona Baker considers language not just as structure but a social context.

For Jacobson translation involves two equivalent messages in two different codes. His theory is linked to the grammatical and lexical differences between languages, as well as to the field of semantics.

American linguist Eugene Nida put forward the concept of formal equivalence. Formal

equivalence focuses on the form and content of the message of the ST while dynamic equivalence aims at naturalness of expression.

The British translation theorist Peter Newmark was influenced by the work of Nida. He feels that the difference between the source language and the target language would always exist. He replaced the terms ‘formal equivalence’ and ‘dynamic equivalence’ by ‘semantic translation’ and ‘communicative translation’. The idea of the structural approach to translation changed in the 1950s and early 1960s with the work of Vinay, Darbelent and Catford. The concept of translation shift between the

ST and TT also changed. Vinay and Darbelent identified two translation techniques that resembled to literal and free methods of translation.

The first of these is the idea of ‘servitude’ which refers to the compulsory changes from ST to TT and ‘option’ which refers to the personal choices by the translator. Option is an important element in translation because it allows possible subjective interpretation of literary

texts.

The term ‘shift’ was first used in the theory of translation by Catford, in his work ‘A Linguistic Theory of Translation’ in 1965 discusses two types of shifts: i) Shift of level, where a grammatical concept may be covered by a lexeme. ii) Category shifts of which there are four types-structural shifts, class shifts, shifts unit or rank,

selection of non-correspoding terms.

The 1970s and 1980s saw a move away from the structural side of the linguistic approach. Katharina Reiss proposed a translation strategy for different text types. According to her, there are four main textual fiinctions they are informative, expressive, operative and audio medial.

Hans Vermeer introduced the Greek expression ‘skopos’ which mean ‘aim’ or ‘purpose’ to translation theory in the 1970s. Skopos theory deals with the purpose of the

translation and the fiinction of the TT in the target culture. It may not necessarily be the same as the purpose of the ST in the source culture. The emphasis here is on the reader of the TT, the translator decides the strategies to be employed to reach a set of addresses in the target culture. Culture issues in a sociolinguistic context become primarily important. Skopos is important because it means that the same ST can be translated in different ways depending on the purpose of the translation.

Michael Halliday based his work on Systemic Functional Grammar- the relationship between the language used by the author of a text and the social and cultural setting of the text. Halliday says that the text type influences the register of language, the word choice and syntax. Mona Baker examined how word forms vary from language to language. She also discusses the utterances in communicative situations.

Basil Itaim and Ian Mason doscuss socio-linguistic factors to be applied to translation. They look at the ways in which non-verbal meaning can be transferred. Such as the change from active to passive voice. All above linguistic approaches to translation incorporate the main concepts such as meaning, equivalence, shift, text purpose, register and discourse. However no theory is complete in itself.

10 Hans J. Vermeer in his article, ‘What does it mean to translate’, remarks,

‘There has been an abundance of scientifically embroidered theories as well as scientific theories of translation but there is no scientific translating.” (Page, 20)

Translation is not just a linguistic game. There are downs of verbal and non-verbal aspects to every text. Translator has to read lines, between the lines and beyond the lines in order to come to the meaning of the text. Meaning of the text is subjective in nature. Hence every translation carries an element of subjectivity in it.

1.6 Cultural Approach to Translation

Language and culture are the two sides of the same coin. Various words and expressions that construct the language demonstrate the culture of that language. For example ‘marriage’ is a cultural construct. Language used in wedding ceremonies is a reflection of the culture of that group. Marathi wedding will have words and expressions like ‘WT’,

which are not found in European weddings. Translators have to take into consideration different associations that accompany the concept.

Translation involves a process of de-coding and en-coding. Words and refers to the same thing. But they have separate cultural implications in Maharashtra, is auspicious '^TRS' is mundane. Translation focuses not merely on language transfer but also on cultural transposition. The meaning of the text and the culture that goes with it co-exist. The customs and conventions differ from one part to another. A language is undoubtedly the reflection of a particular culture. The element of culture has to be a major consideration in translation. The translator has to take into consideration language of the text, the culture out of which the text emerges and the language and system of the meta text.

Term culture includes language and dialect, reUgion, technology, cuisine, aesthetic, art, music, fashion, architecture, values, ideology, socio norms, taboos, etiquettes, gender roles, festivals, commercial practices, social structure etc. Literature combines language and culture. These three phenomenons are interdependent.

11 Sapir told that

“Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for their society.” (Page, 77)

Meaning can never be wholly separated from the expressed form. Every word in language is embedded in its socio-culture particularly. It is possible to find a TL equivalent for a word in the SL, but it cannot be said that the selected word has the same social and cultural dimensions as the SL word.

Translators are confronted with many difficulties. Most of these problems are caused not only by the differences between the source language and the target language but also by the differences between the source culture and target culture. Translators need to be well versed with the two languages and two cultures. A culture approach to translation studies foregrounds these aspects of translation activity.

The cultural approach or ‘cultural turn’ is a recent theoretical and methodological shift in translation studies. It gained recognition in early nineties of 20’^ Century and is primarily associated with the work of Susan Bassnett, Andre Le Fever and Lawrence Venuti. These approaches highlighte the relationship between translation and ideology.

Many translators focus on difficulties involved in translating culture specific aspects of text. These difficuhies may be related to words to ecology. Material culture, social culture, descriptionof non-verbal communication, proper nouns, idiolect, dialect, register and style.

The language universals are based on the hypothesis that languages have common grounds along with their uncommon grounds. Language universals make translation possible. Borrowing, defining, literal translation, substitution, lexical creation, transliteration, omission, addition, transcreation, building and redundancy are employed in the translation of unmatched elements in different languages. In the present study the researcher has focused on these strategies used by the translator to overcome the cultural hurdles of the source text. The autobiographies that are selected for this study are written in Marathi. But the Marathi used by these writers is mostly a dialect of Marathi. It is a different Marathi. The cultural moors of these writers are different from the cultural moors of Marathi people. Hence the texts under scrutiny are cultural translations more than linguistic ones.

12 1.7 History of Translation Studies in Europe

The word translation is derived from the Latin word ‘translatio’ that means ‘to carry across’. The ancient Greek term for translation is ‘metaphrasis’ which means ‘speaking across’. (Word for word translation) and ‘paraphrasis’ (saying in another words).

Cicero and Horace were the first theorists who distinguished between word for word translation and sense for sense translation. Both of them gave importance to sense for sense translation. Horace advocated the borrowing of new words because he always thought that translation ought to enrich the existing literary systems. The Roman theoretician Quintilian distinguished between two areas of study the Trivium (grammar, rhetoric and dialectic) and ‘Quadrivium’ (Airthmetic, geometry, music and astronomy). Translation was closely linked with textual interpretation in the middle ages and early Renaissance.

A patriotic trend of translation developed in the 16*'’ century. It aimed at enriching the vernacular languages and literatures. George Chapman began to translate. He considered translation a direct linguistic mimesis. “Translation” he said, “Should begin with rapturous admiration for the original author and work”. (Page, 21)

In the seventeenth century Ben Johnson believed that natural genius was needed to give second life to the words of great writer. According to him, “Verbal equivalence alone was not sufficient for good translation, but the translator should tryto estabUsh equivalence at

all levels” (Page, 21)

Dryden categorized translation as metaphrase, paraphrase and imitation. The first EngUsh work on translation ‘Essay on the Princilpes of Translation’ by Fraser Tytler was published in 1791. Tytler set three basic principles for the translator.

1) The translation should give a complete transcript of the ideas of the original work.

2) The style and manner of writing should match the original.

3) The translation should have all the ease of the original composition.

The idea of individuality asserted itself in the practice of translation during romantic period. A.W.Schlegel remarked that all communication is basically translation as it involves both decoding and encoding of messages.three types of translations were advocated by translation critics in the late 19'*' century. The first view advocated liberal way of translation. The second one called for a freer approach to the original. The third advocated the use of archaic methods and language.

Many people started thinking seriously about translation. Their works provided significant insight into the translation process in the 20* Century. It also helped in raising the status of translation. Ezra Pound’s theory of translation was based upon a concept of energy in

13 language. According to Pound the aims of translations was real speech in English version, fidelity to the original meaning and atmosphere.

There was notable development in translation studies in the twentieth century. J.C.Catford and Eugine A.Nida dominated the field of translation studies. Catford published ‘A Linguistic Theory of Translation’ in 1964. Catford’s observations gave a great impetus to the study of translation. He gave a sound linguistic basis to translation studies.

Eugene A. Nida wrote books like ‘Towards Science of Translating’, ‘Theory and Practice of Translating’, ‘Exploring Semantics Structure’ etc. He tried to analyse the process of translation minutely.

He stated,

“Translation consists of producing in TL the closest natural equivalent to the message of the source language, first in meaning and second in style”. (Page, 34)

He stated that it was impossible to deal with language as a linguistic signal without reckoning its essential relationship to the cultural context. Perhaps the greatest contribution of Nida to the theory of translation is his advocacy of ‘dynamic equivalence’ as opposed to ‘formal equivalence’. According to him formal equivalence focuses its attention on the message itself in form and content. The dynamic equivalence attempts to assure that

‘The relationship between the receptor and the message should be substantially the same as that which existed between the original receptors and the message”. (Page, 37)

The works of Nida are especially important because in them theory and practice of translation meet. Nida also wrote about the logical relations of words in a sentence, the problems of cultural translation and the relevance of discourse analysis.

Wolform Wilss is known for his three phase model for translation process. Aacording to this model, the translation process consists of an SL decoding phase, transfer phase and TL encoding phase. Wolfarm Wilss’s theory took the thoughts of translation theories to the concept of translation creativity and translation spontaneity. In fact, all the important books on translation published within the last ten years uphold the right of the translation to be different from the original.

14 Peter Newmark in his book ‘Approaches to Translation’ made difference between semantic translation and communicative translation. Andre Lefevere is another name in twentieth century translation studies.

He told that

“The translator’s task is precisely to render the source text, the original author’s interpretation of given theme expressed in a number of variations,

accessible to readers not familiar with these varieties by replacing the original author’s variations with their equivalence in different languages time, place and tradition.” (Page, 41)

Literature is a complex and dynamic system. This theory sees literary translation as one among the many elements which are in constant struggle for domination between the system’s various layers and subdivisions. This approach broadens the horizon of Translation Studies. The most ardent advocates systematic view of translation are James S.Hoknes, Gideon Toury and Andre Lefever.

The pendulum of translation studies has been swinging between the two opinions

‘translation as word to word’ and ‘translation as creative interpretation of a literary work from one language to another’. Nowadays the individuality of the translator is strongly asserted.

1.8 History of Translation Studies in India

Translating is an old practice in India. However Indian scholars never paid much attention to theorize the procedure of translation. Perhaps the plurality of translation practices might have to do so. The words used for ‘translation’ are Anuwad, Tarjuma, Rupantar, Teeka and Bhashantar. They are not equivalent. This suggests that the concept was not unfamiliar to us. Sujit Mukharjee observes,

“In this country, we have been practicing translation for a long time without

giving it such a name or style. The presence of more than one language in one’s daily life or the need to learn more than one language in one’s life time has not generally been regarded as a problem throughout India’s known history.” (Page, 33)

15 Translation or transcreation was considered quite natural phenomenon in multilingual India.

Translation becomes a medium of expression of one’s identity to the rest of the world in post-colonial period. Sachin Ketkar in his article, ‘Is There an Indian of Translation Studies?’ Observes, ‘The bilingual poet translators deploy translation as a strategy to de­ colonize their soul by translating what is considered as truly Indian”2 A noted poet and translator P. Lai writes about his own experience as a translator. He says, “I soon realized that an excessive absorption in the milieu and tradition of English was discovering me from the values that I found all around me as an experiencing Indian. So I undertook the translation of Indian works in practice.”3 Dilip Chitre says, “Why I felt compelled to translate his poetry as a bilingual poet I had little choice, if any. I have to build a bridge within myself between India or Europe or else I become a fragmented person.”4

These experience of the bilingual poets and translators throw light on their intention. Though, they talk about their experiences as translators, they don’t theorize a concept of translation. Sujit Mukharjee says, “I have no theory of translation I leave such theories to those who do not translate.” (Page, 39) According to Parthsarthy, ‘Translation is the most intimate act of reading. To interpret his text to his audience the translator must study the culture that has produced the text and study it diligently and for a long time so that he knows what the words look like.” 6 Dilip Chitre expected translator to reach its iimer spirit.

He says,

“I regard translation as reading based on main readings that aims at evolving a coherent, resonant, multi-larged rich and complex meta text that can give birth to a whole inter-related and yet variegated family of target language texts reaching different target audience and attracting them ideally towards the alien universe of the source text and its language, desiring intimacy with it.” (P. 5)

Sudhakar Marathe finds that the translation of a poem involves the analysis of language at micro level. S.S.Mate a well known writer in Marathi gave importance to the translation of core context of source text in target language. He doesn’t give importance to the translation of outer form. Harish Trivedi, G.N. Devy, Tejaswini, Niranjan, Dr. Vilas Sarang have also contributed to the translation studies in India.

Even though it is said that all languages are same, it is not practically acceptable. Like human beings they also have strategic importance. Sanskrit for example was considered to be ''i)qfuic(|u|V the language of the God as opposed to the language of the ordinary people. When we think of translation activity in India, it is strikingly visible that many Indians translated 16 English texts into Indian languages. This is because text translated was considered superior to the target language text. The number of books translated from English into Marathi is certainly much more than the number of books translated from Marathi into English. Relationship between TT and ST is based on power structure of the language.

A translation study in India hasn’t provided any indigenous theory. All the discussion mentioned above is the expressions of the individual translator’s experiences during the process of translation. We hope that Indian theory of translation would emerge soon.

Modem world has been many changes in the field language studies. People like Noam Chomsky found out that there is no basic difference between the deep structures of two languages. Surface structure may seem to be different but the end structure which helps derive the meaning of the utterance does not essentially change. Chomsky also spoke about the linguistic competence and the linguistic performance. When one expresses one’s ideas in language it becomes a performance of that person in that language. He may have different competence than his open expression. Writers write; readers read. The experience shows that there is a gap between the writers writing and readers comprehension of the writing. It is therefore necessary for the readers and translators to read between and beyond the lines. Printed words are significant but the vacant gaps are more significant than the printed letters. Translator has to take into consideration these vacant spaces while translating a text.

It has been found out by the linguist that languages change from time to time and place to place. We do not have the same Marathi that we had during the 13“’ Century. The words have changed some words have enlarge their meanings in the course of time. One person does not use the language in the same way over the different stages of his life and experience. In short language is a continuous flow of changing tides. Written books do not have the same capabilities in expressing the feelings and ideas as the spoken language has. Translator therefore faces special problems when he comes across the expressions in local and individual mark.

There are certain qualities that the translator has to possess. It goes without saying that the translator must be well versed in the two languages in question. If he knows the source language well but lacks the sufficient mastery over the target language is likely to bring out faulty translation. The problem before English translators of Marathi books in Maharashtra is that they know Marathi pretty well but are not the master of English. Translation under such circumstances becomes weak.

Translator must know the two cultures that the source language and target language texts consider with them. For Ex:- Dalit writings in Marathi represent the dalit Marathi culture. Their traditions, customs and conventions are remarkably their own. An English

17 culture does not have the similar traditions, customs and conventions. Naturally translators

find it difficult to provide exact culture equivalences.

Translator has got to be a good reader of literature. Even when he has only one book before him for translation, he has to read other books by the same writer or other books of the similar characteristics in order to understand the depth of the source language texts. Reading,

comprehension and representation of the source language text and the target language text over and over again will help the translator take his translation close to the original. The translator needs to revise his draft repeatedly to make it more authentic.

Translation is like a short blanket, which in short either at the end or at the legs.

Hence reader of translated texts has to make adjustment with himself in order to get to the core of the original. It is a matter of appropriation for readers.

1.9 Aims and Objectives

1)To study Dalit autobiographies in Marathi and their translations in English from translation

point of view.

2) To study the process followed by translators in translating these autobiographies.

3) To fmd out the problems that the translators faced in translating these works.

4) To study the way they overcame the problems.

5) To compare and contrast these translators and their translations with each other.

6) To compare and contrast these translations with other translations from Marathi to EngUsh.

1.10 Hypothesis

Translation has acquired an important place in the literary world today. Dalit writers

narrated their experiences in the autobiographies in Marathi language. These works are translated in English. These texts are translatable. The culture embedded in Marathi language can be rendered in English language with some modifications. It is not enough to know two languages only. Translator knows the mind of the autobiographer while translating.

18 1.11 Scope and Limitations of the Research

Dalit writers all over India have been writing in various Indian languages. There are many non-dalit writers from Maharashtra writing in Marathi. Researcher has not selected all of them for study. The study is limited only to the four autobiographies that were originally written in Marathi and translated in English.

These autobiographies are:

Laxman Mane's ‘Upra’ (1980) translated as ‘Upra (An Outsider)’ (2003).

Sharankumar Limbale's ‘Akkarmashi’ (1984) translated as ‘The Outcaste’ (2003).

Laxman Gaikwad's ‘Uchalya’ (1987) translated as The Branded’ (1998).

Urmila Pawar's ‘Aaydan’ (2003) translated as ‘The Weave of My Life: A Dalit Woman's Memoirs’ (2008).

The study aims at the analysis and evaluation of translation methods employed by the translators. The study does not include other aspect of these autobiographies. The researcher does not comment on the themes, narrative technique, plot construction and style etc. of these works. Thus its scope is limited to fevr autobiographies that are translated from Marathi to English.

1.12 Justiflcation for Research

Indian society has been a multilingual society for centuries today. Literature produced in one language has always been translated into other Indian languages. It helped people from one language to get in touch with the literature in other languages.

The globalization has brought the world together. People from India have been learning various European languages for various academic and commercial reasons. Dalit writers in Maharashtra wrote their life in Marathi. Dalit literature in Maharashtra came forward as a force to reckon with. It was necessary to translate these works in English. Almost all writings by Dalits have been translated in English and other European languages. The researcher felt it necessary to study the translations, the methods and procedures employed by the translator.

‘Translation studies’ has become one of the courses in university syllabi. This study will certainly help the students of translation studies.

19 1.13 Pedagogical Implication

The globalization has made it easy to cross the borders of various nations and

literatures. Today literature from one country is studied by the people of the other countries. Major universities in the world prescribe literature from across the world. This study will help

^the students as a reference work. This study will serve two academic purposes. First, it will help the students of translation studies. Secondly, these books can be studied as individual

works of art.

20 Works Cited

Catford, J.C. ‘A Linguistic Theory of Translation’. London: OUP, 1965.

Chitre, Dilip. Anubhavamrut, ‘The Immortal Experience of Being’, Sahitya Akademi, New Delhi, 1996.

Mukherji, Sujit. ‘Translation as Discovery’. New Delhi: Allied pubhshers, 1981.

Mukherjee, Sujit. ‘Translation as Recovery’, Pencraft International, 2004

Nair, Shreedevi K. ‘Aspect of Translation’, Creative Books, New Delhi, 1996.

Newmark, Peter. ‘Approaches to Translation’. Oxford: Pergamon P, 1981.

Nida, Eugene. A ‘Towards a Science of Translation’. Leiden: E.J.Brill, 1964.

Nida, Eugene. A. and Charles Taber. ‘The Theory and Practise of Translation’. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1969.

Sapir, Edward. ‘Culture, Language and Personality. Berkely: University of California Press, 1956.

Toury, Gideon, ed. ‘Translation Across Cultures’. New Delhi: Bahri Publication, 1987.

21