Chapter I

INTRODUCTION

The art of translation is being practised all over the world. In its very nature, it is bilingual. The question of translation would not have arisen if the entire world is mono-lingual. When languages evolved in human society, the need for translation must have been felt among the intellectuals. For practising translators, a minimum of two languages must have been conversant. Desirable it is, if the target language is the mother-tongue of the translator. Strictly speaking, however much is the efficiency of the translator, no translation could equal the source material in all respects. Any original is alike a living eagle. But the translation is like a stuffed eagle of a laboratory.

The concept of translation would have evolved gradually since time immemorial. At the same time it could be traced back to the Christian missionaries who would have been the pioneers to have translated The

Bible into several languages of the world with a view to propagating the word of God among the people particularly of heathen countries where they made their settlements and started proselytizing them. It is as in the words of Bassnett-McGuire, “With the spread of Christianity, translation

came to acquire another role that of disseminating the word of God” (40). 2

The translation emerged as a separate art in the twelfth century. It is a well known dictum that art of translation flourishes only in an atmosphere of bi-lingual scenario and also in an area of multiplicity of languages. In a methodical study of translation it is found that this art itself has its own origin and development. As the present critical study involves two languages – Tamil and English, it is obligatory to make a note of translation in both these languages. Geneologically speaking,

Tamil is one of the earliest languages of the Dravidian family and the

English is the off shoot of Indo-European family of languages.

Linguistically, culturally and socially, the Tamils are certainly different from the English. The origin of Tamil language goes back to circa fourth century B.C. and English is the language of about 600 years old only.

What seems to be a wide gulf and chasm between these two languages of different culture and civilization have been ironed out with the advent of translation. In other words translation proves to be a connecting link between these two languages of different climes and cultures. Translation according to Dr. Johnson involves the process of “Change into another language, retaining the sense” which is indeed the basic objective.

Modifying this statement A.H. Smith maintains that “to translate is to change into another language retaining as much of the sense as one can.”

(8) 3

In this respect, translation as a separate discipline serves the essential purpose of ushering in a literary flavour, identity of thought and emotional bond among the lovers of literature. As in the words of

Patankar,

Translations provide for many the only means of approach to

foreign literature. Thousands of literary works have been

translated. Methods have been devised to judge whether and how

far individual translations are successful. (61)

Translation is far greater than any other means to convey an idea into another languages. Das very aptly says,

In fact, translation is more than all these – ‘art’, ‘craft’, and

‘science.’ It is a process of analysis, interpretation and creation

which leads to replacement of one set of linguistic resources and

values for another. (Das, Handbook 103)

Practice of Translation

Whenever the writers of the past intended to make their concept reach beyond the boundaries of their lingua-region, translation proved to be the only medium. The uses of translation are amazing. It is very clearly put forth by Das in the Herizon of Translation studies.

Translation of world classics into several other languages of the

world helps in enriching the target languages. Apart from 4

well-known epics of the world, great authors like Tolstoy and

Shakespeare, continue to be translated into several languages. (71)

Thus the original authors sought the help of others. The writers who were well versed in both the original and the receptor’s languages rendered the works by themselves. This practice was quite common in those days. It has become an art now.

The writer, his reader and work belong to one language and the

translator, his reader and translation belong to another language

(Of course, the translator knows both the languages). What happens

in translation is that the source language text gets substituted and

the result is that the target language is born. In other words

translation is a journey from one language to another. (Das,

Handbook 67)

There are quite a good number of translated works throughout the world. For example Iliad’s Odessey, the Tamil ethical literature

Thirukkural by Thiruvalluvar have been translated into many a languages of the world. Recent translations of Thirukkural are found in Thai language, Malay and Burmese, to speak of South-East Asian countries. In languages like Tamil and Sanskrit, more than one translation is found. The

English translations of Thirukkural continue to be published in Tamil

Nadu. The couplets of Kural are so precise that they give room for 5 different interpretations and hence in many places, no two translators go together.

Need for Translation and Shakespeare’s Socio-Cultural Aspect

Translation is the intellectual link between one country and another and one language and another. A cultural homogeneity could easily be evolved in this exchange of one literature to another and vice- versa.

Normally existing geographical, social and cultural barriers disappear when the work gets into another language. In a multi-lingual country like

India, the part played by translation is stupendous. It is an intellectual binding force to bring in an emotional integration and unity in this

multi-lingual sub-continent. Whether the translation is classical or

comprehensive or even pedestrian, its role in its totality cannot either be

underestimated or neglected.

As far as India is concerned, translation has existed as a link

between Sanskrit and Tamil. These two were the languages originally

existing in India right from the pre-historic times. It appears that leading

ancient scholars and creative writers in those days have been proficient in

both these Indian languages. That is why Valmiki’s RÀmÀyaõÀ which is

said to be the pioneer work, is found in the twelfth century

KambarÀmÀyaõÀ. This in effect has gradually been extended to other 6 languages such as Telugu, Malayalam and Hindi. As regards Tamil,

Tholkappiyar the author of the earliest extant Grammar has said in a stanza (Sutram) in Ceyyulial of Tholkappium that in the process of translation from Sanskrit into Tamil, certain Sanskrit letters must be

Tamilized - an evidence that the art of Translation had been existing even in ancient time (A.D.2nd Century). In the succeeding ages also translation

had been in practice. The didactic, philosophical and logical treatises have

been translated from Sanskrit into Tamil. The reputed works such as

AlaôkÀra Types of grammar and minor literary works such as Sandesa

types have also been rendered in Tamil from Sanskrit. The term Sandesa

is in Sanskrit and it means an ambassadorial duty. There had been

a tradition both in Tamil and Sanskrit to write poems of this type. The

classical poets of both these languages have purported to have sent even

birds and animals on political and social issues. Perhaps, due to either lack

of talent or unwillingness, certain Sanskrit scholars in giving their

commentary to the treatises of Vaishnava Sect have made use of

MaõippravÀÒa style of Tamil. This prose style is in fact an admixture of

copious Sanskrit words along with those of Tamil in interpreting or

explaining the matter at hand. It is in a way allied to the existence of

translation.

Translation was a systematically organized activity only during the

Pre–British period. A large number of European missionaries visited 7

India, particularly Tamil Nadu for proselytizing the local population into

Christianity. Their religious activity in a way compelled them to learn the native languages such as Tamil, Telugu and Malayalam. Once they learnt

Tamil, they began translating the Bible and Biblical literature into Tamil.

Exceptionally a few cosmopolitan missionaries of a secular outlook have translated a good number of Tamil literary works also into English.

Taking a cue from these benevolent literary endeavours, the East

India Company at the outset and the British Indian Government

succeedingly endowed a good amount of money for translating English

literary works into Tamil. For a few decades in the later part of the

nineteenth century, there had been an organization called Madras School

Books and Vernacular Literatures Society (Mudaliyar, E¸ cuya Caritai,

13). This State-sponsored organization established in 1950 was instrumental in rendering many pieces of English works into Tamil. It was during this period that quite a number of Shakespeare’s plays engaged their attention. To begin with, Shakespeare’s plays were prepared by them in the form of re-told stories meant for young children in the schools. This was actually a period in which the greatest plays of the sixteenth century began marching into Tamil literary field. Even Tamil journals such as

Prasanda Vikatan, Lokobakari and Kalaa Nilayam published in the twenties of the last century, a number of articles on Shakespeare and his plays. The Kalaa Nilayam, edited by a brilliant bi-lingual scholar 8

Mr.Seshachalam translated and published The Tempest and Julius Caesar in Tamil in a format in which both the English text and the Tamil version are juxtaposed to one another in one and the same page.

With the advent of the English medium schools in India, during the

British Rule the English language became a vital tool as a medium of communication. Books on English literature were prescribed to the school students. Master pieces of prose, poetry, novels and dramas were not only

included in the school curricula but also in colleges. The students of

regional languages found it difficult to understand the prescribed text

books in the English language. Hence the concept of translation did arise.

The need for translation is greater than ever before in our time.

This is because we live in multi-lingual and multi-cultural society

where the need for interaction between people of different

linguistic groups and cultures is highly necessary. Translation

fulfils that goal of putting across the view of the people in

a multi-lingual society. Thus, translation has acquired a place for

itself in the highly sophisticated techno-electronic age. (Das,

Handbook 25)

To facilitate the process of learning English words, the mother tongue of the state concerned in India became a sheer necessity. The teachers of those days could lucidly explain the complex concept easily with the help of the vernacular languages. The result is the rise of 9 translated versions of English works. Local dramatists intended to adopt

Shakespeare’s method of writing plays.

A few indigenous dramatists borrowed his format and structure for

the plays written by them. Many have moulded him as they desired.

They removed what they call the obscurities, ambiguities and

syntactical complexities, substantial cuts of scenes, alterations,

shortening of long speeches and vice-versa are also some of the

characteristics that are noticeable. (Arangasamy 9)

In the language of Tamil, a particular genre, the drama did not evolve on its own. The other genres such as poetry and literary essays, were also not available in Tamil language. The father of Tamil drama

PSM introduced the genre drama into Tamil language. Followed by him there were many scholarly writers too contributed to Tamil drama. While translating English plays into Tamil, the translators faced a lot of problems specifically with respect to socio-cultural aspects. It is as opined by Kumar, in hit article “Translation: A Creative Process.”

The translator has to make a balance between maintaining a close

fidelity to the original and utter freedom from it. Sri Aurobindo is

in favour of taking liberty with the original. He states a translator is

not necessarily bound to the original he chooses; he can make his

own poem out of it, if he likes, and that is what is generally done.

(65) 10

The English culture is totally different from the Tamil culture. The life style of English especially dress, manners and public movements are totally different from Tamils even today. It is quite natural to see such a gulf of differences between the English and the Tamils. Some how or other, the translators have tried their level best to nutralise the two cultures. As Krishnasamy quotes,

The well known dictum of Benedetto Croce, the Italian Critic:

“Traddutore-traditor” (the translator is a traitor, a falsifier of the

original) seems to be dated. Equally dated is the cynical

observation that “Translation is like a woman if beautiful, it cannot

be faithful and if faithful, it cannot be beautiful.” (Anonymous 235)

In fact all these four chosen translators for this study have boldly rendered the play into Tamil unmindful of many such criticism prevalent with respect to translation.

Aestheticians also have different opinion with respect to the separability of meaning from the poem and rendering it.

The assumption of the separability of meaning is challenged by

aestheticians who deny the possibility of translations. They hold

that the meaning of a poem is not a liquid which can not be

transferred from one vase to another. One can not separate the

meaning of a poem from its verbal expression any more than one

can separate a smile from the lips that smile. (Patankar 63) 11

In spite of all these different kinds of opinions held by the critics,

translation as an essential art has gained its momentum. It is very briefly

and beautifully stated by Nida and Taber.

“The best translation does not sound like a translation” (12). It was

a challenging task to the translators to render the English slang version into Tamil.

Colloquial expressions, culture–words, slangs, proverbs are

difficult to translate for there is no one to one language and

another. Equivalence of words in two or more languages is hard to

come by. (Das, Handbook 40)

Shakespeare wrote both for royal and groundlings. Apart from slang, there were idioms, phrases, phrasal verbs and classical allusions that proved to be added impediments for the translators. In fact these were very big hurdles for them especially in finding out the equivalents in

Tamil. The translators had to skip such idiomatic, phrasal expressions and classical allusions. Sometimes the translators had to localise the versions to suit the Tamil culture. Translating conversation which has sexual undertone or sexy was very difficult for them to render.

The translator faces many problems while rendering a text from the

source language into the target language. His task is more difficult

than a creative writer for the latter thinks and writes in one 12

language the former has to make a tight-rope walking between two

languages. (40)

The chosen translators for study

William Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice has been translated into Tamil by more than ten translators. Of them, the researcher has chosen both the earliest and latest two translation each for the study. They are Pammal Sambanda Mudaliyar (PSM), Kallappiran Pillai (KPP),

Aru. Somasundaran (ARS) and T. Namasivayam (TNS) respectively.

PSM has entitled the play VÀõÁpura Vaõika¸, KPP Venice

Vartaga¸, ARS Venice ViyÀpÀri and TNS Venice Nagarathu Vaõika¸.

The thesis critically and exhaustively analyses all these four renderings of

William Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice with the help of primary source edited by E.C. Pettet and A.W. Verity respectively.

Adaptation, Paraphrase and Translation

As it is a well known fact English culture, customs, practices, convention etc., are totally different from that of Indians particularly

Tamils, there was a necessity for the translators to adapt the plays including characterization towards the suitability of Tamils. The obvious example is VÀõÁpura Vaõika¸ rendered by PSM is both a translation and

adaptation. He closely follows the English text line by line omitting some 13 of the lines that have had classical allusions as he thought to himself that might not be received well by the conservative Tamil audience. The audiences who watch the enactment of the play in the theatre would feel

that they are at the native land and the readers of the play would also be satisfied with the text that is free from vulgarity and even sexual

undertone.

The salient features of Kallappiran Pillai’s translation of The

Merchant of Venice are: He has given the meaning of the entire play in an

abridged form that too in Act and Scene wise, preceded by the story in

short form and a brief profile of William Shakespeare. Apart from this, he

has elaborately explained the meanings of imageries, symbols, myths,

idioms and classical allusions in the foot-note. This method facilitates the

readers of the drama to have a clear cut picture of the Elizabethan England

including the traditions, cultures and other unique conventions of those

era. To illustrate with examples the following things can be taken into

account.

KPP has strictly followed the English text, of course with a few

lines of omissions then and there. He has translated even the bell sound

“Ding” “Dong”. His is not an adaptation but a pure translation in the form

of poetry and prose as well. Translating poetry into poetry is the toughest

task. Srinivas (quoted) rightly says: 14

Poetry by its very nature is untranslatable. Ideas can be translated

from language to language, but poetry is the idea touched with

magic of phrase and incantatory music. Competent translator can,

however, play the good broker between the poet and the reader, and

surpassing the mere prose of statement can give intimations of the

poet’s sovereign utterance. Good translation can create trust and it

can stimulate interest. (52)

KPP has fully attempted it excellently with his profound knowledge in both the languages. He has even brought in the rhymes in contrast to the opinions of Das in A Handbook of Translation of Studies.

Translation of rhythm and rhyme schemes in poetry into another

language is almost impossible. In case of poetry, translation is

restricted to ideas only, not to the form, for form varies from

language to language. The musicality of a poem along with its

technical virtuosity cannot be translated. This is a serious limitation

of translation. (91)

The other two chosen translators ARS and TNS have translated fully in the prose form.

To suit the Indian particularly Tamil culture, most of the earlier translators have adapted the plays. They have changed even the names of characters. Shakespeare has named a few characters in such a way that they themselves should reveal their true nature as in the case of 15

Mrs.Overdone in the play Measure for Measure. Similarly in the chosen play for study, if Shylock is split into two halves shy-lock, a shameless fellow who would unashamedly indulge himself for the sake of earning money. Of course he is a money lender for higher rate of interest. To signify his professional trade, Shakespeare has picturised him as a villain who would never care for anything except accumulating wealth or amassing wealth. A Tamil Translator Mullai Muthaiyah has have translated the chosen play with the title Kadumvatti Vankiya Kalneðchan

(Muthaiyah, Sheksespeare Kataikal, p.148) a hard-hearted fellow. The other play wrights did not take that much effort to bring in the true nature

of the person that is revealed through the name. PSM has named Shylock

as Shamlal whereas KPP has named him Shylock only. PSM has

appropriately given the name because “Lal” is the title used by a group of people of Rajasthan, especially from Marwar region settled throughout the

country. Their primary business is money lending. This group of people

has been residing at all parts of India and Tamilnadu is not an exception

for them.

It is not only with the characters, but also with the plot and the

other aspects of the play The Merchant of Venice, adaptation has been

made by the translators. There are umpteen number of examples that have

been dealt with in the subsequent chapters.

16

Summarization

When the poetic genre is again rendered into poetic form, mostly originality is lost. In the case of KPP without causing any damage to the original version, he has made strenuous efforts and translated the entire play into Tamil in the poetic and prose forms. He has not omitted anything. The other translators, his successors have gone through the play and merely summarized the play, of course, with many omissions.

A pearl like dew drop set on the blade of a grass must be enjoyed in the morning, leaving it there on the blade without causing any disturbance to it. Once the dew drop is taken and left on the palm of a hand, nothing would be left to enjoy excepting the smallest amount of water or moisture.

Similarly translation as an art should not cause any damage to the original version. KPP has strictly adopted the above said concept and translated.

The other three chosen translators have rendered the play in poetry as well as prose.

Concept of Translation: its Origin and Development

Great many Tamil scholars and poets have felt that the art of literature and its immortal intellectual properties in the form of cherished thoughts must be brought into Tamil. Subramaniya Bharathi a renowned versatile personality and poet says “Go in all the eight directions and bring 17 treasures of art over here” and the master pieces of the great scholars of other nations should be translated into Tamil.

The art of translation began in the ninth century, when King Alfred translated. He also made scholars to translate quite a number of Latin books into English. The primary purpose of this translation was to save

English from the devastation of the old monastic centres of learning run

by the Danish.

Translation grew into a separate discipline and the fifteenth century

is considered to be the Golden era in the field of translation in the history

of the European countries.

Shakespeare, an Elizabethan playwright is popular in England and

equally reputed in countries other than England. Such a global reputation

has been acclaimed by a very few dramatists in those days. Even today he

is familiar among the literates and semi-literates all over the world.

To begin with, his plays were enacted and read in English. As and

when England became an empire and English became a medium of

instruction in the British colonies especially in India, the reputation of

Shakespeare grew by leaps and bounds. Many native scholars of English

in colonial countries began rendering the plays of their own choice. Many

writers have drawn inspiration from him for developing their native

stagecraft. But still, the fact remains that out of thirty-six of his plays,

thirteen of the history plays have not been translated into Tamil. The 18 reason being that most of the history plays might have been found repetitive and hence lack lustre in their thematic content.

Among the plays rendered into Tamil, The Merchant of Venice tops the list with its Tamil prose version by Viswanatha Pillai in 1870. Ever since, a number of bilingual scholars have attempted to render, adapt, summarise and translate the same play. The reason behind choosing this comedy for Tamil version by more than one person, sporadic omission of sub-plot, change of dramatis personae into Tamil names and various other transformations, is bound to prove to be an interesting study. Hence all the available Tamil versions of The Merchant of Venice subjected to a critical assessment in this dissertation. A poetical version of this play was also subjected to a literary scrutiny. The net result is found to be through this dissertation, how far the image of Shakespeare, the playwright has been faithfully rendered in this comedy.

Shakespeare, the British playwright is of a different cultural milieu.

The society of Elizabethan England is certainly different from the customs and manners of the conservative Tamil society, as it existed in the middle and later decades of the nineteenth century. Expressions that are unsophisticated, vulgar and colloquial are found among the rustic and minor characters. Translating them as such into Tamil was a major hurdle for the early translators. How these setbacks were tackled and problems 19 solved, involve an assessment, critically and chronologically. This, in

effect has analysed the role of translation in the study of Shakespeare.

Besides these cultural restraints, there are idiomatic expressions, proverbial sayings, puns classical allusions and application of dramatic ironies. Those that are lexically operating cannot be translated. Even allusions and literary echoes from contemporary playwrights and poems

that are precise and terse did not yield to translation. These obstacles have

been narrowed down, passed off and surmounted with the subtlety of the translators chosen for this study.

Apart from these culture and technical-oriented approaches, an attempt to find out how far the knowledge of Shakespeare has been disseminated even among the illiterate and semi-illiterate masses and his

story of The Merchant of Venice has been taught among school-going children in Tamil-Speaking areas, was found to be informative and interesting. It could be recalled in this context that this comedy of

Shakespeare has been filmed in Tamil with all the paraphernalia of an

English play and a number of well-known scenes from this play have been taken out and enacted as a one – act play in schools and colleges on the occasion of college-days and school-anniversaries. An attempt has been made to estimate how far Shakespeare has been taken to the grass-root level of society until the early decades of the twentieth century ever since

Shakespeare’s study began. 20

So long as Britishers remained in power in India, the study of

Shakespeare was, in a way not only compulsory in the academic institutions but also voluntary among the elitist group. Once Britishers left

India in the middle of the twentieth century, the situation has undergone a radical change. Shakespeare is no longer studied as a text except by those who opt English Literature as their course of study and no chance for the younger generation to be aware of this outstanding playwright. His comedies including The Merchant of Venice and famous tragedies have a bleak future, so far as collegiate syllabi is concerned.

Bakaya says,

A translation that strives to be identical to the original in the end

comes close to being an interlinear version and greatly facilitates

the understanding of the original. This leads us, indeed drives us,

towards the basic text and so, finally, the whole circle is closed in

which contacts between foreign and indigenous, familiar and

unfamiliar take place. (120)

With all that is said and done on Shakespeare, the fact remains that

even to-day, in spite of an academic neglect of that English playwright, he

is still quoted in printed texts and in literary platforms in Tamil Nadu.

Many monolingual Tamil scholars unknowingly quote Shakespeare in

their writings. Evident it is that the impact of that dramatist is such in

Tamil and there are also Tamil films adopted from Shakespeare. However, 21 this dissertation aims at an analytical study of the Tamil translations of

The Merchant of Venice.

Translation theories

Some scholars like Theodore Savory define translation as an ‘art’, others such as Eric Jacobsen define it as a ‘craft’ whilst others perhaps more sensibly borrow from the German and describe it as ‘a science’.

Horst Frenz claims that translation is neither a creative art nor an imitative art but stands somewhere between the two (Bassnett-McGuire 4).

A few more scholars have explained the concept of translation differently. J.C. Catford defines it as the replacement of textual material in one language (source language) by equivalent textual material in another language (translated language) (20). Dostert defines it as “...... that branch of the applied science of language which is specifically concerned with the problem–or the fact of the transference of meaning from one set of patterned symbols into another set of patterned symbols”

(cf. J.C. Catfords 35).

Besides these, this chapter yields to a scope of various definitions

of translation equivalences such as stylistic and textual shifts enunciated

by the reputed translated theorist Anton Popovic. But at the same time, it

must be kept in mind that the translator roughly 100 years back never

thought of any translation theory as such but it is left to a discerning critic 22 to apply the theory with the text of translation under review. So the application of any theory as such in this translation or even in any other translation has only a limited scope to compare with the modern theories of translation.

Anton Popovic in his definition of translation equivalence distinguishes four types of equivalences as follows: (Bassnet-McGuire

25).

i) Linguistic equivalence

ii) Paradigmatic equivalence

iii) Stylistic (translational) equivalence

iv) Textual equivalence

Popovic classifies the shifts in translation as follows: (138)

i) Constitutive shift

ii) Generic shift

iii) Individual shift

iv) Negative

v) Topical shift

All these equivalences and shifts have been elaborately dealt with in the third chapter with illustration from the chosen Tamil renderings. Chapter II

OMISSIONS AND ADDITIONS

2.0. Omissions and Additions

The translators are meant to play the second fiddle. They are like subservient disciples to render the source material of their masters into the languages of their own. But in practice they confront many a problem - literary, linguistic and cultural. These hurdles have to be crossed over by the translators. This formidable task is a challenge for their competence.

In meeting this challenge, what was done by them is quite an interesting study. Whether they have added in their rendition for the sake of clarity and out rightly bypassed an item that proves to be unyielding for rendition. Hence, this chapter deals with the omissions and additions made by the translators and the reasons for such have also been critically analysed and documented. Compared to additions, lines that have been omitted are limited.

2.1. Omissions

When a text is translated into any language, there must be clarity in the translated text. It should not be ambiguous, vague and abrupt. The translators of Shakespeare plays have sporadically omitted sub-plots and a few passages but added something with the original text for inducting 24 clarity into the rendered text. Ivir opines that, “Omission is necessitated not by the natures of the cultural element to be translated but by the nature of communicative situation in which such an element appears.” (44)

In the early translations, Lorenzo and Jessica episode has been omitted. Compared to all other chosen translators, KPP has omitted a very few lines of the play. That too might be inadvertently, it seems.

PSM has omitted any phrase that is unpopular to Tamils. For

example, while Salarino intended to know the reason for Antony’s

sadness, he asks as follows.

Not in love neither? Then let us say you

are sad,

......

And other of such vinegar aspect

(A.W.V.1.1.47-54)

PSM has not touched upon ‘vinegar aspect’ which means sour or

unpleasant look or appearance. He has stopped with a reference to

Brahmma Rishi Durvasa who does not laugh even when he listens to

jokes. He has taken efforts to convey the idea but not so exactly. KPP too

has not translated this concept. Similarly ARS and TNS also have not

touched upon. But they have brought in the concept. On another context

of the second Act, PSM has omitted and slightly deviated from the 25 following original by translating Portia’s utterance keeping in mind the

Tamil readers and the viewers.

Besides, the lottery of my destiny

Bars me the right of voluntary choosing:

But if my father had not scanted me,

And hedged me by his wit to yield myself

His wife who wins me by that means I told you,

(A.W.V.2.1.15-19)

He has translated, whichever the casket the husband who wins her, she has to marry. It could be ‘who ever wins’ instead of ‘husband.’ Apart from this, he has not said anything about the lottery of her destiny.

KPP has stated that her destiny is going to be decided by a sheet of paper. Likewise ARS says that selection of casket prevents her freedom to

choose her life partner. TNS says that the game of destiny prevents the choice of her life partner.

Subsequently in the second Act, Portia replies to the request of the

Prince of Morocco to bring him unto his chance,

Portia : First, forward to the temple. After dinner

your hazard shall be made.

(A.W.V.2.1.44-45)

PSM has slightly modified that he can choose the casket based on his

luck. Here for ‘hazard’, he means a dice game. To avoid being verbatim, 26 he might have done like this. ARS has translated temple into mother Mary

Church and omitted the concept of ‘hazard’ used in this context. But the translator TNS uses the word ‘luck’ in the place of hazard. He says that his luck shall be tested.

PSM has used the most colloquial form while rendering the idea of escaping of Launcelot Gobbo from Shylock his master. Gobbo’s conscience speaks to him as follows.

The fiend is at mine

elbow, and tempts me, saying to me, “Gobbo,

Launcelot Gobbo, good Laucalot,” or “Good Gobbo,”

Or “good Launcelot Gobbo, use your legs, take the

start, run away.”

(A.W.V.2.2.2-6)

PSM translates that he has to extend his legs, show a rod of sufficient length and start running. In fact, all these are well done to suit the Tamil audience and the readers because he has rendered this portion with musical effect of rhyme and alliteration. He has used the phrase

Kambi Kattu instead of Kambi Neetu which signifies running fast though seemingly deviated from the original and omitted the clause “use your legs”, it is well brought in by PSM. As Ivir says that, 27

literal translation is virtually ruled out (unless specially cited as

such) when it would directly clash with an existing expression in

the target language having a meaning which is more different than

that intended by the original sender. (40)

KPP has done it correctly. ARS has cut short and brought in the idea while TNS has rendered it exactly. Jokes can be translated. But all jokes won’t produce humorous effects. As Das says, “All jokes are translatable. But the translation of only some kind of jokes produce humorous effect similar to the one produced by the source language joke.”

(53)

Launcelot wants to play some tricks with his sand blind father Old

Gobbo in order to make fun of him.

Launcelot : Talk you of young Master Launcelot? ―

(Aside) Mark me now; now will I raise the waters. ―

Talk you of young Master Launcelot?

(E.C.P.2.2.42-44)

In this context, “now will I raise the waters” means to stirrup something rather than causing somebody to weep. PSM has translated that he would induce Old Gobbo to speak. He has managed to translate. KPP,

TNS and ARS rendered that Launcelot would make him (Old Gobbo) shed tears. It seems that they have given literal meaning of the phrase 28

“raise the waters.” Though it is a deviation, the translators have viewed the context in two different ways.

Gobbo expressing his state of mind to his son Launcelot, wants to thank God for the comforts He has given to them. In his own words, it is as follows:

Gubbo : No master, Sir, but a poor man’s son: his father,

though I say it, is an honest exceeding poor man,

and God be thanked, well to live.

(A.W.V.2.2.45-47)

PSM has omitted “well to live.” At the same time, he gives his own thought that God has given more than enough food. KPP says that by

God’s grace, there is enough to live. He has generalized it, though he has not omitted. ARS translates that by God’s grace he lives well and TNS says that he thanks God for making him still alive. Thus it could be inferred that, “Making him still alive” is a total deviation from the source text.

Laucelot finally says that Margery is his mother with a view to making Old Gobbo believe that he is none other than his own son.

and I am sure Margery

your wife is my mother

(A.W.V.2.2.81-82) 29

PSM has not omitted the sentence but, as usual he has localized the name

Margery as Maragathambal which is a familiar name in Tamil. The sound effect also is one and the same in both these names. The three other chosen translators for this study have retained the name Margery.

what a beard hast thou

got! thou hast got more hair on thy chin than Dobbin

my fill-horse has on his tail.

(A.W.V.2.2.85-87)

Originally “Fill-horse” means a hackney horse. It is not a toy. The other

three translators have done so exactly, while PSM has misinterpreted it

though not omitted.

While translating the Dobbin horse in the above lines, PSM has had

a confusion over the fill horse, it seems he has mistaken Dobbin for a toy

horse.

In the subsequent scene, PSM has misconceived the word

‘infection.’ It is a Malapropism. Old Gobbo uses this word with the

meaning of ‘affection’ only. But PSM has literally translated the line

uttered by Gobbo.

He hath a great infection, sir, as one would say,

to serve, ―

(A.W.V.2.2.114-115) 30

Swelling is one of the resultant effects of the infection. PSM says that

Launcelot has much swelling to serve. KPP and ARS say that, he is eager to serve as everybody says. TNS translates the context that he has an infectious disease, as everybody says, one to serve. Though all of them have not omitted it, they have viewed it in three different ways.

There is a reference to “Hyrcanian deserts” in the same Act II.

Prince of Morocco describes the beauty of Portia and suitors fascinated towards her from far off.

From the four corners of the earth they come,

To Kiss this shrine, this mortal-breathing saint:

The Hyrcanian deserts and the vasty wilds

Of wide Arabia are as thorough fares now

For Princes to come view fair Portia:

(A.W.V.2.7.39-43)

PSM has omitted Hyrcanian deserts and translated the rest of the text.

KPP changed Hyrcanian deserts into Hyrcanian forest. The rest of the two

translators have exactly done it.

PSM has totally omitted a part of an utterance of Salanio who

denies the words of Salarino on hearing Antonio’s ship wrecked on the

narrow seas; the Good wins. 31

… ever knapped ginger or made her neighbours believe

she wept for the death of a third husband.

(A.W.V.3.1.9-10)

But, at the same time, KPP, ARS and TNS have exactly brought in stating that it is a common belief like weeping by ginger consumed woman and also by a woman on the demise of her third husband. Though it is contrary to the Tamil custom. These three translators have rendered with a reference to English custom. They ultimately think so. They wish this news of ship wreck should be a gossip. It should not have happened that too in the life of their beloved friend Antonio.

Gratiano admits the fact that he gave the ring presented by Nerissa to a little boy who accompanied the disguised Portia. Gratiano says as follows:

Now, by this hand, I gave it to a youth,

A kind of boy, a little scrubbed boy,

No higher than thyself, the judge’s clerk;

A prating boy, that begg’d it as a fee:

I could not for my heart deny it him.

(A.W.V.5.1.161-165)

PSM has translated these verses very beautifully. But he did not take into account the phrase “a prating boy”, while he considered “a little scrubbed boy.” “A prating boy” means a boy who speaks in a stupid and boring 32 way. PSM might not have thought it necessary to describe the physical appearance of the boy. Thus he might have omitted. In fact, it is a slight hint that Gratiano has given it unwillingly to the clerk and he expresses his hatred towards him for being so adamant in getting the ring. So he says that the boy is a prating boy. TNS has said that the boy was very talkative. KPP has also brought out in the same way. He has not stated that he is a little scrubbed boy. But he has rendered that he is not taller than her. ARS has brought in the concept so exactly.

When the husband is dead, his wife is considered a widow. Portia says, she and her maid Nerissa will live as maids and widows until

Bassanio comes back after saving his friend from the clutches of the Jew

Shylock, the villain of the play. In the words of Portia,

My maid Nerissa and myself meantime

Will live as maids and widows. Come, away!

(A.W.V.3.2.304-305)

It is for emphatic purpose, Shakespeare has employed the word “widows” in this context. But PSM and ARS have omitted the word “widow” keeping in mind that Tamil audience or readers would not accept spinsters being called widows. In the views of KPP and TNS, they would live like maids and widows until Bassanio comes back. Thus, these two pairs of translators have viewed the text in two different ways. While former translators have omitted the word “widows” the latter translators have 33 taken it into account unmindful of the Tamil culture. It is as in the words of Ivir:

Literal translation is often regarded as the procedure for the filling

of the cultural and lexical gaps in translation, and, together with

borrowing, is the commonest method of cultural transference and

spread of influence from one culture to another. (39)

Gratiano says, if he had been the judge, he would have had ten

more persons to bring Shylock to the gallows instead of Christening him

with two god fathers. It is in his own words.

In christening shalt thou have two god fathers:

Had I been judge, thou shouldst have had ten more,

To bring thee to the gallows, not the font

(A.W.V.4.1.396-398)

PSM stops with saying that Shylock would have had one God father plus

three persons to hang him to the gallows if Gratiano had been the judge.

The Indian tradition is to have four persons to hang somebody and carry

the body in the litter. That is why PSM has done so. In the text, it has been

stated two god fathers. Here he has stated one god father. Apart from this

change, he has not mentioned anything about “not a font”, the term “font”

means a large stone bowl in a church that holds water for the ceremony of

Babtism. PSM might have thought that it is least important and so he has 34 omitted it. KPP has rendered it exactly. He did not even change the number of persons required to hang Shylock at the gallows.

ARS renders that if Gratiano had been the judge, he would not have ordered for Babtism rather he would have ordered for hanging him in the presence of ten great personalities. He has changed the text slightly. He has taken up the concept and not the literal meaning of the word font.

TNS says that Gratiano would have ordered for ten more god-fathers or priests to hang him and not to babtise him.

Portia pretends as if she were very angry with Bassanio for his having given her precious present of the gold ring to the judge. She says that she is prepared to do anything to regain the jewel from the judge. She goes to the extent of telling Bassanio that she would have that doctor his bed fellow as she is also equally liberal in giving others. So she asks him be vigilant at night without sleep. She speaks,

Lie not a night from home. Watch me like Argus.

If you do not, If I be left alone,

Now by my honour, which is yet my own,

I’ll have that doctor for my bedfellow.

(E.C.P.5.1.229-232)

PSM does not care for the sentence “Watch me like Argus.” He simply says, “Carefully watch me” which is less equivalent to the intended meaning. How Bassanio has to watch her whole night is clearly 35 expressed by Shakespeare. He should watch the palace wherein Portia lies, like Argus who in classical mythology is said to have 100 eyes and so

to be an all seeing watchman. PSM has not taken the significance of the

reference to Argus in this context very seriously. Thus he has ignored it.

KPP translates the sentence and as usual, in the foot-note he has explained

who Argus is. It is an animal with 100 eyes. ARS has slightly hinted that

Portia wished, the judge should not come to her house for ever. If he comes, she may have to love him and that may end in trouble. He does not talk about how Bassanio has to watch her. TNS says that the judge should not come to Portia’s house as she is equally gracious, she can’t deny to sacrifice him anything that she has. Thus TNS too has not touched upon

Argus. As Patankar says:

When a translator realizes that he can not give the ‘how’ as well as

the ‘what’ of the original, he usually regards it his chief

responsibility to be faithful to the ‘what’; consequently he gives the

‘how’ a secondary position. (63)

With respect to omissions, it is very limited as stated earlier. The select translators for this study have not omitted much. They have ignored

a few phrases or words and in some context a full sentence or line. The

omissions of these things are solely attributed to the omissions made in

the later and the latest editions of the original play. Of course the earliest 36 and earlier editions have all these lines. The pioneer of the four translators namely PSM has not omitted much.

2.2. Additions and changes

The translators were at liberty to add many ideas into the rendition of the source text to have a better clarity in the translation. The obvious example is that PSM has added several things. Ivir says:

Addition of cultural information may turn out to be a necessary

procedure in the translation of the implicit elements of culture. The

original sender, addressing an in-group of receivers with whom he

shares particular cultural knowledge leaves some things unsaid. As

soon as the presence of an in-group cannot be taken for granted,

even when no translation is involved, additional information is

readily supplied by the sender. (45)

Gratiano, a friend of Antonio and Bassanio while speaking to

Bassanio says as to how he would behave himself at the dinner. It is as

follows

Talk with respect, and swear but now and then,

Wear prayer-books in my pocket, look demurely;

Nay, more, while grace is saying, hood mine eyes

Thus with my hat, and sigh, and say amen;

(A.W.V.2.3.177-180) 37

Shakespeare stops with saying, ‘talk with respect’ but PSM adds

“Do not employ abused words while talking.” This is an addition to emphasize his personal behaviour that he is going to adopt. KPP and ARS translated the text as it is without any addition and ofcourse with a minor modification that is, “amen” into “ohm” and “amen” into “be it so”

respectively. TNS has also rendered exactly.

Shylock’s friend Tubal tells him that his daughter Jessica who

eloped with Lorenzo has spent four score ducats within one night. Shylock

gets shocked to hear this news from him. When he hears this news,

Shylock feels as if Tubal pierces in him a dagger. He thinks that he will

never see his hard earned gold again. Shylock, in his own words,

Thou stickest dagger in me: I shall never

see my gold again: fourscore ducats at a sitting!

four-score ducats!

(A.W.V.3.1.97-99)

Shakespeare says in general, he pierces in him. PSM adds a word “heart”

into which Tubal (Tublal) pricks Shylock. He has specially stated like this

because in Tamil it is the convention to speak like this. When something

goes wrong in one’s family, it is spoken that the adverse news pricks

one’s heart. To localize the concept, PSM and TNS have added the word

“heart.” ARS have multiplied four score into ducats and say clearly that

Jessica has spent eighty gold coins and KPP renders that her daughter has 38 spent so dakkatru. Shylock says that this news is pricking him with a dagger. Of course TNS did not add anything excepting the change of instrument that is, dagger into knife which is also almost equivalent to the dagger.

Bassanio is in dilemma, when he thinks about the selection of

casket. If only he chooses the right casket, he can marry Portia. That is

why he is frightened and fully in panic. He expresses his intention to

Portia.

Let me choose;

For, as I am, I live upon the racks

(A.W.V.3.2.24-25)

PSM does not stop with the fact that Bassanio is uncomfortable and he is in torment. He adds that he feels he is in a thorny drum. He has translated ‘rack’ into ‘thorny drum.’ The rest of the three selected translators for this study have rendered so exactly. The reason behind their success in rendering is that the translators are familiar not only with both the languages but also with literatures as stated by Das in Handbook of

Translation Studies “The translator of a literary text should be conversant not only with two languages but with two literatures. Here, comes the question of intertextuality” (97).

Jessica, the only daughter of Shylock the Jew is to be converted into Christian. Launcelot tight corners her speaking about the sins her 39 father has committed, she is damned and the price of hogs will raise if all the jews are converted into Christians. The way Launcelot speaks is not liked by Lorenzo, the lover of Jessica. Therefore he says,

I shall grow jealous of you shortly, Launcelot,

if you thus get my wife into corners.

(A.W.V.3.5.15-16)

PSM translates these two lines somewhat differently. He says that

Lorenzo will become jealous of Launcelot, if he shares any secret with his wife in the corners. There is not even hidden secrecy. But PSM adds the word ‘secret’. He might have thought getting the wife of somebody else into corners might mean different and to avoid the confusion, he has purposefully used the word ‘secret’ and surmounted the barrier. Compared to KPP, PSM has done better. KPP renders that Lorenzo will shortly suspect Launcelot if he takes his wife to the corner. He has totally deviated from the original by adding ‘taking my wife to the corner.’ In stead of growing jealous, it is said that he will suspect him. ARS says, if

Launcelot speaks with Jessica like that, Lorenzo will become angry with him and TNS renders that, if Launcelot takes Jessica to the corner,

Lorenzo will become jealous of him.

Shylock praises the intellectual capacity of Portia who is in

disguise as a judge. Shylock without knowing how to honour her says, 40

A Daniel come to judgement! Yea, a Daniel!

O wise young judge, how I do honour thee!

(A.M.V.4.1. 221-222)

PSM who decides to bring in the dramatic effect adds Aha which means

“What a great!.” Dharmarajave (with an emphatic usage he says so.

Dharmaraja is a king known for his generosity) has come to give verdict!

“Yes, you are none other than Dharmaraja. Yes you are! Though you are a youngster, much I respect you”, PSM says, Dharmaraja (a king known for his generosity, and rightful judgement) himself has come to the court of Venice to offer judgement on the case sued by Shylock against

Antonio. KPP and ARS have retained the idea and brought in clearly.

TNS has given an additional information about Daniel while the other translators say that Daniel is merely a judge. For the sake of Tamil readers and audience who are unfamiliar with Daniel, a Biblical name, he says

Daniel is one who wisely argued and freed a woman who was kept in the custody for a crime that she had not committed. This additional information helps the Tamil readers and viewers know something about

Daniel.

Before passing orders to Shylock to cut off a pound of flesh from

Antonio, Portia suggests the following to Shylock.

Therefore prepare thee to cut off the flesh.

Shed thou no blood, nor cut thou less nor more 41

But just a pound of flesh: if thou cut’st more

Or less than a just pound, ― be it but so much

As makes it light or heavy in the substance

Or the division of the twentieth part

Of one poor scruple, nay, if the scale to turn

But in the estimation of a hair, ―

Thou diest, and all thy goods are confiscate.

(A.W.V.4.1.322-330)

This, in fact is the climax of the play The Merchant of Venice. PSM

has rendered this argument in an ordinary way. He has translated the word

‘scruple’ differently. In fact he has added the name of a little black and red

coloured globular seed (Fz;Lkzp) which is very familiar to the Tamils.

Shakespeare intends to say the smallest quality i.e. one twentieth of the

scruple. The scruple he refers is Apothecaries’ weight for 20 grains. PSM

has replaced the word scruple with the seed (Fz;Lkzp). The emphatic

usage of “Shed thou no blood” is very ordinarily stated by him. ‘Even

a single drop of blood should not shed’, he translates like this. The effect

is less in this sentence compared to the original version. KPP has brought

in even the dramatic effect through his translation ‘shed no blood’ the

flesh cut off should not exceed one fourth of a grain instead of one in twentieth. With this slight change he has done. Since TNS’s rendering is 42 in prose form he has cut short and brought in the main idea of the text, as rightly opined by Nida and Taber:

“Translating must aim primarily at ‘reproducing the message.’

To do anything else is essentially false to one’s task as

a translator.” (12)

TNS did not take into account the excess or less quantity of flesh to be cut off. He speaks about the blood shed and ignored the quantity excepting what is stated in the bond executed by Antonio. Similarly ARS also has done it, ofcourse with a reference to the quantity of flesh.

The most fundamental assumption is that meaning can be separated

from its verbal expression. It is further assumed that semantically

equivalent expressions exist. Literary translators are not usually

satisfied with mere symbol substitution; they assume the additional

responsibility of making their translations as elegant and delectable

as the original. (Patankar 62)

The entire property of Shylock has been confiscated to the state of

Venice. Thus Sylock has no money even to buy a cord to hang himself.

Gratiano asks Shylock to beg for the cord.

Beg that thou mayst have leave to hang thyself:

And yet, thy wealth being forfeit to the state, 43

Thou hast not left the value of a cord;

Therefore thou must be hang’d at the state’s charge.

(A.W.V.4.1.362-365)

PSM translates that Shylock has to ask for permission to die at the gallows. Even in it, there is a problems, since his property has been confiscated to the state, he can not buy the rope to hang up. He is left without money. So, he must be hanged only at the expense of the state.

Here in this context, there is a reference to cord only. But PSM has replaced it with the gallows or halter gratis that finds a place in the subsequent utterance. He might have considered this and translated accordingly.

KPP and ARS have correctly rendered the text in this context, whereas TNS, with a view to making the Tamil readers understand clearly, has made it very colloquially. He says that Shylock has no money even to buy a yard of rope. This statement is proverbially spoken by the

Tamils on many such situations. So the translators resorted to familiar proverbial expression in Tamil and made use of it in explaining the text from the original.

Gratiano has given the ring presented to him by Nerissa to the clerk of the judge. But Nerissa does not believe it. Gratiano promises that he has given the ring to the clerk only as in the following argument. 44

By yonder moon I swear you do me wrong;

In faith, I gave it to the judge’s clerk:

Would he were dead that had it, for my part,

Since you do take it, love, so much to heart.

(A.W.V.5.1.142-145)

PSM has translated these lines with an addition that boy (clerk of the judge) must have been a eunuch instead of expressing his wish he were dead. Just because of him he is trapped now in the hands of Jessica.

ARS renders with an addition that Nerissa should not unnecessarily blame him. He did not give the ring to none other than the attendant of the judge.

TNS and KPP have translated exactly so. It is understandable therefore that if the original version is precise, the translators take liberty to add a bit more to make it clear for the readers of Tamil version.

Portia is so adamant to get the ring presented to Bassanio.

She does not want to accept anything else. She goes to the extent of threatening him that she can not be his wife until she sees the ring. In her own words, it is as follows.

Even so void is your false heart of truth.

By heaven, I will never be your wife

Until I see the ring.

(A.W.V.5.1.189-191) 45

PSM renders the second and third lines in a subtle way that, with a vow on Lord Shiva she won’t near his bed until she sees the ring again.

As he does not have the ring, in the same manner, he does not have any truth in his heart which therefore must be false. PSM would have stopped with what is there in the source, but he has enriched it by adding something here to the text. KPP has rendered it exactly. Similar to that of

PSM, ARS translates that Portia would not bed with Bassanio unless she sees the ring whereas TNS has stopped stating that Bassanio does not have truthfulness in his false heart. He does not refer to bed and to be his wife.

The ring episode ends with the admittance of two false statements uttered by Portia and Nerissa. They are as follows:

Portia : I had it of him. Pardon me, Bassanio,

For by this ring the doctor lay with me.

(E.C.P.5.1.257-258)

Nerissa, on her part says,

And pardon me my gentle Gratiano,

For that same scrubbed boy, the doctor’s clerk,

In lieu of this last night did lie with me.

(E.C.P.5.1. 259-261)

In the above statement of Portia, there is no reference to night at

all. But PSM has added that the judge who got the ring from Bassanio was

with Portia the previous night. Nerissa says that the scrubbed boy, her 46 doctor’s clerk having given this ring was sleeping with her the previous night. PSM has gone through the speeches of Nerissa and come to a conclusion that it was the previous night only with respect to Portia. The latest editions do not refer not only to the time but also to the text that the judge was lying with Portia. KPP has not translated these lines since these lines have sexual undertone. Similarly ARS and TNS have omitted these

two utterances for being very sexy.

The cultural background of the Tamils is that an eligible spinster

would never say and that too to her fiancé that she had shared her bed with

somebody else. Even sportively no girl or woman would speak like this.

Hence the omission of this passage by ARS and TNS is, in a way justified.

Shakespeare has referred to the Hyrcanian deserts in the second

Act. The Prince of Morocco says that suitors of Portia have made the

Hyrcanian deserts and the vasty wilds of wide Arabia as common ways to

come to Belmont. The prince of Morocco says:

The Hyrcanian deserts and the vasty wilds

Of wide Arabia are as throughfares now

(E.C.P.2.7. 41-42)

Of the chosen translators, it is only TNS who has added Hyrcanian deserts

as the deserts filled with tigers, whereas others have not stated any thing

about the deserts. 47

TNS has added several details whenever required. He has given

English verse in brackets in his translation. First he gives translation and

followed by this, within brackets he gives the original English version.

Translation must have been purely in Tamil. The reason for giving

English version is clear that the readers who have even little English

knowledge can thoroughly understand. The examples of such inclusions

of English versions are as given below.

“You are sad because you are not merry.” TNS has bracketed this

sentence. In fact, he gives the meaning of the lines uttered by Salarino.

Then let us say you are sad

Because you are not merry;

(E.C.P.1.1.47-48)

Antonio convinces Gratiano by telling him that the world is a stage.

Everyone has to play a role and his part is a sad one. TNS translates the

utterances into Tamil and gives them in bracket also. The bracketed

utterance in the source text is,

I hold the world but as the world, Gratiano ―

A stage, where every man must play a part,

And mine is a sad one.

(A.W.V.1.1.77-79)

When Bassanio describes the beauty of Portia, he says that she is

fair and fairer than that word. TNS translates very beautifully. At the same 48 time he gives the phrase ‘Fairer than that word’ in bracket. Similarly throughout the play, wherever he feels that it is necessary to give the

English version also, he gives the original version or at least the meanings

of the utterances in brackets. This, in a way, helps the readers understand

the concepts thoroughly.

TNS introduces the second scene of Act II with an additional

explanation to the readers. Launcelot Gobbo a servant of Shylock hails

from a village adjacent to the city of Venice. His father Gobbo is a small

farmer. He has had a horse namely Dobbin. He reared doves. Occasionally

he would pay a visit to the city to see how his son is.

This information is not in the original text. But TNS, one of the

chosen translators for this study has additionally given this, for the sake of the Tamil readers. At the concluding part of the scene one of the second

Act also, the translator has added some details as follows.

As soon as Antonio signed the bond, Bassanio got three thousand

gold coins (in the source text it is three thousand ducats) from Shylock

and hired a ship to leave for Belmont. He was making arrangements to

take a few companions with him. This sort of addition he is making

throughout the play.

The food habit, food taking time and number of times of the

English are totally different from that of Indians. To bring in this 49 difference, TNS lucidly explains in a full page while translating the order for food arrangements given by Bassanio, to one of his attendants.

You may do so; but let it be so hasted that

supper be ready at the furthest by five of the clock.

(A.W.V.2.2.104-105)

Dukes, upper class people and the students would take their lunch by

11.00 a.m. and the supper between 5.00 and 6.00 p.m.. Businessmen would take their lunch by 12.00 noon and the supper by 6.00 p.m. and farmers would have their lunch by 12.00 noon and the supper by 8.00 p.m.

It was the convention to take food daily twice. The children, patients and those who wake up at the week hours would eat thrice a day and sometime not in time.

It is certain that this sort of additional inputs helps the readers. The translator makes his readers be aware of the food habits of the English among the readers of his rendering. ARS has also added a few phrases and lines for the purpose of clarity. Before introducing the second scene of Act

II, he gives a short information about the entry of Launcelot Gobbo, the servant of Shylock, and he is not only a servant but also a jester in this

play. This additional information prepares the audience or the readers to

be ready for a comic relief.

Shylock had a bad dream the previous night. He related it to his

daughter and made her be alert, since he was going to attend a party. 50

Normally this sort of dream is said to be a good omen for Tamils. But

Shylock considered it adversely. Thus ARS gives the real effect of the dream within bracket that it is good omen but Shylock assumed it into a bad one taking it for his convenience. His real intention is to make his daughter be alert. Similarly, in the seventh scene of the same Act, he has given a valid information about the future of the Prince of Morocco, since he did not choose the right casket. It is given in bracket that the Prince of

Morocco sadly returns with his attendant and followers. As per the vow made by him before selecting the casket, he can never marry anybody since he has chosen the wrong casket. He has to spend his life without marrying anybody. He concludes like this.

Change of Dramatis Personae into Identical Tamil Names

The Tamil readers cannot exactly spell the English characters of

the plays of Shakespeare or of any other English writers. To facilitate the

Tamil readers, viewers and enactors of the plays, the translators replaced

the names of English characters with the typical Tamil names. PSM has

given identical Tamil names to the English characters as follows.

The Tamilisation of English names is not made at random. PSM has paid some attention to this to change the names either mnemonically or semantically or phonemically. For example Venice become

Vaneepuram. The word Belmont must have reminded him of Bell. Hence 51 he changed it into Manipuram – since the Tamil meaning of the word Bell

is Mani. Shylock is a money lender and his name is altered into Sham Lal.

Words ending with Lal is reminiscent of Jain money-lenders in Tamil

Nadu. This is how PSM has converted the English proper names into

Tamil with a real significance and sense.

Changes Made in the Names of Characters, Places and Religions

Shakespeare’s Version PSM’s Version Duke of Venice VÀõÁpuratharasa¸ Prince of Morocco MÀrthaõda Sethupathy Prince of Arrangon Arugapuratharasa¸ Antonio °¸anthanÀtha¸ Bassanio BÀ¸us¼¸a¸ Salanio S½manÀtha¸ Salarino Sambantha¸ Gratiano GirijanÀtha¸ Salario S½meœwara¸ Lorenzo LÁlÀthara¸ Shylock ShÀm LÀl Tubal TublÀl Launcelot Gubbo LÀvanyÀ KabÁra¸ Old Gubbo Vay½thiga KabÁra¸ Leonardo K¼sarinÀtha¸ Balthazar BÀladÀsa¸ Stephano ŒthavÁra¸ Portia Sar½ji¸i Jessica Jalaja

52

Places

Shakespeare’s Version PSM’s Version

Venice VÀõÁpuram

Belmont Maõipuram

Religions

Shakespeare’s Version PSM’s Version Christianity Hindu Jews Jain and Hebrew

Gods

Shakespeare’s Version PSM’s Version Christian God Hindu God

Shakespeare’s Version KPP’s Version

Duke of Venice Venice K½maka¸

Prince of Morocco Morocco V¼ntha¸

Prince of Arragon Arragon Prabu

Significance of the Names of Shakespeare’s Characters

Shakespeare has very cleverly named his characters in all his plays.

In the chosen play for this study also he has created his characters subtly.

As far as the name of Shylock is concerned, the origin or source of it is uncertain. A critic named Staunton says that this name may have been an 53

Italian name, Scialocca, the change of which into Shylock was natural.

Another critic Hunter writes. “We collect that Shylock was Levantine Jew form the name Scialac.” It seems more likely that the tract mentioned by

Staunton was older than the play and that “Caleb Shilock” suggested

Shylock (A.W.V., “Introduction” xxiii).

Nerissa is the Italian Nericcia (from nero) and signifies “the black haired” and she is contrast to Portia. To all appearance Jessica is borrowed from Genesis XI. In the Hebrew it is Jescah signifying a spy or a looker- out. No doubt she is looking-out for Lorenzo to elope with him on contrary to the expectations of Shylock, her father. Gobbo is the surname of Launcelot. It means “hump backed”. It is said to be quite common in

Italy. In fact it was the name of an ancient stone in the market–place of

Venice.

PSM has named Shylock as Shamlal. He has taken into account only his merchandise that is, money lending and found out equivalent group of people doing the same business in India. Of course he does not care for the other aspects of the name as identified by the Editor of the play A.W. Verity through the critics Staunton and Hunter.

He has named Nerissa as Neelakesi. In the original play with the intention of signifying her black hair, she has been named so. PSM has taken into account only the hair that is Kesam in Tamil. He has slightly modified the part of her name Kesam also into Kesi. He could have named 54

Nerissa as Karkuzhali (Black haired) which could be more equivalent, appropriate and meaningful than Neelakesi.

Pammal names Jessica as Jalaja excepting the phonemic retention

of the name that too to some extent, he has managed to render without

bringing in any significance of the original name. He names Launcelot

Gobbo as Lavanya Kabeeran. This name also has no symbolic

significance.

KPP has named Shylock as Shylock only whereas ARS and TNS

changed Shylock into Shyluck. It is with a small shift in vowel, they have

named-“lock” becomes “luck” here. SVK retains Nerissa, Jessica and

Launcelot Gobbo as they are but he changes old Gobbo into Vayothika

Gobbo. It is more appropriate to name “old” as Vayothika in Tamil. ARS

and TNS also retain Nerrisa, Jessica and Launcelot without any

modification in the names. At the same time old Gabbo into Gubbo.

Excepting PSM others have not paid that much importance to

change of names or revealing the true nature of the characters.

PSM has renamed these characters and their religions very suitably.

Shylock, the money lender and antagonist of this play is equivalent to

Shamlal. “Lals”, a group of people in India are well known for money

lending business especially for higher rate of interest as referred to earlier.

They are originally from the state of Rajasthan especially from Marwar

region of the state. Thus he has most appropriately preferred the name 55

Shamlal to Shylock. System of ruling the small provinces with Dukes was prevalent in England. This is new to Tamil readers. So he named the

Dukes as Kings.

He has changed even the minor characters and names referred to classical allusions, to The Bible and other classical literatures. The examples are as follows:

Minor characters

Shakespeare’s version PSM’s version

Jacob Thigambarar

Laban Œwath¼mbarar

Holy Abraham ThÁrthaôgarar

Hercules BÁma

Lichas Briôgi Mahariœhi

Alcides (Hercules) Arju¸a

Margery MaragathammÀl

Change of proper nouns (places)

PSM has not only changed the names of characters but also the places. He has changed Arragon into Arugapuram and Venice into

Vaneeppuram as stated earlier.

Translators like KPP, ARS and TNS have retained the English names as they are in the original play. This shows that the care and attention of PSM towards the art of translation is much deeper than KPP, 56

ARS and TNS. This is not to upgrade or degrade one from the other but to present the performance of the translators in proper perspective.

Thus PSM has changed the names of places into Tamil names with a symbolic significance.

Names of places

Shakespeare’s version PSM’s version Belmont Maõipuram Maõi (Bell, Puram-area) Venice VÀõÁpuram [Place where business transactions take place] Paudua MathurÀ Lisbon Tuticorin (a harbour in Tamil Nadu) Barbary Bangladesh Rome Ramanathapuram (a sea shore town in Tamil Nadu)

Similarly the other places and proper nouns are renamed as follows

Shakespeare’s version PSM’s version Tripolis Tiripuram/TirupÀpuliyÂr Indies Bangladesh Rialto Revuthurai Mexico Naval Tibet and Kerala on another context England ChiõgaÒam (Sri Lanka) The Goodwins PÀmba¸ Guda Frank Fort BinÀôg½ K½ÇÇai (Fort) Barbary VaôgÀÒam Lisbon ThÂthukudi (Tuticorin) Genoa Tuticorin India KÂrjara¸s

57

PSM’s attempt deserves appreciations of all those who read and view the play. In the words of Arangasamy:

Pammal re-oriented the plays of Shakespeare to suit the tastes of

the Tamil theatre goers. But yet the bold localization did not lead to

the serious distortion of the plays whose plot and characterization

were kept intact. (26)

Shakespeare himself was adept in naming the characters in many

plays. Some of his characters would reveal the true nature of the person or

business. By naming Shylock, he proved that Shylock would indulge

unashamedly in any vicious deeds. But PSM has gone a step ahead and

brought out the true picture of the person that he is none other than

a money lender by naming him Shamlal very much suitable to the Indian

context.

KPP has typically adapted and sometimes transliterated the names

with slight modification. He has changed the personae as follows.

Shakespeare’s version KPP’s version

Duke of Venice Venice K½maga¸ (K½maga¸ in Tamil = King)

Prince of Morocco Morocco V¼ntha¸ (V¼ntha¸ in Tamil = King)

Prince of Arragon Arrago¸ Prabu (Prabu in Tamil = Duke)

Antonio Anthonio

He has retained the rests of the characters as they are, ARS and

TNS have also followed the pattern of the translator KPP. 58

2.3. Changing the concept of the text to suit the Tamil Audience

The chosen translators were at liberty to change the ideas and version of the text to suit the taste of the Tamil audience or the readers and rendered it. If an English man wants to state something about the heartless or merciless attitude of any man, he usually says, that he is void and empty from dram of mercy as lucidly explained in the chapter III of this thesis under the subtitle “culture.”

Most of the translators literally translate from the source text. As far as KPP is concerned, he grasps the total idea of the entire utterance and renders it. When he does so, there are not much deviations. The obvious example is the description of the Duke of Venice in delineating the cunning and merciless attitude of Shylock the antagonist.

Shylock is merciless to the core. He is inhuman. Not even a small quantity of mercy equivalent to any dram can be expected of from him.

KPP stops saying that he does not have even small quantity of mercy. His stony heart can never be melted. At the same time Goddard says:

Not all, of course, go that far. There have been many to point out

that Shylock is by no means a monster. He has traits that humanize

him and excite our sympathy. But those who vindicate Shakespeare

do so in a bold or ringing tone. They are timid, or qualified, or even

apologetic. The thought of how the Elizabethan crowd at any rate

must have taken Shylock makes them shudder. (81) 59

In order to help Bassanio, Antonio had to borrow three thousand ducats, the gold coins used in European countries. PSM translates three thousand ducats as three thousand sovereign. In India gold coins were in use but not as currency of the Nation. Therefore he finds this as its equivalent.

In the Act I of Scene iii, KPP uses the word ducat as dakkatru

(lf;fw;W) with a foot-note explanation that it is a kind of currency used (in page no.22 in his rendering).

Shylock tries his level best to justify the obtaining of interest for the amount lent is no doubt acceptable, a good thing. He quotes examples from The Bible. To criticize his ways of justification Antonio says,

Mark you this, Bassanio,

The devil can cite Scriptures for his purpose.

An evil soul, producing holy witness,

Is like a villain with a smiling cheek

A goodly apple rotten at the heart

O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!

(A.W.V.1.3.86-91)

Portia praises the intelligence of all the wooers as follows.

I am glad this parcel of wooers are

so reasonable;

(A.W.V.1.2.100-101) 60

KPP literally translates the word “Parcel” into Tamil as “a gunny bag full of wooers” somehow or other he has managed to translate the word “parcel.”

To denote “the scripture” the holy Bible, the translator uses the phrase Shathya Veda which is easily understandable to the Tamil audience

and the readers as well. In stead of using the word “apple” he has

generalized the word as rotten fruit which means any fruit. Normally The

Bible is quoted by honest people. But here in this case, the villain is citing.

Thus it is ridiculous when it is referred to by a cunning villain like

Shylock. Though the employment of this idea is contrast, the translator has very rightly done it. He has made it non-verbatim to suit the Tamil audience and the readers.

The intervention of Shylock by his entry while Solanio and Salerio are speaking about the loss of a ship of Antonio, is related to the entry of a devil in the form of Shylock. Solanio wishes he were not entering and says,

Let me say ‘amen’ betimes, lest the devil cross my prayer,

for here he comes in the likeness of a Jew.

(E.C.P.3.1.16-17)

It is very difficult to have equivalent for ‘amen’ in Tamil, that too, to suit the Hindu Tradition. According to Hindus, it is their habit to chant the monosyllabic ohm on such an occasion. Thus the translator has very 61 cleverly employed the word ohm for “amen.” More justification is that the ohm is a word of sanctity in Hinduism as much as “Amen” in Christianity.

It is obvious therefore that the translator has very carefully and justifiably effected the replacement.

There are references to white wine obtained from Rhine Valley

popularly known as Rhenish and red wine. These references are made by

Salerio to compare the colours of Shylock’s daughter Jessica and Lorenzo her lover. Jessica eloped with a Christian namely Lorenzo.

Salerio says,

There is more difference between thy flesh and hers than

between jet and ivory, more between your bloods than there is

between red wine and Rhenish.

(E.C.P.3.1.32-35)

Another reference to Lord Shiva is made by the translator in Act

III, Scene iv. For the sake of Bassanio, Portia has a secret vow to live in prayer.

Until my Lord’s return. For mine own part

I have toward heaven breathed a secret vow

To live in prayer and contemplation,

(A.W.V.3.4.26-28)

Normally the word heaven refers to God. In this context the translator prefers the Hindu God “Lord Shiva” in stead of Jesus Christ, 62 having been mindful of the Tamil audience and readers. Another remarkable thing is that “vow” is a promise only, but he says that it is undertaking of fasting by Portia on her part towards the safe return of her husband Bassanio.

The Tamil tradition brands a culprit as a culprit, a criminal as a criminal and a villain as a villain only, unless or otherwise the speaker intends to criticize the fellow with a sarcastic or farcical remark. As

a Christian, Antonio is very much merciful. He does not want to avenge or

revenge anybody, not only by an evil deed against the offender but also

with hurting or impolite words. He wishes Shylock, as ‘good Shylock’

even when Shylock doesn’t yield to what he demands, remains adamant

and goes on insisting to proceed as per the executed bond.

“Hear me yet, good Shylock”

(E.C.P.3.3.3)

PSM tackles this in a different way by making it in a colloquial

form. As a child pleads its father, Antonio requests Shylock, ‘oh father!,

please listen to me sometimes.’

The translator KPP has bracketed the phrase “Good Shylock’ and

made the readers or audience not to bother about it. It is a beautiful and

befitting addition made by the translator.

KPP very aptly retains all the English names of personae and

places as they are in the source excepting very minimal phonemic changes 63 that too, if it were inevitable. Antonio remains Antonio until the middle of

Scene i, Act IV. When he gets into trouble and cannot escape from the clutches of Shylock, as stated in the bond executed by him, KPP purposefully changes the name by cutting short Antonio into “Antho.” It has got its own significance in Tamil. It is obviously true. Antonio is in a

pitiable state that Antho means the same. But at the same time he has

abridged the rest of the names of characters also at the fag end of the play.

Here it is significant. When Portia asks Antonio in the court,

Of a strange nature is suit you follow;

Yet in such a rule, that the Venetian law

Cannot impugn you as you do proceed ―

[To Antonio] You stand within his danger, do you not?

(A.W.V.4.1.175-178)

Thus it could be inferred that in the context KPP changes the name

Antonio into “Antho” is the most appropriate and highly deserving the

appreciation of the readers.

To suit Tamil audience and readers, KPP has localised several

things. In fact the very objective of every translator is to take the message

to the readers or to the audience with absolute clarity. Antonio thinks of

his plight and expresses. 64

I am a tainted wether of the flock,

Meetest for death: the weakest kind of fruit

Drops earliest to the ground; and so let me:

(A.W.V.4.1.114-116)

The fruit mentioned here is a common one. But the translator

specifically stated that it is the weakest mango fruit that drops earliest. It

is a quite common sight to see this particular variety of unriped ones fall

down plenty at the early stage itself. Mindful of making the text with

better clarity, he has referred to the mango fruit with which all the Tamil

readers are very familiar.

In the same scene Shylock busily sharpens his knife. Bassanio asks

him the reason why he sharpens it so earnestly. He replies that it is to cut

off a pound of flesh from Antonio as per the deed.

Bassanio : Why dost thou whet thy knife so earnestly?

Shylock : To cut the forfeiture from that bankrupt there.

(A.W.V.4.1.121-122)

Any borrower is bound to repay what he has borrowed either before time or on time. In fact it is his sole responsibility. As far as

Shylock is concerned, to kill Antonio is his primary aim. KPP has cleverly brought in this idea with a small change in the syntax. 65

jPh;j;jplf; flid

tif xd;W ,d;wpkw; wh';nf epw;gt

dplj;Jmg uhjk; mWj;bjLj; jplw;nf. (120-121)

He has intentionally played a wordy trick to bring out the revenging mood of Shylock first.

Even the mood of the speaker is exactly brought in to the translated

text by KPP. Portia orders Shylock.

Have by some surgeon, Shylock, on your charge,

To stop his wounds, lest he do bleed to death.

(A.W.V.4.1.255-256)

Immediately he reacts to this order of Portia by saying.

Is it so nominated in the bond?

(A.W.V.4.1.257)

“mt;tzk; Mtze; jdpy; miwe;Jsnjh?” (128)

Very appropriately KPP has brought in the reaction of the respondent with a high raising tone and alliteration though it is not that much effectively stated in the source text. Thus, this rendered version proves to be more effective than the source text to some extent. This does not mean that the translator goes far beyond his limit of confining himself with the original but to enlighten his readers in Tamil with as much comprehensiveness as possible. 66

There are references to the Hindu God “Lord Shiva” in the translated version of KPP. Portia as a lawyer describes the quality of mercy. She speaks a lot about the quality of mercy.

It is enthroned in the hearts of kings,

It is an attribute to God himself;

(A.W.V.4.1.192-193)

Shakespeare refers to God in general but KPP says that it is Easan

(Lord Shiva) to make the Tamils understand the concept easily.

A Christian Portia swears by the name of a Hindu God may be paradoxical but the translator has kept in mind, the taste and familiarity of the Tamil readers.

At last Shylock is utterly bereft all his property and his only heir.

He does not have money even to buy a coir to hang himself. He must be hanged at the state’s charge. His plight is spoken out by Gratiano.

Thou hast not left the value of a cord;

Therefore thou must be hang’d at the state’s charge.

(A.W.V.4.1.364-365)

The state’s charge again means that it is at the mercy of the Duke he is depending on even to be hanged. Here the translator has introduced a typical name Parthiban at whose expense he must be hanged. It could be inferred that the Tamil audiences are familiar with Parthiban rather than the Duke of the state. Thus he says very appropriately. 67

Portia says,

The crow doth sing as sweetly as the lark,

(A.W.V.5.1.102)

The goose is referred here in stead of lark. The bird lark is

unfamiliar to Tamils. Thus he uses goose which is a known bird to all.

fk;g[s;nghy; ,dpjhf; fhfKk; ghoLk;. (KPP 148)

The crow also can sing as sweetly as the lark. KPP renders like

this. He renders lark into Kambul. He could have used the word

Vanambaadi which is kind of song bird familiar to Tamils and equivalent

to the lark. He renders the bird nightingale into Vankozhi, a bird belongs

to poultry taking into account what is given in the subsequent line.

Shylock expresses his grievances against Antonio and even blames

him for lending money on the basis of graze competing him in the money

lending market in Venice. In the words of Shylock,

He lends out money gratis and brings down

The rate of usance here with us in Venice

(E.C.P.1.3.36-37)

PSM refers to a goddess “Vattilava Devi” in his rendering. The

name of the goddess reveals if she is worshipped by the money lenders

she will make them prosper through the interest collection. Vatti is

nothing but interest Laba (Lavam in colloquial) is profit and Devi is the

Goddess. But there is no such reference to the Goddess in the original and 68 not even in Tamil. PSM has beautifully coined the name of the goddess.

Thus the translation becomes transcreation as in the words of Mukherjee,

“Faced by such a variety of material, the translator must edit, reconcile and transmute: his job in many ways becomes largely a matter of translation.” (9)

As such there is no goddess of interest stated by PSM, TNS and

ARS have not referred to any goddess in their renderings. But they have rendered exactly what is there in the text.

KPP renders that Antonio has brought down the rate of interest and therefore the jews have become unlucky in getting higher rate of interest.

And so Shylock hates Antonio.

In the same scene Shylock blames Antonio’s criticism on the Jews, thus,

He hates our sacred nation; and he rails,

Even there where merchants most be congregate,

(A.W.V.1.3.45-46)

Shylock speaks to himself like this. Antonio has vehemently criticized Shylock on many an occasion, that too in the presence of other merchants. PSM translates the line, “He hates our sacred nation” very beautifully. He says that Antonio hates our sacred people (Jewis). He has changed the nation into people because here Jews live in the same nation and they can not be isolated from the Christians in Venice. KPP says that 69 it is (Kulam) religion instead of Nation. ARS and TNS render nation as community (Enam). Thus all these translators have understood the concept and rendered ‘the nation’ as Jewish. They have changed the word without being verbatim. TNS has rendered that he would break his hip

using this opportunity while others have not touched upon it.

PSM changes apple into fig in the following context.

Antonio : A goodly apple rotten at the heart:

O, what a goodly outside falsehood hath!

(A.W.V.1.3.89-90)

Antonio says Shylock is equivalent to an apple that looks so good

outside whereas the reality is that it is rotten inside. He appears to be such

an apple. PSM not only makes additions for clarity but also changes

things to suit the Tamils. The fig fruit is more popular among Tamils than

apples. KPP renders that Shylock besides being a smiling villain, appears

to be a fruit that has beautiful outlook whereas it is rotten inside. He has

generalized the fruit as any fruit. TNS and ARS say apple as apple only

and rendered its appearance and quality as stated by Shakespeare.

All these four chosen translators have rendered how Antonio had

criticized the habit of obtaining exorbitant rate of interest collected by

Shylock. Shylock says it in his own words. 70

Signior Antonio, many a time and oft

In the Rialto you have rated me

About my moneys and my usances:

(A.W.V.1.3.95-97)

The translators have viewed it unique. They rendered the second line similar. “You have rated me” is considered as “You have scolded me.” Though these words “rated” and “scolded” are not equals, they have studied thoroughly, understood the concept and rendered it exactly. This is one of the obvious examples for their not being verbatim in translating the play. They have just changed the word but brought in the real meaning of the text.

Launcelot could not decide whether to leave his master Shylock or to continue his job with him. In fact he is in dilemma. His conscience speaks to him.

“My honest friend Launcelot, being an honest

man’s son” ― or rather an honest woman’s son; ― well

my conscience says, “Launcelot, budge not”.

(A.W.V.2.2.14-16)

There is a slight hint on the characteristics of Launcelot’s father.

He is not better than his wife Margery (mother of Launcelot). PSM very cleverly says that Launcelot’s father is just a different type of person. He has some bad habits. He finds tasty in it (vd; jfg;gdhh; xU khjphp/ 71 bfh";rk; cz;L/ me;j tp\aj;jpy; bfh";rk; Urp). (26) He has elaborately rendered. He has added a few more vicious attitudes of

Launcelot’s father keeping the slight hint that is stated in these lines. KPP has stated that Launcelot’s father was an honest man and his mother was

so pious. He has not stated anything against his father whereas he has

enriched the attitude of his mother saying that she was a pious woman.

ARS has rendered that Launcelot is the son of an honest father and an

honest mother. The latter pair of translators did not add anything.

PSM one of the chosen translators for this study has added several

details in his rendering. Gratiano assures Bassanio that he will behave

properly in Belmont and so he should be permitted to go with him to

Belmont. Gratiano says,

Signor Bassanio, hear me:

If I do not put on sober habit,

Talk with respect, and swear but now and then,

Wear prayer-books in my pocket, look demurely;

Nay, more, while grace is saying, hood mine eyes

Thus with my hat, and sigh, and say amen;

Use all the observance of civility,

Like one well studied in a sad ostent

To please his grandam, ― never trust me more.

(A.W.V.2.2.175-183) 72

PSM has totally localized these ideas to suit the Tamil readers and viewers. He has rendered that, when he is in Belmont, he will talk with

great respect, he will behave like a highly regarded person, he will not

employ absurd words, he will wear Rudratza garland, he will look sacred and before meals, he will wear holy ashes like line sketched marks, will chant Santhiya Vanthanam (re;jpah te;jdk;) a kind of chanting of

hymns and behave like a Vedanthiri (sage) who has foregone the worldly

attachment. “If I do not wish them with greetings, you need not believe

my words afterwards.” He has even deviated from the original and

omitted the last two lines upto “grandma” which has a comparison. KPP

changes “amen” into Ohm to suit Tamils. He has translated fully and even

exactly. TNS has rendered “amen” into “be it so” and rendered the entire

text excepting this change. ARS has rendered that Gratiano will keep the

Bible and say “be it so” and within bracket he says “Amen” in Tamil and rendered the other concepts correctly.

If Shylock, the villain of the play comes to heaven after his demise, it will be for the sake of his good daughter otherwise it will be impossible for him to gain entry into Heaven, Lorenzo, the lover of Jessica ascertains,

If e’er the Jew her father come to heaven,

It will be for his gentle daughter’s sake:

And never dare misfortune cross her foot, 73

Unless she do it under this excuse,

That she is issue to a faithless Jew

(A.W.V.2.4.33-37)

PSM has translated the word ‘misfortune’ into Saithan (Satan).

Similarly he has translated the phrase ‘faithless Jew’ into Atheist Jain. In case Satan desires to suffer her, it would be just because of the fact that she is the daughter of Shylock, the faithless Jain (Jew) and not because of her deed. KPP has translated as it is and TNS has rendered that misfortune

would not near her and never dare to near her. He has rendered the rest of

the lines correctly. ARS has rendered, in case Shylock goes to heaven (he

will not go), that will be because of his daughter’s virtuous deeds. Jessica

will not face any misery or misfortune. If she has to face any such, it will

be because of her father’s sin only. Of the four translators, PSM has

localized the concept by including Saithan (Satan) in this context.

PSM has brought in even the rising tone so exactly while rendering

a question with angry tone. Both Shylock and his servant Launcelot are

about to leave for a supper. While Shylock is talking to him, interrupting

Launcelot calls Jessica. Shylock becomes angry and he asks him,

Shylock : Who bids thee call? I do not bid thee call.

Launcelot : Your worship was wont to call me I could

do nothing without bidding.

(A.W.V.2.5.6-8) 74

PSM renders, “Who asked you to call? I did not ask you to call.”

He has beautifully rendered the next utterance also. “You have already

told me many a time that I should not do anything without your

permission.” Launcelot recalled it. KPP has rendered “Who ordered you

to call? I did not ask you to do so.” He has rendered the utterance of

Launcelot exactly. ARS has just conveyed the meaning. TNS has rendered

the first utterance with a rising tone and the second utterance as it is.

Launcelot requests Shylock to go for dinner stating that Bassanio is

waiting for his reproach. He uses the term “reproach” instead of

“approach” or arrival because he is a jester. The term ‘arrival’ means the

proposed income also. Shylock also pays heed to what he says

comprehending what he intended to say. At that time Launcelot says, there shall be no masque recalling an omen that he had it as follows.

And they have conspired together, ― I will

not say you shall see a masque; but if you do, then it

was not for nothing that my nose fell a–bleeding on

Black-Monday last at six o’ clock’i, the morning, falling

out that year on Ash-Wednesday was four year in the afternoon

(A.W.V.2.5.22-27)

The two days referred to here in this context have got their own significance. PSM has localized the concept. He changed Ash-Wednesday into Pongal, a harvest festival of all Tamils and Black Monday into 75

KarunÀl an inauspicious day. On the day of Pongal celebration which fell on the Black Monday, some four years back, Launcelot had a dream of bleeding from his nose. It was in practice among the Elizabethan people to say like this especially to denote something that is going to happen adversely and unexpectedly. In this context it is more suitable to refer to this because Jessica is going to elope with Lorenzo. KPP explains in the foot-note that Ash-Wednesday is one of the festivals of Roman Catholic.

Easter is another such festival. Both Monday morning and Wednesday evening fell together, Launcelot says that his nose was bleeding. TNS renders that Shylock is expecting only income from him. The words

“arrival” and “income” are synonymous in Tamil that is, varavu. He did not give any reference to Ash-Wednesday and Black Monday. ARS has bracketed the intention of the speaker (Launcelot) that he is speaking funny and sarcastically. He has rendered the inauspicious aspect of his dream that his nose was bleeding at 6 a.m. on the day of Easter Monday.

He did not refer to Ash-Wednesday. Infact this utterance of Launcelot appears to be deliberate gibberish, mocking the common style of prognostication. Somehow or other, the chosen translators have managed to translate this utterance with omission and also addition.

A typical critic of these translations may question the justifiability of such free handling of the source material by the translators. He may even disapprove of such deviations, deletions and in certain cases 76 additions. But what should be kept in mind is that the primary aim of the translators is to make the passages, episodes, allusions and other references are easily understandable to an audience and readers who are in a time-lag of about four hundred years after Shakespeare. Hence their occasional tampering of Shakespeare need not be seriously viewed.

On his leaving for dinner, Shylock advises his daughter to remain within after shutting the house and also says that he will return immediately. To emphasize his advice, he uses a proverb.

― well, Jessica, go in:

Perhaps I will return immediately:

Do as I bid you; shut doors after you:

Fast bind, fast find;

A proverb never stale in thrifty mind.

(A.W.V.2.5.51-55)

PSM has fully localized the concept throughout the play. He

changes even drum a very popular and common musical instrument

among English into Mruthangam an equivalent banging instrument

familiar to Tamils. Similarly the above utterance of Shylock has been

localized, at the same time it is notable that it is not verbatim. He says that lazy cannot live with Shylock. In the original it is the drones that can not live with him. The drones are well known for their industrious and dynamic behaviour. He brings in the meaning of the proverb “Fast bind, 77 fast find” as “If you build strong, you can find strength” (bfl;oaha;f; fl;odhy;/ jpl;lkha;f; fhzyhk;). This proverb insists one who is prudent for ever is meaningful to one’s heart. The Tamil readers would certainly understand the proverb beyond any doubt. As discussed earlier, it is not so easy to translate the English proverbs since there are no equivalent proverbs in Tamil.

KPP renders this proverb as tightly twisted things would be found in small size (,Wf;fg; gpzpe;jit RWf;fpw; fhzyhk;). TNS renders it as things that are fastened tightly would soon be found out

(,Wf;fkhff; fl;lg;gl;lJ tpiutpy; fz;Lgpof;fg;gLk;) and ARS

as fast bound would be found first (tpiue;J fl;oaJ Kjypy;

fhzg;gLk;).

The word “Heaven” means God. It is any God wherever it is

referred to. But PSM says that it is Easan the Lord Shiva. This is clear

from the immediate response to the question posed by Jessica.

Jessica : And now who knows

But you, Lorenzo, whether I am yours?

Lorenzo : Heaven and thy thoughts are witness that thou art.

(A.W.V.2.6.30-32)

Lorenzo’s answer to Jessica’s question is that her inner most

thought knows that he loves her. KPP translates that her hope and God 78 would know that he loves her. He has referred to the God in general. TNS renders it so exactly. She is his and god is the witness for that. ARS translates heaven as heaven only. He did not change it into God. He says that both Heaven and her heart are witness for the love that he has for

Jessica.

Sometimes PSM goes beyond the translator’s limitations. He says uncontrollable love or wild love (ml';fh fhjy; bfhz;oUf;fpnwd;)

for the strong love that Lorenzo has towards Jessica. It is in the words of

Lorenzo,

Beshrew me but I love her heartily;

For she is wise, if I can judge of her;

(A.W.V. 2.6.52-53)

KPP’s rendering of this particular utterance is very simple and he

has plainly stated that Lorenzo will support her because he loves her. ARS renders, Lorenzo asks Gratiano to curse him if his love with Jessica is a false one. He also affirms that he loves her heartily. TNS renders that

Gratiano and others can even mock at his love but he says that he loves her heartily. Excepting PSM, all others have not crossed the limitation.

In the same Act and scene Antonio tells Gratiano that there would not be masque that night because the time was already 9 p.m. A chill wind

started blowing and Bassanio was about to leave for Belmont. Thus

Antonio says, 79

’Tis nine o’ clock; our friends all stay for you.

No masque to-night: the wind is come about;

Bassanio presently will go aboard:

(A.W.V.2.6.63-65)

PSM renders that masque will not be helpful on that day

(,d;iwf;F Tj;jhl;lk; vy;yhk; xd;Wk; cjthJ). It is the Tamil convention to say like this. The rest of the two lines, he has rendered exactly. KPP straight away says that there is no masque that day. ARS renders that there need not be any masque that night. TNS says that there is no masque that night. It is only PSM who has changed the word

‘masque’ into Koothattam towards localising the concept. But at the same time, it is highly remarkable that he is the writer and translator who has introduced the word Kalaigðnan in the place of the derogatory word

Koothadi. This is how he has honoured the artists. This is as revealed

through website (http://www.evi.com).

Sometimes PSM slightly changes the grammatical structure of the

utterance especially the tense forms. Antonio says that he has sent twenty

persons to search for Gratiano. But PSM renders it in the simple past tense

instead of present perfect tense Shakespeare has used. Antonio says,

“I have sent twenty out to seek for you.” (A.W.V.2.6.66). PSM has

rendered that he sent twenty persons to search for him. All the three 80 translators have translated paying attention to the tense forms also as far as this utterance is concerned.

According to the Hindu belief or mythology Eman or Emadharma

Raja is a God of death who takes away the lives of the people on their dooms day or according to their destiny. This is his only profession. He is the deciding authority on where to send the soul of the deceased, either to

Heaven or to Hell. The prince of Morocco one of the suitors of Portia unlocks the golden casket and he finds a carrion Death which is nothing but an empty skull. There is a scroll of paper inserted in the empty eye.

Morocco says,

O hell! What have we here?

A carrion Death, within whose empty eye

There is a written scroll! I’ll read the writing

(A.W.V.2.7.62-64)

PSM renders that Prince of Morocco is shocked on opening the golden casket. He exclaims, “What a Hell! What is there? It is the skull of

Eman. There is a scroll in the eye of the skull. Let me read what is written in it.” PSM has localized the concept of carrion Death into Eman’s skull.

KPP renders that the Prince of Morocco is surprised to find a white head which refers to the skull and there is a scroll in the empty eye hole and he reads what is written there. 81

TNS and ARS say that the Prince of Morocco is very much surprised and says “O Hell! What is here? A skull! In the hollowed eye there is a scroll and let me read it.” These two translators are unique in rendering this particular shocking utterance of the Prince of Morocco.

A friend in need is a friend indeed. It is true in the case of the

friends of Antonio also. Salanio and Salarino proved to be worthy friends

of Antonio. Salarino heard that a vessel was miscarried. Immediately he

thought of Antonio’s. Thus he shared with Salanio what he had heard. But

Salanio advises him not to divulge the message to Antonio because it

might grieve him badly. In the words of these two friends,

Salarino : Marry, Well remember’d

I reason’d with a Frenchman yesterday,

Who told me, in the narrow seas that part

The French and English, there miscarried

A vessel of our country richly fraught:

I thought upon Antonio when he told me;

And wish’d in silence that it were not his.

Salanio : You were best to tell Antonio what you hear;

Yet do not suddenly, for it may grieve him.

(A.W.V.2.8.26-34) 82

These two too good friends wish such thing had not happened in the life of their true friend Antonio. PSM who has studied the psychology of these two friends renders that this bad news should not reach the ears of their good friend Antonio. They wish he were not told anything about this

bad news because it would grieve him. At the same time the word

“Marry” in the first sentence is rendered differently by each translator.

PSM says it is “yes” KPP and TNS have omitted and ARS says that it is

“O God!” At the same time PSM exactly renders Salarino’s utterance

“I reasoned with.” He has rendered that he was wording with. KPP says,

‘he was talking to’ ARS renders that he heard it. TNS renders that the

French man told him. The utterance ‘reasoned with a French man’ has

been differently rendered. Of all, PSM seems to be verbatim. At the same

time it is correct because there is no direct reference to speech.

Once Antonio heard this news, he would be in panic. The word

‘grieve’ is used here in the sense of ‘mental agony.’ PSM, though his is an adaptation, exactly gives the meaning whereas KPP has rendered that that news would disturb him. “This tragedy would attack him”, says ARS.

TNS renders that this sad news would make him feel mentally upset. Thus there is a gulf of difference in expressing this idea by all these chosen translators.

The Prince of Arragon, one of the suitors of Portia, compares his choice of casket over the others. While all others foolishly care for the 83 superficial appearance, unmindful of the impending dangers out of it, like the martlet which builds its nest without bothering about the hazard, he would be different from others and so he ignores the golden casket like all others who are easily attracted by it. This is a beautiful comparison. PSM wanted to localize the concept. So he considers the little bird martlet as

Th½kanaðkuruvi (J]f;fdh';FUtp) a small bird like sparrow which usually builds its nest in the exposed space. Shakespeare thought of these birds as building in deceptively beautiful as well as hazardous position. It is as in the words of the Prince of Moracco,

By the fool multitude, that choose by show,

Not learning more than the fond eye doth teach,

Which pries not to the interior, but, like the martlet,

Builds in the weather on the outward wall,

Even in the force and road of casualty.

(A.W.V.2.9.26-30)

KPP renders that it is V½rkkuruvi (Ch;f;FUtp) a small bird that builds its nest exposing to the hot sun and rain in hazardous road. ARS says that it is like a martlet (khh;yl; vd;Dk; rpl;Lf;FUtp) that builds its nest in the outside of the wall as it likes to be exposed. TNS also renders equally. Both these latter translators have brought in the English bird’s name as it is of course with an addition of the word ‘bird’ as martlet bird which makes the readers understand that martlet is a bird. 84

Bassanio has to select one of the caskets to woo Portia. If he selects the most appropriate one, he can marry her. He selects the leaden casket.

He is very much surprised to see the beautiful portrait of Portia in the

leaden casket. He says,

What I find here?

Fair Portia’s counterfeit! What demi-god

Hath come so near creation? Move these eyes?

(A.W.V.3.2.114-116)

PSM renders that Bassanio asks himself whether it is an

uncomparable portrait of Portia. In the original it is counterfeit. But PSM

changes it into uncomparable. This portrait is equivalent to the creator. He

wants to know the holy man who drew that picture and beautified it like

a God does. KPP translates,

brt;tpnrh; nghh;\pah rpj;jpug;glnk!

rpU\;oia ,j;Jizr; rptQw vGjpa

bja;tPf eud;ahh;? (89)

that Bassonio is curious to know who has created Portia’s portrait. He

wonders art it because it is that much lively. The translator says that the

painter has ‘written’ in stead of ‘painted’ or ‘drawn’. The reason could be

assumed that both the writer and painter are creators. For description of

the beauty of Portia in the painting, the translator refers to Lord Shiva

whose beautiful image was created by a cosmic Naran. ARS renders that 85

Bassanio wonders at the beauty of Portia’s drawing in the paper. He says

that her Portia is in the form of a beautiful picture.

Shakespeare intends to say Portia in the portrait is a replica of her.

That is why he says that it is fair Portia’s counterfeit which is the antonym

of genuine.

In yet another context Shakespeare metaphorically says that the

face of Bassanio becomes colourless on reading the letter from Antonio.

He is noticeably upset. This is sensed by Portia and she says,

There are some shrewd contents in yon same paper,

That steals the colour from Bassanio’s cheek:

(A.W.V.3.2.238-239)

PSM says that his face (Bassanio’s) has become pale on reading the

letter. It is the Tamil tradition to say like this. KPP renders it differently.

He says straight that it seems there is a bad news to deprive the brightness

of Bassanio’s cheek. ARS renders that brightness in Bassanio’s face

becomes diminished when he reads Bassanio’s letter. TNS says plainly

that the letter from Antonio carries a bad news. That has looted the facial

colour of Bassanio’s face. Thus every translator follows his own method

and renders according to his understanding of the original text. Either he

has changed it to suit the Tamils or he has added something to bring in the

meaning of the text. But all the four translators chosen for this study have

avoided being verbatim in many contexts. 86

PSM has very rightly changed the concept to suit the Tamils and made them understand it beyond any doubt. The letter of Antonio reads as follows:

. . . my bond to the Jew is forfeit; and since in paying

it, it is impossible I should live, all debts are cleared

between you and I, if I might but see you at my death.

(A.W.V.3.2.312-314)

For a far-off person to see somebody at death is not so easy. That is

why Antonio says that Bassanio might see him at his death. But PSM

makes it with more clarity that it is after the death of Antonio, and not at

his death.

KPP renders that the entire loan between Bassianio and Antonio

will be cleared at the time of the latter’s demise. TNS adds that even if

Antonio repays Shylock, he cannot be alive because of the expiry of the

period stipulated in the executed bond and he expresses his wish to see

Bassanio before his death. Though TNS’s rendering has a slight deviation,

the meeting of Antonio by Bassanio is clearly expressed by him. ARS

renders that there is no loan between Antonio and Bassanio to be cleared.

Antonio expresses his desire to meet him before his death. He too has

cleverly changed the phrase ‘at my death’ into ‘before my death’.

87

PSM who wanted to localize the God’s name added Jagadeesan

(Lord Shiva) who is very popular among the Indians. Portia says,

Unitil my Lord’s return: for mine own part,

I have toward heaven breathed a secret vow

(A.W.V.3.4.26-27)

Bassanio has gone to Venice to save his friend. In the mean time, Portia

who is alone asks Lorenzo as to how he should carry out the commands.

She has vowed herself to live in prayer and contemplation. KPP has also identified the God as Easan. ARS has not referred to any God. At the same time he has given a reference to prayer that they are going to offer in a place two miles away from there. TNS renders that Portia says that she has something to offer (neh;j;jpf;fld;). Like fasting and also needs to

offer prayer and meditation. There is a church which is two-mile away

from Belmont. Though there is no direct reference to God, he has

mentioned about the prayer to be offered at the church. It could be

inferred that KPP also wants to localize the concept as in the case of PSM.

That is why he changes the word ‘Heaven’ into the Hindu God “Easan.”

This is more appropriate in this context.

All these four chosen translators have not made their renderings of

many contexts verbatim. The obvious example is that Portia who wanted

to tell her plans to Nerissa on the way asks her to hurry. Portia says, 88

But come, I’ll tell thee all my whole device

When I am in my coach, which stays for us

At the park gate; and therefore haste away,

For we must measure twenty miles to-day

(E.C.P. 3.4.81-84)

PSM who is for localization renders this text differently. Portia tells

Nerissa that she will disclose her full tricks (NH;r;rpia KGtJk; cdf;Fj; bjhptpf;fpnwd;) on their way. She says that they have to travel six Katham (measurement of distance) on that day itself. PSM converts the mile into Katham with which the Tamils are more familiar. KPP renders in Tamil as follows Mjypd; gUjp ekf;fh ee;jdtd thrypny fhj;Js tz;oapy; VU';fhiyapy; vd;wd; NH;r;rpbayhk; cdf;F

,ak;g[td;. Mjypd; Jhpjkhf tpiue;jplha;. ,";"hd;W ,Ufh tj";bry ntz;Lnk (107-108). He says that it is two Kavathang instead of twenty miles. ARS says that it is twenty miles. He explains the total distance in a bracket. He has stated that the distance between

Belmont and Venice is 25 miles. Of the 25 miles, Portia has to travel in a coach for five miles from her palace and after that she has to sail 20 more miles in a ship. TNS states exactly twenty miles. The translators read the text “We must measure twenty miles today” fully and rendered the concept correctly excepting the change in the distance to be covered by Portia and Nerissa. The word ‘measure’ is considered as travel or cross 89 the distance by all the translators. This is a unique rendering of them and proves to be one of the best examples for not being verbatim.

Launcelot tells Jessica that the sins committed by her father would be imposed on her. Jessica denied this stating that she would be saved by her husband Lorenzo through baptism. Thus she says,

I shall be saved by my husband; he hath made

me a Christian. (A.W.V.3.5.6-7)

Though there is no reference to Hell in this context, PSM adds the word “hell” in his rendering. He translates these two lines as follows:

“My husband will save me from that hell; he has made me an

Hindu.” PSM, having considered the previous utterance of Launcelot, brought in the word ‘hell’. Luncelot says that is the damned one. The rests of the three chosen translators have not taken this antecedent into account.

Thus PSM proves to be an extraordinary in this respect.

In the same Act and scene, there is a conversation between Lorenzo and Launcelot on the arrangement of dinner.

Lorenzo : Yet more quarrelling with occasion! wilt

thou show the whole wealth of they wit in an instant?

I pray thee, understand a plain man in his plain

meaning: go to thy fellows, bid them cover the table,

serve in the meat, and we will come to dinner. 90

Launcelot : For the table, sir, it shall be served in; for

the meat, sir, it shall be covered; for your coming in

to dinner, sir, why, let it be as humours and conceits

shall govern.

(A.W.V.3.5.32-40)

PSM adds two things here in his rendering of these lines. Lorenzo

asks Launcelot to reserve the table for them to dinner. He refers to

“spreading of leaf” on the table because it is the Tamil convention to

spread banana leaf and serve the food on it, similarly, the second addition

is that Launcelot says “Let it be as humorous and conceits shall govern.”

PSM replaces that statement as “when you come for the dinner, each one of you bring three things with you-one mouth, one hand and one stomach.” PSM wanted to make the situation humorous with a slight hint given in the original. Thus he has made it funny. KPP renders the utterance of Lorenzo differently. “Will you order me to cover?” asks

Lorenzo. For the word “cover” KPP gives explanation at the foot-note that it is the convention of English to cover the table with a cloth towards arrangement of a dinner. He also adds that people of lower rung should not veil their heads in the presence of higher class people. It is with this intention, Lorenzo says so, as far as this translator is concerned. ARS renders that Lorenzo asks Launcelot to go and spread the that, (ge;jp tphpj;J) serve meat and they will come for dinner. Launcelot replies that 91 mat is spread, meat is served and they can come as they wish. TNS for his part added that Launcelot has to spread out the table and serve the meat and they will come for the dinner. Thus it could be inferred the quality of translation totally depends on the understanding of the original text by the translators. Here in this case, each of the chosen translators has viewed these two utterances distinctively. Of the four, PSM is totally deviating since his is an adaptation and he adds several things to suit the Tamil readers and audience. Similarly PSM adds a few more details while rendering the speech of Shylock in the first scene of the fourth Act.

Some men there are love not a gaping pig,

Some, that are mad if they behold a cat,

And others, when the bag-pipe sings in the nose,

Cannot contain their urine, for affection, (E.C.P.4.1.47-50)

Some people hate the gaping pig, others while seeing a cat and

some others do not like bag Piper’s music. It all depends on the likes and

dislikes of each and every individual and especially their mood. Some

may take it as a bad omen. In giving examples of strange phobias and the

odd, irrational reactions they produce, Shylock makes a valid

psychological point. PSM has omitted the line “some that are made if they

behold a cat.” Instead of this utterance, he has stated that some men

become angry on hearing the barking of a dog. At the same time he adds, 92 in hatred some people think, they can beat a bag piper with a broom stick, if he plays music. In fact, beating a person with a broom stick is a very great insult. PSM who wanted to localize the concept renders like this without being verbatim or literal. The rest of the three translators are not as harsh as that of PSM. They have rendered the text neither with omission of anything nor with any addition.

On another context PSM says “to perform rites and ritual for deceased” instead of “writing an epitaph” mindful of the Tamil readers.

Both these activities can be carried out after the demise of a person. Thus he changes so. Antonio has come to a conclusion that he can never be relieved from the clutches of Shylock. Therefore he asks his friend

Bassanio for whom he was trapped, to write his epitaph. It is in the words of Antonio:

You cannot better be employ’d, Bassanio,

Than to live still, and write mine epitaph.

(A.W.V.4.1.117-118)

PSM says that Bassanio has no other better work excepting to perform rituals after the demise of Antonio. It is ‘writing his epitaph’ in the original. But KPP renders that it is epitaph (Maraõa SÀsanam)

Bassanio is asked by Antonio to write. In fact the Maraõa SÀsanam is not

equivalent to epitaph. But it is a will that is executed by a person who is

on the death bed and about to breath his last. The practice of writing 93 epitaph was not much popular in India particularly in Tamil Nadu. Thus the translator has changed the word into an equivalent Tamil phrase.

ARS renders that as requested by Antonio, Bassanio has to live and write (about Antonio) in his grave. TNS translates that Bassanio can not get a better job than writing statements about him on the grave of Antonio.

PSM is totally free from being verbatim in most of the contexts.

The clerk reads the letter from Ballario. In the letter, he has commented on the intelligence of Portia who is in disguise as a young man. On seeing his

(Portia’s) physical appearance, the Duke of Venice should not underestimate him. There he strongly writes,

for I never

knew so young a body with so old a head. I leave him

to your gracious acceptance, whose trial shall better

publish his commendation.

(A.W.V.4.1.161-164)

PSM renders that Ballario has never seen such a person who is very young and at the same time very intelligent. KPP does not talk about his intelligence. But he renders that he must be honoured though he is young.

ARS states that Ballario in his life, has never seen such a young man with rich talents and TNS adds one more thing that he (Portia in disguise) also has the same opinion as the Duke of Venice has. At the same time the

Duke of Venice admits the fact that he is more talented as he is highly 94 educated and so he should not be under-estimated by the Duke by looking at his physical appearance.

PSM’s version is not free from colloquialism. If one’s thinking is contrary, someone has to throw a stone in his thinking (vz;zj;jpy; fy;iyg; nghLk;). Practically it is not possible. But it is quite common among the Tamil speaking public to use it in such occasion. Shylock’s revenge motif against Antonio is contrary. So Bassanio says that it is a thinking of a Devil (Shylock). Therefore it must be thrown. In fact it is in the form of an appeal to Portia (in disguise as a lawyer) by Bassanio.

And I beseech you,

Wrest once the law to your authority:

To do a great right, do a little wrong,

And curb this cruel devil of his will.

(A.W.V.4.1.212-215)

Portia is requested to do a great right, by doing a little wrong. “To

do a great right” is to save Antonio and “to do a little wrong” is to curb

the revenging attitude of Shylock. KPP renders it exactly but TNS says

that Portia has to curb Shylocks’s attitude and also renders that this

Satan’s pride (bfhl;lk;) must be suppressed.

Shylock is so adamant in enforcing the law as per the promise

made in the bond. He is sticking to what he said. He does not pay heed to

others. He says, 95

There is no power in the tongue of man

To alter me: I stay here on my bond.

(A.W.V.4.1.239-240)

PSM says that Shylock never deviates himself from the words of

the bond. He says it exactly in Tamil. A situation like this uses the

quantity of atom. If a person is so rigid in his statement, he will say that he will not move from his stand even to the quantity of atom. Saying like this is common among the Tamil speaking people. That is why PSM renders so. KPP renders that Shylock will get his due as stated in the bond. He has just conveyed the idea without paying attention to Shylock’s adamant behaviour. ARS simply says that he is sticking to the bond and he stays fighting for justice accordingly. There is some stress to his being so rigid.

TNS has added something to the text. Shylock says that he has vowed on his soul, no powerful tongue can change his stand and so he is on the bond. He is on the bond is so verbatim of the original. PSM has exactly used the maxim that even to the quantity of the atom, Shylock will not be flexible. It is more suitable to the Tamil readers and the viewers.

Sometimes PSM excitedly and exaggeratedly uses Tamil words in his rendering. If a translator becomes emotional on reading a text that is also revealed through his translation. The obvious example here is that

Portia (in disguise as a lawyer) refuses to accept any fee from Antonio and

Bassanio. But Bassanio does not want to leave her without any payment 96 made to her. At the same time, he requests her to take something in memory of them and honour. He persuades Portia who is in disguise as a lawyer.

Dear Sir, of force I must attempt you further:

Take some remembrance of us, as a tribute,

Not as a fee: grant me two things, I pray you,

Not to deny me, and to pardon me.

(4.1.419-422)

There is a word in Tamil to denote something that is done forcibly and cruelly. That is (balÀthkÀram) violence. It also has the other meaning,

that is, to rape somebody violently. PSM could have used some other

word for force, instead of the word balÀthkÀram. Bassanio says that, he

must attempt Portia in disguise further. If it is seriously thought of, it

means differently. KPP renders it in a polite and persuading tone. He

persuades him (Portia in disguise) to accept what he gives in memory of

them and he should not deny and at the same time he should pardon him

for giving something to him.

TNS renders on par with KPP. But ARS brings in the forcible

request of Bassanio. She has to compulsorily accept something from him

as a token of memory and he has explained that she has to pardon him.

Within bracket ARS states, for forcing her like that he (Portia in disguise)

has to forgive him. He has brought in the tone of the speaker very 97 cleverly. Thus the chosen translators for this study have omitted the lines and ideas that are unsuitable to the Tamil readers or audience. On such of those contexts where changes, alterations and deviations required were made sincerely by them. The ideas or the contexts that proved to be a great hurdle and barriers to all these select translators of this study have been exhaustively analysed in the subsequent chapter. Chapter III

BARRIERS IN TRANSLATING THE PLAY THE MERCHANT OF VENICE

3.0. Barriers

The translators of the plays of Shakespeare have faced a lot of hurdles but somehow or other, they have surmounted those problems and became successful in rendering the plays. As Patankar:

The translator is thus faced with the Crocean dilemma of ‘faithful

ugliness and faithful beauty.’ On this view every translation will

become an original work of art in its own right. But that is not how

we regard a translation. It is of course true that the translator is in

some respects like the original creator. For example, he must have

the same flair for words in the language of translation as the

original creator has. But a translator differs from the original

creator in that he is required to be faithful to the original. (71)

The following elements were identified by the researcher as barriers to the translators.

i) Culture embedded in the original

ii) Vulgar and rustic style of the source material

iii) Proverbial sayings, Idiomatic expressions and Puns

iv) Classical allusions 99

Besides these barriers, this chapter also deals with the translation theories propounded by Anton Popovic.

3.1. Culture

Translation proves to be a link between cultures, though it is difficult to translate the cultural sensibilities and behaviours of the two countries. It is as in the words of Ivir,

Translation is a way of establishing contacts between cultures. One

might even claim that cultural contact as such, presupposes

translation and that the exchange of goods of material and spiritual

culture is not possible without translation. The reason for this is the

fact that language and culture are inextricably interwoven. (35)

Every country has its own indigenous culture, traditions, heritage, life style, habits and customs that are kept intact with its people. European countries are not exceptions to these things. It is quite true to the core that

English writers particularly the European would naturally follow their own culture and practices in their own plays. Apart from the culture the translator should be mindful of the subject and audience. Talgeri and

Verma have stated that: “Not only is creative instinct that gave the original impetus difficult to match in a translation, the translator’s task is further complicated by the host of limitations imposed on him by both subject and audience” (36). 100

Thus Shakespeare has consistently followed the English culture and this proved to be a great obstacle for Tamil translators of his plays. It is as admitted by Bakaya,

Translations from one Indian language into another are much easier

to do than from foreign languages into Indian. The reasons are

obvious: We have much larger number of Indian languages from

amongst whom to draw potential translators, and because of our

common cultural heritage and history, many of the social concepts

which create great difficulties for translators interpreting disparate

cultures, are much easier to render into Indian languages. (140)

At the same time there are some similarities between the English

and Tamil cultures. The obvious example is found in the second Act of the

chosen play for study. It is revealed from the speeches of the Duke of

Arragon.

How many be commanded that command!

How much low peasantry would then be glean’d

From the true seed of honour! and how much honour

Pick’d from the chaff and ruin of the times,

To be new–varnish’d! . . .

(A.W.V.2.9.45-49)

KPP in his rendering Venice Varthagan has clearly explained at the

foot-note stating that the people of the low rung in Europe would not wear 101 chaff in the presence of high class people. This system was prevalent in

Tamil society also. In his words

. . . Vjkpy; ft[utk; g{z;nghh;

ghj;jpu tstpdhw; bgWtJ ghd;ikna.

mt;tpj khnky; jiyg;ghif ,d;wp

,f;fhy; njhw;Weh; vj;jid bganuh.

rpue;jid _oj; jphptJ jFjpahk;/

gzpth'; Feh;gyh; gzpbraw; ghynu.

(71)

There are innumerable examples in the rendering of KPP. He wanted to make the Tamil readers or viewers be aware of the English customs also. In the words of Ivir: Defining the elements of culture that are to be transmitted is a procedure that relies on what members of the target culture know in an attempt to make them be aware of what they do not know (38).

Salanio says,

Let me say amen betimes, lest the devil cross

my prayer, for here he comes in the likeness of a Jew,

(A.W.V.3.1.19-20)

When one is in prayer some thing is chanted to avoid the intrusion

of any evil spirit. Here Salanio says that he would say “Amen.” In Tamil

particularly the Hindus would chant Ohm to be saved themselves from 102 any interruption during the prayer. Thus KPP has made his rendering reader-oriented. To some extent he could surmount this barrier by preferring Tamil chanting word Ohm which is not equivalent to Amen in

English. He would have definitely struggled a lot to find this Ohm for

“Amen” which means “May it be so.” Usually it is uttered in chorus at the

end of a prayer of Christians. “Language is largely culture oriented and

therefore, translators face the problem of translating certain culture based

words into another language with a different culture.” (Das,

Handbook 40)

As far as PSM is concerned, culture was a great barrier. He too has

managed it with his intelligence and scholarly approach to the play, The

Merchant of Venice. Throughout the play, he considers the Hindu God

‘Lord Siva’ in the context of Jesus Christ of the source text.

He has drastically changed in order to agree with the Tamil

conventions, dress, food habit, Christians into Hindus, Jews into Jains or

Hebrew, even gloves into hand kerchief with which the Tamil people are

so familiar.

Rice is the staple food of the South Indians, particularly the Tamils.

In Europe, wheat is the principal food item, while giving example, PSM

changed the word wheat into rice in Translation for the sake of making the

Tamil audience or readers understand the text. On commenting upon the

meaningless speeches of Gratiano, Bassanio says. 103

Gratiano speaks an infinite deal of nothing, more than

any man in all Venice. His reasons are as

two grains of wheat hid in two

bushels of chaff: you

shall seek all days ere you find them; and when you have

them, they are not worth the search.

(A.W.V.1.1.114-118)

PSM translates Bag-piper into players of NÀthaœwaram, the two headed Janus into Brahmma Rishi Durvasa; both are familiar to Tamils,

Durvasa is a sage who would never laugh, though he listens to jocular remarks as seen below.

Salarino : Now, by two-headed Janus,

Nature hath framed strange fellows in her time:

Some that will evermore peep through their eyes,

And laugh like parrots at a bag-piper;

(A.W.V.1.1.50-53)

Purposefully PSM gives innumerable references to ‘Lord Shiva’ throughout the play. Portia prays to God (Jesus Christ) to save her from the two suitors namely Neopolitan Prince and County Palatine who have come forward to woo her. Portia did not like both these suitors because the former always does nothing but talks about his horse only. He is a colt 104 in deed and the latter does nothing but frown, is very sad and will become a philosopher when he grows old.

I had rather be married

to death’s head with a bone in his mouth than to

either of these. God defend me from these two!

(A.W.V.1.2.45-47)

PSM says that Lord Shiva has to defend her. Because Lord Shiva is

a prominent God of the Hindus in India. Hence he translates so.

There are references to Thigambarar and Swethambarar the Hindu

monks replacing Jacob and Laban of the English. He has changed Holy

Abraham into Theerthangarar, a typical monk of the Jaina religion.

Shylock : When Jacob grazed his uncle Laban’s sheep –

This Jacob from our holy Abraham was

(As his wise mother wrought in his behalf)

The third possessor; ay, he was the third –

(E.C.P.1.3.68-71)

He has replaced Sophy with Chola King, Persian Prince with

Chenni Prince but at the same time he has retained Sultan Solyman. He

has changed Prince of Morocco into Parthiba descendant,

Morocco : Even for that I thank you:

Therefore, I pray you lead me to the caskets,

To try my fortune. By this scimitar, 105

That slew the Sophy and Persian prince

That won three fields of Sultan Solyman

(A.W.V.2.1.22-26)

Hercules is replaced with Rama (Hero of the epic Kamba

RÀmÀyaõa) in Act III, Scene ii, p.65 referred by Portia and the same

Hercules is replaced with Beema (an epic character in Mahabharata) in

Act III, Scene ii, p.66, referred by Bassanio.

Antonio is certain that he will be able to repay his debt with the blessings of God. Thus he asks his friend Bassanio to pray for the repayment.

Antonio : Pray God, Bassanio come

To see me pay his debt, and then I care not!

(E.C.P.3.3.35-36)

It is generally stated that Bassanio has to pray to God. But here

PSM specially states it is to Easan (Lord Shiva) Bassanio to send a word of prayer. As stated earlier the reason is lucid.

When Portia and Nerissa are about to leave for Venice, Portia asks

Lorenzo and Jessica to stay back in Belmont and look after the palace until their return. It is stated that they have to be there on behalf of Portia and Bassanio. When she refers to Bassanio, she says that he is

Prananathan (reincarnation of the Hindu God, Lord Shiva believed to be 106 responsible for breathing of human beings that is very survival itself).

Thus she says that he is her breath.

Portia : My people do already know my mind,

And will acknowledge you and Jessica

In place of Lord Bassanio and myself.

And so farewell, till we shall meet again.

(A.W.V.3.4.37-40)

The translator has taken very great effort to bring in this idea. Lord in the

sense of the king, it is used here. To show the affinity between Portia and

Bassanio, the translator has taken the thing for granted.

Wherever there is any reference to God, PSM considers him as the

Hindu God Easan (Lord Shiva) who is nationally known and particularly

very popular among the Tamil speaking public. Thus he has preferred

Lord Shiva. It is also the habit of people to spell the name of the God

Shiva! Shiva!!, when they are in need of His help. It is a common belief that He would come whenever He is called by the people to get their needs fulfilled. But one thing is certain, PSM would have puzzled over his brain to decide the name of the God who is equivalent in Tamil. He proved to be successful in choosing the name of Lord Shiva, the God and making the audience and readers understand the concept beyond any doubt. 107

The third rendering chosen for this study Venice ViyÀpÀri by ARS has exactly used the same word God with the Tamil name as Kadavul. He has retained everything as it can be inferred, since the translation is of prose in nature the translator has not faced many difficulties.

The same is true in the case of the fourth translator chosen for this study, Venice Nagarathu ViyÀpÀri by TNS. All these four translators have successfully overcome the barriers.

Polygamy was unheard of among the Tamils in those days. They never had thought of it. The culture of Tamils did not permit woman to marry more than one bachelor. It is remarkable that it is kept intact in some of the sub-sects of the society even today. Portia says that she should marry twenty husbands if she should marry the French Lord,

Monsieur Le Bon. Though it is stated as condition, most of the Tamil readers or audience would object to it once translated, because of their strong belief in conservatism. It should not be uttered even for word sake or as an example. In the following context, if the previous lines are considered, it can be concluded that the suitor is a good for nothing, infirm and lazy fellow as in the words of Portia.

Portia : he is every man in no man; if a throstle sing, he falls

straight a-capering; he will fence with his own shadow:

if I should marry him, I should marry twenty husbands.

(A.W.V.54-56) 108

How to overcome this cultural barrier? It proved to be a great hurdle for the translators, as rightly stated by Ivir:

Faced with an element of the source culture which is absent from

the target culture, the translator relies on different procedures that

enable him to covey to the members of the target culture the

content of the particular element (36).

PSM has cleverly changed the concept as a shift from the original.

He translates that if she marries him that will be equivalent to marrying twenty husbands. A barrier is a barrier-but the only thing is the translator has to change the concept either fully or partially orienting himself

towards the viewers or readers of the play. At the same time he can not

sacrifice virtue for convenience. KPP and ARS have also surmounted this

barrier in the same manner whereas it is notable that TNS has skipped the

entire sentence. The analogy is, of all the four chosen translators, first

three of them are unique in this respect whereas the fourth translator is

different from the rest, being more for the conservative Tamils, he has

omitted. The other three have modified the meaning of the conditional

clause without bothering about the previous lines.

Subsequently in the play, Gratiano says that he has prayer book in

his pocket and hat on his head at dinner. It was then customary to wear

hats at dinners. 109

Gratiano says,

Wear prayer-books in my pocket, look demurely ―

Nay more, while grace is saying, hood mine eyes

Thus with my hat, and sigh and say ‘amen’,

(E.C.P.2.2.178-180)

To wear hat during dinner is not a custom in our country. Therefore

PSM has omitted it whereas the rest of the translators say that he would hide his eyes with the hat while offering the prayer.

In another context there is a reference to the amount of mercy that

Shylock has. He is totally merciless. Shakespeare reveals it through the

Duke of Venice.

Duke : I am sorry for thee : thou art come to answer

A stony adversary, an inhuman wretch

Uncapable of pity, void and empty

From any dram of mercy

(A.W.V.4.1.3-6)

The real attitude and nature of Shylock has been well thought of and brought out subtly by Shakespeare. Metaphorically he says that he has a heart of stone, he is an inhuman, incapable of pity and void and empty from any dram of mercy. The last phrase “empty from any dram of mercy” is a barrier for Tamil Translators because the Ethical values of

Tamils shunned the habit of taking liquor in those days. This habit was 110 rarely prevalent particularly with upper class and privileged. The word

“dram” means smallest amount of whisky left over at the bottle after drinking. PSM who does not want to use this example to show the

merciless attitude of Shylock and the amount of mercy he has within him

says that he has mercy only in the size of mustard, an edible grain

commonly used by the people while cooking. He had thought to himself

and found out the equivalent for the whole phrase and brought in. He

would rather have used thuli, the meanest quantity of liquid than mustard

which is a solid substance. It would be more appropriate in this context.

Somehow he has overcome the barrier like this. There are umpteen

number of examples throughout the play, The Merchant of Venice from where PSM wants to bring in the Tamil concept for the purpose of clarity, keeping the Tamil culture intact.

PSM has grasped the entire idea of the utterance and stated that he does not have even the smallest quantity of mercy and that much stony heart he has. He has carefully avoided the phrase “dram of mercy.” In general, his translation is not literal. Besides this, he too has been aware of the fact that it would not be suitable for the conservative Tamils. In western countries the habit of taking liquor is found to be quite common even now because of the conditions of climate and weather. But he did not intend even to copy the very idea of consuming liquor. 111

The third and fourth translators of this study ARS and TNS have also treated in the same way following his predecessors.

3.2. Vulgar and Rustic Style of the Source Material

There is a clear reflection of the Elizabethan England (1558-1603) in the plays of William Shakespeare. He wrote the plays not only for the elites but also for groundlings. He had to choose their way of speaking mainly colloquial and vulgar which was also found among the rustics.

Later on, his style was enjoyed by all classes of the Elizabethans including the members of the Royal Society.

The Tamil translators had to render the plays of Shakespeare keeping the Tamil audience and readers in mind. Thus, it could be found the customs and manners versus conservative Tamil society in all the versions. As lucidly expressed by Shahane,

. . . Indian culture is a mosaic of many sub-cultures covering

different linguistic regions and their regional literatures and life

styles. Indian culture is more like a salad of different vegetables

and organic growth rather than a ‘melting pot’ in which different

ethnic components swiftly melt away and lose their identity. . . (9)

In all these four renderings, the chosen drama for this study, vulgar and colloquial style is found among the rustics. They are mainly with the minor characters of the play. The Conservative Tamil society never 112 expects any expression in the rendered play to be vulgar. Even expression with mild sexual undertone is not liked by the Tamils who have strong faith in traditional system. This is the reason why the writers have been very careful enough while rendering the play. If they have any such ideas to express, that would be in the form of conceit. At the surface level, all the readers can not know that the expression reveals something vulgar.

The English convention is totally contrary to that of the rich culture of the Tamils. Since the groundlings enjoyed sexy and vulgar expressions and did not take them seriously, Shakespeare did not bother about including vulgar and colloquial forms in his plays. While translating the plays of Shakespeare, the translators found very difficult to modify them and so made additions to suit the Tamil audience and readers and sometimes they omitted the poetic lines with vulgar and colloquial meanings. The obvious examples are, children who were born to legally married spouses would become legitimate heirs. Illegitimate wards do not have equal rights on par with legitimate heirs. They are looked down upon by the well disciplined Tamil society. Here is an example that proved to be a challenging task for all the translators. In fact it is a greater barrier for them than anything else. In commenting upon Neapolitan prince, one of the suitors who has come to Belmont, Portia says that he might have been born to a smith because he always talks about horse and he can shoe the horse himself. In the words of Portia, 113

Ay, that’s a colt indeed, for he doth nothing but talk of his

horse; and he makes a great appropriation to his own good

parts that he can shoe him himself. I am much afeard my lady

his mother played false with a smith.

(E.C.P.1.2.34-37)

PSM has very beautifully tackled this barrier. Portia says “I think a smith has entered the palace while his (Neapolitan Prince’s) mother was alone there.” A sensational issue of illegitimate cohabitation has been put forth in a polished, refined and gentle way. Really such a situation is very critical for the translators to handle. Somehow or other he has managed by giving a slight hint that he might have been born to a smith.

KPP has omitted the lines “I am much afeard, my lady his mother played false with a smith” as it is might be unpleasant for the Tamil society and its convention. TNS and ARS also have omitted the above two lines. But all the three of them have translated the rest of the comments of

Portia on Neapolitan Prince.

Of late the Indian editors of The Merchant of Venice have removed the last line of the stanza that is, “I am much afeard my lady his mother played false with a smith”, from the original source book, since it does not suit the Indian culture as a whole. 114

In the same scene of the I Act, Portia says in stead of marrying a drug addict, the young German shall be married to a sponge. There is a mild sexual undertone in the line

Portia : I will do anything, Nerissa,

ere I will be married to a sponge.

(A.W.V.1.2.90-91)

Since the second line has mild sexual undertone, PSM has

translated that she will do anything in stead of marrying this sponge

(Young German). There is a minor deviation. He has managed it to the

extent possible. KPP and ARS have skipped the line. The fourth translator

TNS has translated that she would do anything in stead of marrying

a drunkard. He has clearly deviated from the original that says she shall be

married to a sponge. He has added “drunkard” in stead of “sponge.”

Portia on hearing dangers impending for Antonio, asks Bassanio to

go to Venice in order to save him, before that, as she says,

For never shall you lie by Portia’s side

With an unquiet soul.

(A.W.V.3.2.300-301)

Since his mind is astray thinking about his friend Antonio, he can

not be happy with Portia. Thus Portia asks him to save his beloved friend

first and honey moon or nuptial will be the next. 115

PSM says that Portia is unwilling to make him beside her as he is not peaceful. He has been very intelligent enough to have avoided the

literal meaning of these lines.

ckJ kdj;jpy; ,f;Fiwia itj;Jf;bfhz;L ePh; vd;

gf;fj;jpy; ,Ug;gJ vdf; fp\;lkpy;iy

(PSM 76)

KPP translates that Bassanio should not be near her as his mind is so obsessed with his friend’s getting into trouble.

ce; njhHd; khl;LcHy; t[Wk; csj;Jld;

nghh;\pah tpd;ghy; nghf;Fjph; radk;

(KPP 99)

ARS translates that Bassanio has to rush to Venice and save his

friend who is at the mercy of Shylock. With this unpleasant mood or

dilemma, he can not be happy with her

Vbddpy; r";ry cs;sj;njhL nghh;\pahitf;

bfh";rpf; bfhz;oUf;f KoahJ

(ARS 85)

TNS straight away says that Bassanio can not lie beside her without

any peace of mind.

Vbdd;why;/ mikjpaw;w cs;sj;njhL nghh;\;ahtpd;

gf;fj;jpy; gLj;jpUf;f c';fshy; KoahJ

(TNS 100) 116

All these chosen translators have merely conveyed the ideas, similar to that of beating about the bush. They do not openly say that

Portia is of the opinion that Bassaanio can not have his nuptial bliss with his disturbed mind.

Thus it proves to be a barrier for them, they could not say the matter straight because of the conventional societal system prevalent in

Tamil Nadu.

Bassanio reads out the letter of Antonio to Portia. Being so merciful and unmindful of her personal affair with respect to her marriage to be solemnized at the church, Portia asks Bassanio to rush to Venice in order to save his beloved friend Antonio. When he bids farewell to her, he says,

Bassanio : Since I have your good leave to go away

I will make haste; but till I come again,

No bed shall e’er be guilty of my stay,

No rest be interposer’ twixt us twain.

(E.C.P.3.2.318-321)

PSM renders that “he rushes immediately as she pleases, he won’t take much time to stay back there and says to his dear love, he won’t sleep until he returns to see her back.” He has very subtly surmounted this obstacle “No bed shall e’er be guilty of my stay.” He means that he will return as chaste as he is, but PSM says that he would not sleep until he 117 meets her back. Any way, he did not translate exactly because of the hidden sexual meaning the line intends to have if translated plainly.

KPP translates that Bassanio would not seek any bed until he

returns to meet Portia. He too has managed to convey something but not

so exactly equivalent to the original. ARS says that Bassanio would not

sleep in any cot there in Venice. His translation is almost verbatim and equivalent to KPP’s, and TNS paraphrases that Bassanio’s sleep in any bed would not be a crime. Apart from this, he is giving another meaning in bracket that he would not lie in any bed. At least TNS has conveyed the plain meaning to some extent.

As far as the Tamil conservatives are concerned, the word ‘bastard’ is an abused or impolite word. In the dictionary of Tamil nobody would pronounce the word, in fact, it is sentimental and sensational that it should

not be uttered under any circumstance. It also means a person of questionable parentage. This word is found in a context where Jessica, the

daughter of Shylock speaks:

That were a kind of bastard hope, indeed! So the sins of my

mother should be visited upon me.

(E.C.P.3.5.10-11)

If Shylock is not Jessica’s father, then her mother will have sinned, and

according to the Mosaic law that Launcelst tells Jessica the daughter will suffer for her mother’s sins. 118

This is the bastard hope referred to by Jessica. As it is an impolite phrase for Tamils, the translators either skip it or give their own explanations and deviate.

PSM has said that it would be a kind of sinful statement too.

Without having any straight reference to bastard son, or daughter, he goes

further stating that the sin committed by her mother would suffer her.

KPP has said that if it were a sinful hope, she should meet the

consequences for the sin committed by her mother.

ARS and TNS have totally omitted the line from no. 7 to 14. As all

these eight lines discuss the assumed sin committed by Jessica’s mother

and the resultant effect of the sin, these two translators have not touched

upon.

Thus it could be inferred that even a word or phrase that is

considered to be an impolite or abused one, it is left out by the translators.

They were of the opinion that translating such phrase would not be received well by the typical conservative Tamil society.

3.3. Proverbial Sayings, Idiomatic Expressions and Puns

Proverbial sayings were proved to be obstacles to the translators. In

fact all these chosen translators of this study have struggled a lot to

translate The Merchant of Venice. The proverbial sayings employed by

Shakespeare in this play can be broadly classified into two categories viz, 119 near proverbial and absolute proverbial sayings. The obvious example for the former is that purposefully citing of scripture by Shylock is vehemently criticised by Antonio.

Antonio : Mark you this, Bassanio,

The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.

(E.C.P.1.3.89-90)

PSM in his VÀn¼pura Vanigan says that Shylock’s citing from

Dharma Shastras (book deals with moral principles) is quite funny and it is equivalent to the devil that is citing example from Dharma Shastras.

Of course with the Hindu Holyscriptures, he has managed. KPP in his

Venice Vartagan says that even devil, to establish its adamant behaviour

can cite from Holy scriptures. Retaining the emphasis of the original, he

has translated the passage.

ARS renders it as, “Look Bassanio, even devil can chant from

Vedas (Holy Scriptures of the Hindu) in the event of necessity.” With

mild deviation from the track, he has translated the near proverbial saying.

Antonio appears to be sad. He is noticeably upset. It is observed by

his friends Salerio and Solanio. They ask the reason for his sadness.

Antonio in reply to their query says,

Believe me; no: I thank my fortune for it,

My ventures are not in one bottom trusted,

(A.W.V.1.1.41-42) 120

His response depicts a proverb that was commonly used by the

English. That is “Venture not all in one bottom.” He has very causally used the proverb. The Tamil readers would not understand unless the translators gave an appropriate explanation for this proverb. PSM says that they have to believe him and his ships have not carried goods from one particular place and on one ship. When he thinks about it, he is happy.

Apart from this, he tells that his profit in the business this year is not depending on this two years transaction. So his dejected state is not because of his merchandise. PSM has not given any clear cut explanation of the proverb. But he has given the meaning that his financial the source is not single. Similarly KPP, ARS and TNS have also managed this way.

For many proverbs that are not familiar with Tamils, only the meanings can be given. It is cent per cent true in this case. Obviously most of these translators do not seem to have been aware of the English proverb. But still with the plain meaning they have given they felt satisfied. If they had given atleast in foot-note that Shakespeare blended the proverb in his text, the readers of the translation would have understood the versatility of

Shakespeare.

There is one more proverbial truism in the subsequent utterance of

Salanio. Since Antonio is not sad, he can laugh. Salanio with a sarcastic remark says. 121

Then let us say you are sad

Because you are not merry; and ’twere as easy

For you to laugh and leap, and say you are merry

Because you are not sad.

(E.C.P.1.1.47-50)

It is true that a person who is sad, can not be happy, can not laugh and can not leap at all. He can be happy, if only he is not sad. It is quite natural with everybody. All these chosen translators have merely brought in the meaning of the proverbial truism. As far as this truism is concerned, it can be literally translated. It does not convey any other meaning.

Launcelot differentiates his present master Shylock and Bassanio under whom he is going to serve. Quoting a proverb, he says Bassanio has the grace of God whereas Shylock has enough money. In his own words it is as follows.

The old proverb is very well parted between my master

Shylock and you, Sir-you have ‘the grace of god’, Sir, and he

hath ‘enough.’

(E.C.P.2.2.127-129)

There are several interpretations for this proverb: one is “god’s grace is enough.” Those who have money won’t be merciful. God’s grace is enough in stead of having money with oneself etc. It is a beautiful comparison that god’s grace versus money and spirituality versus 122 temporal power. The chosen translator for this study, PSM renders that money and attitude do not stay permanently with oneself. This is how he translates. What he has done is equivalent to a Tamil proverb which roughly translated into English would be a mind that satisfies with what it has is alike an alchemy that makes a base metal into gold. KPP renders that Launcelot says that his master and Bassanio are equally sharing a proverb that Bassanio has God’s grace and Shylock has enough property. As usual, the translator has given the meaning of the proverb in the foot-note that God’s grace is better than being rich. ARS has also done like KPP. But he has brought in the meaning in the text itself and not mentioned at the foot-note. TNS renders that there is a proverb that very well differentiates Bassanio from Shylock. Bassanio has the grace of god whereas Shylock has riches.

There is one more proverb employed by Shakespeare in The

Merchant of Vanice. Bassanio has offered the dearest ring presented to him by Portia to the judge who argued against Shylock and decreed against him. Portia comments upon Bassanio’s generosity in offering the ring. She says,

I see, sir, you are liberal in offers.

You taught me first to beg, and now methinks

You teach me how a beggar should be answered.

(E.C.P.4.1.431-433) 123

In fact, it is a reference to the famous proverb that “beggars can not be the choosers.” Simply the judge was for the ring and against accepting any other value equivalent to that of the ring. In deed, she blames herself as a beggar who specifically opted for the ring. But she did not disclose it. In general she says that beggars are not at liberty to choose anything. What ever is offered to them, they should simply accept it without questioning.

PSM and KPP render that Bassiano taught her how to beg first and then how to deny the beggar who asks for alms. ARS and TNS also say that Bassanio only persuaded Portia to get something first and when she is prepared to accept it, he is denying. Thus he has taught her a lesson.

Though there are no equivalent proverbial sayings in Tamil for

English sayings, the translators chosen for this study have managed to incorporate the meanings of such proverbial sayings into their Tamil text

even though there are no equivalent proverbs in Tamil.

Similarly idiomatic expressions used by Shakespeare were also proved to be a great hurdle for the translators. The chosen translators have either skipped them or modified them for the convenience of the Tamil audience and readers. Duff very rightly says:

Idiomatic expressions are notoriously difficult to translate. As

a general rule, I would suggest to you and to the students that if

a suitable idiom in your own language does not readily spring to

mind, you give a straight forward translation of the meaning. (137) 124

In addition to this, Bassnett-McGuire rightly observed:

Translation involves for more than replacement of lexical and

grammatical items between languages and as can be seen in the

translation of idioms and metaphors, the process may involve

discarding the basic linguistic elements of the source language text

so as to active. Popovic’s goal of ‘expressive identity’ between the

SL and TL text. But once the translator moves away from close

linguistic equivalence, the problems of determining the exact

nature of the level of equivalence aimed for begin to emerge (25).

William Shakespeare was very clever in the employment of puns in

his plays. It was very much enjoyed by the Elizabethan audience. The

obvious example in the chosen play is Portia’s utterance to Bassanio in

welcoming the latter.

Portia : Let me give light, but let me not be light;

For a light wife doth make a heavy husband,

And never be Bassanio so far me:

But God sort all! you are welcome home, my lord

(A.W.V.5.1.129-132)

All the chosen translators have rendered these four lines differently. But in

one respect they are unique. Their rendering is not verbatim. Of all the

puns, this is fairly a complex one because light can mean immoral and 125 wanton also. However the translators have done justice mindful of the

Tamil audience and readers as well. Their renderings are as follows:

PSM : ehd; ckf;F btspr;rk; jUfpnwd;.

gjptpuijahd kidtp jd; g[U\Df;F

xU tpsf;ifg; nghypUf;f ntz;Lk;.

gpuhzehj/ ePh; jpUk;gp te;jJ re;njh\k;. (117)

KPP : ,d;dif ckf;Fahd;

md;wp vs;Seh; eiff;F MshfhJahd;

kd;Df. mj;jif kidtp bfhGeDf;F

,d;dy; ,iHg;ghs;/ vd;dhh; grhdpnah

mf;fjp ailahh; midtu jKnk

vdpDk; aht[k; ,iwbra yhf;F

thHp Jiu/ ck;ey;tu ntw;fpnwd;. (150-151)

ARS : ehd; xsp jUfpnwd;. Mdhy; gHp jukhl;nld;.

gHpjUk; kidtpahy; fztDf;Fj; jhnd

Rik. Mdhy; grhdpnah vdf;Fr;

Rik jukhl;lhh;. flt[s; fhf;fl;Lk;

gpug[! c';fis tUf tUf vd

tuntw;fpnwd;. (129)

NS : xsp jUntd;. Mdhy;/ rydrpj;jk; cs;stshf

,Uf;fkhl;nld;. rydrpj;jk; bfhz;l kidtp 126

fztDf;F bgUk; ghukhf ,Uf;fpwhs;. vd; fzth;

g!hdpna ghuKs;stuhf vf;fhyj;jpYk; ,Uf;ff;

TlhJ. Mdhy; flt[s; vy;yhiua[k; juk; gphpj;J

itj;jpUf;fpwhh;. vd; gpug[nt tUf j';fs; tut[

rpwf;fl;Lk;. (155)

3.4. Classical Allusions

Shakespeare brings in innumerable classical allusions in many of

his plays and The Merchant of Venice is not exceptional. He employs

many allusions from classical mythology, that is, Greek, Latin and even

from the Bible, etc. As far as the Tamil readers and viewers are concerned, the classical allusions referred to by Shakespeare may be unknown to them. The local readers are totally unaware of such allusive remarks in the play rendered. Being very cautious and conscious of these limitations the translators distinctly render the substance from the classical and Biblical allusions employed by Shakespeare.

There are many Biblical concepts in the play. The obvious example is in the praising of Portia in disguise as a lawyer by Shylock.

Shylock : A Daniel come to Judgement! Yea, a Daniel!

O wise young judge, how I do honour thee!

(A.W.V.4.1.221-222) 127

In the same scene Gratiano also refers to Daniel as follows,

Gratiano : A second Daniel, a Daniel, Jew!

Now, infidel, I have thee on the hip

(A.W.V.4.1.331-332)

Infact Gratiano is very much thankful to Shylock for having referred to

Daniel in this context.

Gratiano : A Daniel, still say I, a second Daniel!

I thank thee, Jew, for teaching me that word.

(A.W.V.4.1.338-339)

Since Daniel is a Biblical character, and the Tamil audience and readers will certainly be puzzled their brain over Daniel and it has been rendered verbatim. They would think who he might be, why he is referred to here and how far it is appropriate in this context. Of the four select translators, PSM translates the name as Dharmaprabu which means a Generous or Gracious Duke and Gratiano’s reference to second Daniel as Dharma Raja, a king known for his generosity in Tamil.

KPP names Daniel as Daniel only. But, as usual he has explained in the foot-note that he is a Biblical character, well known for his intelligence. His explanation in the foot-note instantly helps the readers

understand who Daniel is. A.W.V. explains in his notes that:

Daniel, according to the ‘History of Susannah and the Elders’

(v.45), was a young youth when he convicted the Elders ‘of false 128

witness by their own mouth’. His detection also of the imposture of

the priests of Bel, as we read in the Apocryphal “History of Bel and

the Dragon” may have contributed to suggest the propriety of the

allusion.” Hunter thinks that the name Daniel was proverbial for

“an Eminent Judge,” and quotes a letter written in 1595: Madam,

“I do wish you one other Daniel to decide your doubts, according

to your good deserts.” (151)

The other translator ARS, unmindful of the Tamil readers, has stated Daniel as Daniel only. But he has added something before Daniel that is, a straight forward judge Daniel (ePjp jtwhj nldpay;). To some extent this addition of these two qualifying words would enable the readers to know what kind of person Daniel was. At the same time, had he given any other explanation apart from this, the readers would have found it easy. TNS also refers to Daniel as Daniel but he has given lucid explanation in a nutshell that too within a bracket that Daniel is a person who cleverly argued and got a woman released from a case allegedly sued against her. Of course the method he has employed at least enables the readers to understand the context.

To express the sad mood of Antonio, Shakespeare refers to Janus.

It is a Latin deity commonly represented by two headed (Janus bifrons).

Roman custom is to open the gate of his ‘temple’ during war as a sign that he had gone out to assist the Roman army, and shutting it off during 129 peace. Here the point of Salarino’s oath is that he speaks of two kinds of men; happy and unhappy men. Salarinio could guess that Antonio is sad.

But, when he asks Antonio, he hides the fact and says that he is happy only. Salarino in his own words says,

Now, by two-headed Janus,

Nature hath framed strange fellows in her time:

(A.W.V.1.1.50-51)

It is clearly expressed by Salarino that Antonio is unhappy and so he cannot laugh and leap joyfully. To denote the two moods of a person, he refers to the two headed Janus, the Latin deity whose one face would be merry while the other would be sad.

The translators would have certainly found it too difficult to render this comparison. PSM says in his Tamil rendering that by the oath of

Asuvanithevar, (mRtdpj;njth; 3) has nature surprisingly created human beings both with expressions of sadness and happiness? KPP has translated the allusive remark to two headed Janus as it is. But he has given detailed explanation at the foot note of page no.4 that two headed

Janus is a deity referred to in the Latin mythology. It has two faces: one face would express happiness while the other sadness. Since two kinds of men are mentioned in this context, it is suitable to refer to this two-headed deity here. 130

ARS renders that Salarino vowing on two faced Janus says that nature has created strange fellows. He has not changed the name of the god. He has retained it and conveyed the concept. TNS has not given any reference to the two headed Janus. He has just rendered the meaning of the utterance. Thus it could be inferred that with the classical allusions, the Tamil readers are not familiar. So the translators either explain in the foot-note and also in bracket or skip it mindful of the Tamil readers who are unaware of these classical and allusive remarks to literature and The

Bibles.

In the same utterance there is a classical allusion to Nestor, employed by Shakespeare through Salarino. It is in the words of Salarino,

......

That they’ll not show their teeth in way of smile

Though Nestor swear the jest be laughable.

(A.W.V.1.1.55-56)

Verity, one of the scholarly editors of Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice says that Nestor is the oldest and wisest of the Greek heroes of the Trojan war. Another editor of the chosen play for the study Pettet says that Nestor is the old adviser of the Greeks in Trojan war, epitomized gravity etc. Anything that amused him would have to be extremely funny indeed. Thus it could be concluded that he would not laugh easily for common or ordinary jokes. PSM, one of the translators for this study 131 changed Nestor into Brahmma Rishi Durwasa, he would hardly laugh even when he heard laughable jokes cracked by anybody. PSM has aptly preferred the character Durwasa to Nestor. Durwasa is a very well known saint of the Tamils. Thus he has cleverly made the Tamils understand the context. He has learnt the similarity of these two characters and very cleverly replaced Nestor with Durwasa in a reader friendly way.

KPP brought in the same name Nestor and in the foot-note (p.4) he has explained that he is one of the Greek soldiers. No jocular remarks would make him laugh. He appeared with his irritating facial expression

for ever. He has made the readers of his translators understand the concept

with the explanation in the foot-note. ARS renders that even if Nestor, the

Greek God, symbol of agony or tragedy (mtyj;jpd; rpd;dk;) allows the

people that they can laugh, they won’t. Here the translator has deviated from the original. As put forth at the outset, it is not so easy to render the classical allusions employed in the source book. This is an obvious example for it. TNS says that even if the God Nestor assures the people that they can laugh for a joke, they would not laugh at all. Excepting the fact that Nestor was not a God, he has conveyed the meaning of the utterance.

The beauty of Portia is praised to the sky high by Bassanio. He says that she cannot be undervalued even to Cato’s daughter, Brutus’

Portia. Having known that she is pretty, renowned suitors from all the four 132 directions have come to Belmont. In fact the suitors were attracted by

Portia. Her hair is beautifully picturised by Bassanio. He says,

Nor is the wide world ignorant of her worth,

For the four winds blow in from every coast

Renowned suitors, and her sunny locks

Hang on her temples like a golden fleece,

Which makes her seat of Belmont Colchos’ strand,

And many Jasons come in quest of her.

(E.C.P.1.1.166-171)

Golden fleece is a reference to the classical story of Jason’s quest for the

Golden Fleece in Colchos. The phrase was also used for the wealth that merchants ventured after. The allusion to golden fleece employed by

Shakespeare through Antonio originally refers to the expedition of the

Argonauts under Jason to Colchis in Asia (on the east coast of the Euxine or Black sea) to obtain the golden fleece of the ram which Hermes had given to Phirixus. Phirixus sacrificed the ram and presented the fleece to his father-in-law Aeetes, king of Colchis, who had it hung up in the grove of Ares and guarded by a dragon. Jason obtained it with the help of

Medea. It is highly impossible for the translators to bring in all these details with a view to making the Tamil readers understand the passage.

Any passage thick in allusion would certainly pose a problem and prove to 133 a challenging task to the translators. The translators have somehow crossed over the hurdle in a manner which they deemed fit.

PSM has totally localized the entire utterance of Bassanio. He has compared the suitors who had gathered in Belmont to a scene in Kamba

Ramayana, a famous Tamil epic with which all the Tamil readers and audience are familiar. In Kamba Ramayana, to marry Sita, the heroine of this epic, princely suitors have come from far and wide to prove themselves fit and then to marry her. Rama is one such suitor who had come to Mithlai. PSM says that Portia is no less than Sita. Belmont has become Mithlai here. In stead of Cato’s daughter, he has stated the daughter of Janagan the King of Midhilai, in stead of Brutus’s Portia, he has put Sita, the wife of Rama. Thus the translator has cleverly brought in the context.

KPP has exactly translated the allusion to golden fleece. He has given explanation at the foot-note for golden fleece, Cato’s daughter,

Brutus’s Portia and Jason. This Portia is no less equivalent to Cato’s daughter and Brutus’s Portia in chastity, intelligence and honesty. For

‘golden fleece’ his explanation is beautiful. As Tamils praise the blacky hair, the English would praise golden fleece. A story was said to be that golden fleece was in Colcho’s strand. Having encountered a lot of ordeals,

Jason reached Colcho’s strand and got the golden fleece at last. Similarly those who are eager to woo Portia, reach Belmont after facing a lot of 134 ordeals. Of course these elaborate explanations enable the Tamil readers understand the passage beyond any doubt.

ARS has clearly rendered the utterance without deviating from the original. In the text itself he has defined who Jason is, what golden fleece is and Belmont becoming like Colcho’s strand wherein Jasons were attracted. Here, there are many Jansons who are very much fascinated towards the golden coloured hair of Portia. He has not changed even the names, but brought in the meaning of the utterance.

TNS refers to the golden fleece at the surface level. He has not taken it very seriously. He has not even referred to Jason. In fact, he has cut short the entire utterance and put it in a nut shell. This is an example where the translator has resorted to synoptic rendering without bothering about classical allusion of the original. For him, the core-point of the story is more essential than the decorative accessories such as allusions, puns and equivocations.

In the next scene of the same Act, Portia talks about her father’s will with which she is bound by. As she says,

If I live to be as old as Sibylla, I will die as

chaste as Diana, unless I be obtained by the manner

of my father’s will . . .

(A.W.V.1.2.98-100) 135

The significance of using the names of Sibylla and Diana in this context would not be known to the Tamil readers because they do not know

anything about them. Sibylla is the most famous of the Roman sibyls (or

prophetesses) was the Sibyl of Cumae who obtained from Apollo the

promise that she would live as many years as the grains of sand she could

hold in her hands. Similarly Diana is a goddess known for her chastity and

fufill the request that is asked for, especially the marriage of the devotees.

PSM renders that according to the will of Portia’s father somebody has to

marry her. Otherwise she would live like Avvaiyar, a puranic woman who

lived as a spinster until she became very old as a doddering skeleton, and

died with chastity. To suit the taste of Tamil readers, he has localised the

matter. KPP has retained the name Sibylla a foreteller. God Apollo fell in

love with her (nkhfpj;J) and asked her what boon she wanted. She just

held a handful of soil (sand) in her hand and asked him that, she should

live on par with the number of sands her hand held (one sand = one year).

In the same foot-note he has described Diana who is a woman known for

her chastity. Diana is a goddess who is believed to favour those who seek

her for getting married. ARS renders this Portia’s utterance differently.

According to the will of Portia’s father, she shall marry. If it does not take

place, she shall live like Sybill women who would live upto their very old

age and live like the goddess Diana in chaste. He has used a phrase

“Sybill women” which has no relevance (p.19 in Translation). TNS has 136 skipped this mindful of the Tamil readers and viewers who are unaware of any such a belief.

Shylock says that he has heard Antonio does not have interest on lending. Antony too agrees to this. But Shylock corners him with an example. Both Sylock’s later remark in the same scene “I make it breed as

fast” and Antonio’s reference to “breed for barren metal” give the clue to the purpose of incorporating the story about Jacob and Laban’s sheep

rearing. Both these remarks allude to one of the stock arguments of the

time, taken from Aristotle, against usury, as money is a “barren” metal, it

can not breed, that is, it can multiply itself by interest. By recalling the

Jacob story, Shylock is turning the Aristotelian objection upside down by

showing that even in a natural process of breeding the increase or profit

may be helped by enterprise and ‘artificial’ manipulation and with God’s

blessing. But Antonio refuses to follow this argument and hence

Shylock’s grievance. Without having any background knowledge of this

Jacob story, Tamil readers can not understand the reason why Shylock

argues and Antonio objects to it. Shylock justifies that taking interest on

lending is not a sin or a crime. He says that thrift is blessing if men do not

steal it. The argument is as follows.

Shylock : ......

Methought you said you neither lend nor borrow

Upon advantage. 137

Antonio : I do never use it.

Shylock : When Jacob grazed his uncle Laban’s sheep, ―

This Jacob from our holy Abraham was

(As his wise mother wrought in his behalf)

The third possessor; ay, he was the third, ―

Antonio : And what of him? Did he take interest?

Shylock : No, not take interest, not as you would say,

Directly interest ― mark what Jacob did.

When Laban and himself were compromised

That all the eanlings which were streaked and pied

Should fall as Jacob’s hire. the eves being rank

In the end of autumn turned to the rams;

And when the work of generation was

Between these wooly breeders in the act,

The skilful shepherd pilled me certain wands,

And in the doing of the deed of kind

He struck them up before the fulsome ewes,

Who, then conceiving, did in evening time

Fall parti-coloured lambs, and those were Jacob’s

This was a way to thrive, and he was blest ―

And thrift is blessing if men steal it not.

(E.C.P.1.3.61-82) 138

Of the four chosen translators, PSM has replaced Jacob with

Thigambarar, Laban with Swadembarar and Holy Abraham with

Theerthangar. Thigambarar had taken all the eanlings of the cattle, when

he had them with him as his hire. In stead of taking interest, he had taken

the eanlings and this is a way of prospering. He just conveys the ideas by

changing the names and incidents that are familiar to Tamil readers and

viewers of the play. He has cut short the lengthy utterance of Shylock.

KPP has retained the names as they are. He has so exactly rendered

the concept. Jacob and Laban made an agreement that eanlings born with

parti-colour would be the former’s hire. The clever shepherd with his

vicious deeds made all the sheep give birth to parti-coloured lambs. As

usual, at the foot-note he has stated that Abraham, Jacob and Laban are

the predecessors of the Christians.

ARS has very clearly rendered the utterance that has reference to

Jacob’s intelligence. Shylock says that Jacob was grazing the sheep of his

uncle Laban. He is the third possessor as descendant of Abraham. Antonio

asks Shylock if he obtained any interest and why he should refer to Jacob.

Shylock replies him that Jacob did not get his interest directly. Laban and

Jacob made an agreement. The eanlings born with lined dot marks would

belong to Jacob, others would belong to Laban. Laban separated the sheep

with lined and dot marks. But Jacob painted the lines and dots on posts

and made the mother sheep look at them. Thus all the sheep gave birth to 139 the lambs with line and dot marks and he cleverly got his hire. This was a way to progress. He was blessed by God. If men do not steal, thrift becomes a livelihood and it is a way to prosperity. This is how ARS renders keeping in mind his readers and viewers who do not know much about this allusion to the Bible. TNS has also rendered in the same way but it is much more clearer than ARS’s rendering.

Prince of Morocco, one of the suitors of Portia has come to

Belmont. He wants to try his fortune. To emphasize his view that a person’s worth can not really be decided by chance, the prince uses an

allusive remark as follows.

If Hercules and Lichas play at dice

Which is the better man, the greater throw

May turn by fortune from the weaker hand.

So is Alcides beaten by his page;

And so may I, blind Fortune leading me,

Miss that which one unwortheir may attain,

And die with grieving.

(A.W.V.2.1.32-38)

In fact Hercules is from the Greek Mythology in which Hercules

proved his courage by completing twelve very difficult tasks. He is known

for his courage and strength. Thus he is referred to wherever courage and

strength matter. PSM replaces Hercules with Beema, Lichas with Bringy 140

Maharishi and Alcides with Arjuna. All these three legendary figures are popular among the Tamil readers. He has brought out the very meaning of

the utterance with these changes in characters. PSM would have thought that these legendary figures in the original might not have any relevance with Tamils. Thus he has changed. KPP renders that if there is a competition between Hercules and Lichas at dice, the weaker may win in stead of stronger and greater. Hercules otherwise known as Alcides was beaten by his page. It is implied, in the case of Portia also, as a blind fortune the weaker may select the right casket and marry her. KPP has explained in the foot-note that Hercules is a powerful God. Lichas is the servant of Hercules and Alcides is the other name of Hercules.

ARS translates this utterance very clearly. If Hercules is asked to play dice with his page Lichas to test the strength, the strongest hands of

Hercules may lose himself to the weakest hands of Lichas. This thing may happen in the selection of the right casket by the Prince of Morocco. TNS renders that luck alone decides whether Hercules is better or Lichas is better in dice. The Great warrior may lose to his own servant. Similarly the Prince goes believing in blind faith and he may fail to choose the right casket. An unworthy person may select the right casket and marry Portia if he is lucky. TNS also has conveyed the meaning. The reason behind referring to this allusive remark has been considered seriously by the translators and rendered accordingly. 141

This utterance conveys a beautiful idea, where all depend upon luck, as in the game of dice, and in this lottery of the caskets, the weak has

an equal chance with the strong or even better chance than the strong.

Morocco’s mistake is to suppose that the choice of the right casket

depends upon “blind fortune” also and upon good character, of which the

apparent lottery really furnishes a true test. Shakespeare himself has said

in one of his plays. “Fortune favours fools.” Any fool, coward or weak

fellow may become Portia’s suitor provided he is lucky. This idea is

brought out lucidly by the translators.

Shylock proceeds to the masque following Launcelot. Before

leaving his house, he advises his daughter Jessica to lock the door and

remain in until he comes back.

Shylock : Go you before me, sirrah-Say I will come.

Launcelot : I will go before, sir (whispers to Jessica)

Mistress, look out at window, for all this ―

There will come a Christian by,

Will be worth a Jewes eye.

Shylock : What says that fool of Hagar’s offspring, ha?

Jessica : His words were “Farewel Mistress”, nothing else.

(E.C.P.2.5.37-43)

The Tamil readers might not have known anything about Haggar’s

offspring. So PSM renders “What did the foolish descendant of VÀli say?” 142 asked Shylock to Jessica, his daughter. VÀli is a character in the Tamil epic Kamba Ramayana and it is a well known epic to all Tamils. VÀli and

Sukr¼van are two brothers. They were the reincarnation of monkeys.

They helped a lot to Rama, the hero of the epic. They are known for their

mischievous behaviour. Since Leuncelot is also mischievous, PSM has

very appropriately rendered the text with a very great relevancy and

suitability. PSM has localized the concept. KPP has retained Hagar and

explained in the foot-note that Hagar’s offspring belongs to the

descendant of Hagar. He belongs to a community which is disregarded by

Jewish. Shara is the wife of Abraham and Hagar is a bonded slave to

Shara. TNS has not bothered about Hagar. He has simply stated, what was

told to Jessica by the son of the slave. ARS translates the utterance. “What

did this foolish donkey who was like Ismail born to Hagar, say?” Shylock

wanted to know. Though there is explanation for Hagar, he has just

brought in the idea safe.

At the out side of Shylock’s house, Gratiano and Salerio are asked

to stand by Lorenzo. They speak about how far the lovers be prompt, agile

and keep up the time.

Gratiano : And it is marvel he out-dwells his hour,

For lovers ever run before the clock. 143

Salarino : O, ten times faster Venus’ pigeons fly

To seal love’s bonds new-made, than they are wont

To keep obliged faith unforfeited!

(A.W.V.2.6.3-7)

Of the four translators of this study, PSM renders the first utterance made by Gratiano that it is very much surprising that Lorenzo has not turned up within the stipulated time. Usually lovers would arrive well in advance. In fact, they would be many times faster, just like the God of love in Tamil, Manmadhan’s pigeons that fly faster. Manmadhan is the

God of love in Tamil. He is otherwise known as Madhan. PSM has aptly translated by localizing the concept. KPP has given explanation for

Venus’ Pigeons in the foot-note on contrary to other utterances, here he has not used the name Venus in the text. There is no direct reference to

Venus’ pigeons fly. ARS translates that Lorenzo would come ten times faster and his coming fast here is equivalent to that of sitting in Venus’

Chariot drawn by pigeons and coming to recognize the agreement of new lover by a lady love. It is found in page 50 of translated version. Another translator chosen for this study, TNS renders that Lorenzo would come ten times faster than the Venus Chariot drawn by Pigeons even in windy atmosphere, in order to assert the new agreement without causing any damage, the assurance to be made. To state like this is the convention in

Tamil. It is found in P.no. 55 of his translated version. 144

Shakespeare refers to the prodical son through the speeches of

Gratiano in the play. It is as follows in the words of Gratiano.

All things that are,

Are with more spirit chased than enjoyed

How like a younger or a prodigal

The scarfed bark puts from her native bay,

Hugged and embraced by the strumpet wind!

How like the prodigal doth she return,

(E.C.P.2.6.12-17)

In fact, this is Gratiano’s philosophical utterance wherein

Shakespeare employs the word the younger or a prodigal. Without having knowledge about the prodigal son of the parable related in Luke, Chapter

15 in The Bible, the Tamil readers or viewers can not understand the context. This parable is about a prodigal son who was so adamant in getting his share from his father, got it, went away to far off place where he joined with bad companions, spent his share of money lavishly and prepared to eat even the pods in a pig farm. Having realized his mistake, he got back to his father and asked for pardon. The father of the prodigal son forgave him and gave him a rousing reception which was disliked by his elder son. Finally the father convinced his elder son saying that it was proper to receive him because he thought that he was dead but he has come back alive on contrary to his assumption. 145

PSM had thought that it would not be easy to make the Tamils understand the concept which is totally unfamiliar and unnecessary to them as he thought and so he had virtually omitted this allusion to The

Bible and rendered the rest of the utterance.

KPP has not referred to the ‘prodigal son’ employed in this context first. He gives reference to the progical son employed in the same utterance of course but with a change in name the younger son Edamban

(2.6.21-57, “,isnahd; ,lk;gd;”). He too had thought like PSM and omitted it mindful of the Tamil readers who are unfamiliar with this parable from The Bible. TNS stops with saying “a young man”. He does not refer to the prodigal son because Shakespeare himself has stated a younger or a prodigal without giving any elaborate explanation. ARS also renders the text in the same way but he has slightly hinted upon the concept. The ship that goes to sail in the sea with a rich young man comes back to the village with the tattered (rPuHpe;j) youngman. It is notable that he has not stated anything about the prodigal son.

Therefore it could be inferred that literary allusions employed by the English writers in their works are not at all familiar with the Tamil readers and viewers. Hence the translators either omit or interpret for the suitability of the Tamils.

Jessica feels shy when she is in disguise of a male. She says that she is happy with the night time as she appears to be male in the dress. 146

She says that even Cupid, the god of love would blush to see him

(disguised Jessica). In her own words,

For I am much ashamed of my exchange

But love is blind and lovers cannot see

The pretty follies that themselves commit;

For if they could, Cupid himself would blush

To see me thus transformed to a boy.

(E.C.P.2.6.35-39)

PSM beautifully translates this utterance. He says that Jessica feels

coy to see herself in boy’s dress. But love has no eyes, at the same time

the pretty follies that they commit are unknown to them. Since they are known to them, Madhan the person who is responsible for this love, himself will feel shy when he looks at her in the male dress. PSM has brought in the idea very clearly but by replacing the name of the God of love Cupid with Madhan who is the most equivalent, appropriate and familiar to Tamil readers. He has aptly done. It is an excellent comparison. In fact one would wonder at his skill. Cupid is the Roman

God of love. He is shown as a beautiful baby boy with wings, carrying a bow and arrow with him. It is the English convention to refer to his name in the literary works especially to state romantic relationship between two people. 147

KPP cleverly renders the utterance in Tamil but he has stated

Chithasan (rpj;jrd; 58) instead of Cupid. ARS states that Cupid, the god of love would blush if he looked at Jessica in the boy’s dress. To make the readers understand he states ‘The God of love’ before referring to Cupid.

Though the readers of the translation do not know much about Cupid, they are made to know that he is the God of love. TNS renders that the Tamil

God Manmadhan himself would blush if he looked at Jessica in boy’s dress. Both TNS and PSM are unique in their translation of this particular utterance of Jessica.

Bassanio is let to choose the casket. Portia says, if he chooses the wrong casket he will make a swan-like end. The English belief is that the swans sing before they die. If he chooses the right casket he will hear the dulcet sounds in the day break. It is in the words of Portia,

Such it is

As are those dulcet sounds in break of day

That creep into the dreaming bridegroom’s ear

And summon him to marriage . . .

(E.C.P.3.2.50-53)

In these lines, there is an allusion to the old English custom of playing music under the windows of the bridegroom’s bedroom on the morning of his marriage. PSM has very beautifully translated, dulcet sound is a kind of music played at the early morning to gently wake up the bridegroom 148 and invite him to the marriage dais (kzg;ge;jy;). KPP states, the dulcet

sound as ringing of the church bell. ARS renders casually, let the music be

played as an auspicious music so as to be reached to the ears of the

bridegroom on the day of his marriage. He has not brought in the

significance of the ‘dulcet sounds’ and when to be played exactly. TNS

also has translated on par with PSM.

The way Bassanio walks towards the caskets is beautifully

described by Portia. She compares him to young Alcides (Hercules) who

goes to rescue Hesione, the daughter of Laomedon from the sea monster.

Portia : Now he goes,

With no less presence, but with much more love,

Than young Alcides, when he did redeem

The virigin tribute paid by howling Troy

To the sea-monster. I stand for sacrifice;

The rest aloof are the Dardanian wives,

With bleared visages come forth to view

The issue of the exploit. Go, Hercules!

Live thou, I live: with much much more dismay

I view the fight than thou that mak’st the fray.

(A.W.V.3.2.53-62)

There is a popular allusion to the classical story of Alcides in these

poetic lines. The Tamil readers who are unaware of this classical allusion, 149 read this particular play in Translation, if it is translated as it is can never understand what Shakespeare intends to say. The classical story relates that Laomedon, king of Troy offended Poseidon god of the sea (Neptune).

There on he sent a sea-monster to ravage the country. By the command of an Oracle, the Trojans were obliged, from time to time, to sacrifice a maiden to the monster. On one occasion it was decided by the lot that the king’s daughter Hesione should be the victim. Hercules promised to save the maiden with a condition that Laomedon should give him the horses which Tros had once received from Zeus. Hercules killed the monster. Having known the background of Tamil readers, PSM, one of the chosen translators for this study, has given allusion to The RÀmÀyaõÀ the famous epic which is very popular among all the Tamils. His employment of an allusion to The Ramayana is about the selection of the most suitable life partner for Sita, the heroine of the epic. Here, there are three caskets in The Merchant of Venice. Of them, the suitor has to select the right casket to marry Portia. In The Ramayana, the suitor has to break a strong and heavy bow as set by the king of Midilai namely Janagan.

Thus PSM has cleverly changed the event from the English classical story into similar event from the Tamil epic The Ramayana and made the readers equally understand the concept. But it is notable that he has retained the basic concepts given within bracket. He does not say that it is the bow that is kept over there, but the caskets that are there. KPP has 150 rendered these lines as they are. As usual, he has given the event of the story lucidly in the foot-note, of course with a change in the name of god,

Poseidon into the Tamil god Varunan, the god of rain in Tamil. ARS renders that Bassanio goes towards the caskets. His grandeur walk towards the caskets looks like Hercules who went to save Hesione from the sea monster. He goes faster than Hercules with much more love.

Hesione was to be sacrificed on that day. All others who have gathered there were like Trojan women who were shedding tears and watching the cruel event. Portia asks how many obstacles there are between the property and the owner and she also asks Bassanio to make her his own.

TNS has rendered equivalent to that of ARS. In short, of the four

translators, PSM differs in his rendering. Since he has localized the

concept, it ultimately reaches the readers and viewers beyond any doubt.

At the same time, the rest of the three translators have done retaining the characters and allusions as they are:

Bassanio ignores the golden casket mindful of Midas whose food also turned into gold on touching. This reference to Midas is new to the

Tamil readers but very popular among the European.

Therefore thou gaudy gold,

Hard food for Midas. I will none of thee;

(A.W.V.3.2.101-102) 151

In fact Midas is a wealthy but effeminate king of Phrygia. In his folly he desired that all things which he touched should be turned into gold. The boon was granted. Even the food which he touched to eat became gold. He had to starve. Finally he implored Dionysus to take his favour back. The

God took it away. Midas was able to eat and be free from hunger. For the sake of Tamil reading people who do not know anything about Midas,

PSM has omitted it and brought in the very idea of the text. KPP has rendered these two lines as they are and explained the facts behind Midas at the foot-note. ARS states that gold is the food of Midas, the miser and so Bassanio does not want to choose the gold casket. Similarly TNS also renders “oh! shining gold casket! the solid food of Midas. I won’t choose you” (gsgsf;Fk; j';fg; ngiHna! kplh!; kd;ddpd; jplcznt! cd;id ehd; njh;e;bjLf;f khl;nld;) (89). Bassanio speaks like this and ignores the gold casket.

Pythagoras is a Greek philosopher. He taught the doctrine of the transmigration of souls. Gratiano says that within Shylock there must have been the soul of an animal. That is why he behaves like animal and always wants to revenge good Antonio. To reinforce his argument, he quotes Pythagoras’s theory of transmigration of souls. In his own words,

Thou almost makest me waver in my faith

To hold opinion with Pythagoras, 152

That souls of animals infuse themselves

Into the trunks of men: thy currish spirit.

(A.W.V.4.1.130-133)

One of the chosen translators for this study, PSM has brought the concept

into his rendering without any reference to Pythagoras. He might have

thought that it is least important to state whose theory it is rather than the theory of transmigration of souls. KPP has referred to the name of

Pythagoras and explained about him and his theory in the foot-note. ARS

renders that Gratiano says that Shyock is disproving the belief of

Christianity that there is no rebirth, but Pithagoras strongly opposed this

belief. The translator has given it in bracket. Some how or other he has

lucidly explained the theory of transmigration of souls propounded by

Pythagoras. Gratiano says that he believes in the theory. TNS also has

rendered similar to that of ARS.

Shakespeare brings out a highly romantic speech between Lorenzo

and Jessica. In fact it is the most fascinating and charming speech. The

audience would become spellbound and readers would be enthralled by

reading it. Shakespeare has given allusion to Chaucer’s Troilus and

Criseyde and Legend of Good Women. Moon light would be the right

time for such magic doing. In the legend Medea used her magic to restore

Jason’s father to youth. 153

Lorenzo : ......

Where Cressid lay that night.

Jessicca : In such a night

Did Thisbe fearfully o’ertirp the dew,

And saw the lion’s shadow ere himself,

And ran dismayed away.

Lorenzo : In such a night

Stood Dido with a willow in her hand

Upon the wild sea banks, and waft her love

To come again to Carthage.

Jessica : In such a night

Medea gathered the enchanted herbs

That did renew old Aeson.

(E.C.P.5.1.6-14)

PSM had known that these illusive remarks are totally unknown to the

Tamils. So he has rendered with examples from the Tamil classical

literary works Krishna Leela, Nalavenba and Sakuntala with which all the

Tamils are very familiar. Radhai went in search of Krishna in such a night

Dhamayanthi went in search of Nala who left her in such a night and

Sakuntala was wearing a flowery garland in such a night so as to meet

Dhushyanthan. PSM has localized the entire concept without bothering about the allusive remarks to the classical stories employed by 154

Shakespeare. KPP has given explanations at the foot-note about Cressid,

Tisbe, Dido and Medea. Larenzo and Jessica use these allusive remarks comparing their love with that of those legendary figures from the Greek and other epics. ARS and TNS have retained the English characters as they are and brought in the concept as it is.

Jessica, the only daughter of the Jew Shylock eloped with a Christian boy Lorenzo, Shylock did not like it. So Shylock expresses his wish that Jessica had married even a bad Jew rather than a Christian. In his words,

These be the Christian husbands! I have a daughter, ―

Would any of the stock of Barrabas

Had been her husband rather than a Christian! ―

(E.C.P.4.1.293-295)

Barrabas is a reference to the Villaneous Jew in Marlowe’s The Jew of

Malta or to the seditious, murderous Jew mentioned in Luke. Shylock is

expressing his views in either ways. With this reference to Barrabas, the

Tamil readers would not be familiar. Thus PSM replaces Christianity with

Hinduism. It is better an unearthed Carrion eating ghost be his daughter’s

husband than an Hindu boy. KPP has rendered lucidly with the name of

Barrabas. In the foot-note he has stated that Barrabas is a thief and

murderer. He is treated and revered just above the Jew in the Christianity

instead of marrying a Christian, his daughter would have married a bad 155

Jew like Barrabas. ARS and TNS in their rendering say that Shylock wishes to give his daughter in marriage to a Jew. The suitor may belong to the group of Barrabas instead of a Christian.

Bassanio invites Shylock for a dinner. Shylock sarcastically

resplies to his invitation as follows.

Shylock : Yes, to smell pork; to eat of the habitation

which your

prophet the Nazarite conjured the devil

into. I will buy with you,

sell with you,

talk with you, walk with you, and so following;

but

I will not eat with

you, drink with you, nor pray with you. . .

(E.C.P.1.3.27-30)

There is an allusion to The Bible here in this context. The allusion

is to Jesus Christ destroying the Gadarene. Shylock’s reference to Christ is

not contemptuous. He is decisively condemning the habit of eating pigs

and pork by the Christians.

Mindful of the Tamil audience and the readers of the play in Tamil,

PSM has rendered that their God (Christians’ God) took the third birth to

eat the pork. Shylock is willing to do all kinds of transactions and 156 practices excepting eating of the pork and praying along with them

(Christians). PSM changed the Christian God into the Hindu God throughout the play for the sake of readers. This is the context wherein he says “your God”. It is addressed straight. KPP has given the entire utterance in the foot-note. He has also stated who Nazarite is. It is Jesus

Christ. Shylock asks Bassianio whether he has to smell the pork. As Jesus

Christ conjured, the pigs and porks became the dwelling places of the devil. “Should I eat them?” Shylock asked Bassanio. The rest of the utterance he has rendered is, like PSM’s. His translation of this particular text is in a way better than PSM’s because he has explained about the prophet and what he did. TNS begins with, hatefully Shylock responded to the invitation extended by Bassanio. He asks him whether he has to smell the pork and eat it. Nazarite freed the possessed from the devils and made those devils enter into the souls of the pigs. Shylock asks Bassanio whether he should eat such possessed pigs and pork. TNS’s rendering is very clear. TNS has not rendered this utterance fully. He has omitted the allusion to the biblical reference and rendered the rests.

The prince of Morocco is one of the suitors who has come to

Belmont. As a suitor, he desires to see Portia and he says:

Bring me the fairest creature northward born,

Where Phoebus’ fire scarce thaws icicles, 157

And let us make incision for your love,

To prove whose blood is reddest, his or mine,

(A.W.V.2.1. 4-7)

His complexion is due to the climatic condition of his country. The hot sun made him black. But he challenges his blood would be redder than any person who hails from northward where Phoebus’ fire can never melt the icy bar. From such a coolest part of country, Portia is asked to bring a fellow to test the blood of both. He proclaims that his blood would certainly be redder than his. This allusion to Phoebus’ fire is not familiar to Tamil readers. Thus PSM instead of northward or north pole, says that

Portia has to bring a person from the icy region of the Himalayas where the sun can not melt the icy bars and test their blood and to find out whose blood is redder. PSM has localized the concept by referring to the chillest part of India to make the readers understand the concept. KPP has not touched upon Phoebus’ fire. He has just omitted it. He might have thought that it would be unnecessary to Tamil audience or the readers. ARS renders that Prince of Morocco asks Portia to bring a white fellow from the Northpole and test their blood to find out whose blood is redder. With his complexion, he has driven away many soldiers and he was best regarded by many virgins. He too has not given any reference to Phoebus’ fire. It is a sheer omission by him. TNS has explained that Portia has to 158 bring a fellow from the North pole where even Phoebus’ fire can not melt the icy bar. He has lucidly rendered these lines stated above.

There is a reference to classical story of Jason’s quest for the

Golden fleece in Colchos. The phrase has been used for the wealth that

merchants ventured after. Gratiano says,

I know he will be glad of our success;

We are the Jasons, we have won the fleece.

(A.W.V.3.2.235-236)

While Bassanio is reading the letter from Antonio, Salerio and

Gratiano speak to each other. Of all the suitors who have come to

Belmont, Bassanio has chosen the right casket and won Portia. That is

why Gratiano says Antonio will be glad to hear of their success. He

compares that they are like the Jasons who won the Golden Fleece. PSM

has omitted this allusive remark to the expedition of the Argonauts under

Jason to Colchis. Since KPP has already explained about Jasons referred

(E.C.P.1.1.171-172) he straight away renders Jasons as Jasons. ARS

renders that they prove to be the Jasons who won Colchis where there was

the golden fleece. TNS says that they are the Jasons. They have won the

Golden Fleece.

159

Translation theories

As far as the chosen play for this study is concerned, the translators have applied the theories enunciated by Popovic to some extent that too unknowingly because PSM and KPP have translated the play even before the introduction of translation theories and ARS and TNS also have not strictly followed the theories of translation. Yet, there are some methods of translation that they have been adopted. In fact all these four translators of this play have not acquainted themselves with the theories first and started translating the play next. They have just started straight. Had they strictly adhered to the theory, they would not have rendered within the time frame that they themselves might have fixed.

Linguistic equivalence is where there is homogeneity on the linguistic level of both source language and target language texts that is, word for word translation. As far as PSM is concerned, he has not omitted

many things. He has brought in all the ideas of Shakespeare, of course

with slight modifications towards the suitability of Tamils. The obvious

examples are plenty. One such remarkable example is that Portia

comments on Falcon bridge the young baron of England.

Portia : He is a proper man’s picture; but, alas, who

can converse with a dumb-show? How oddly he is

suited! I think he bought his doublet in Italy, his 160

round hose in France, his bonnet in Germany, and his

behaviour every where.

(A.W.V.1.2.65-69)

PSM has translated word for word. He could have stated that he has bought his clothes from various countries. But he renders the names of the nations from where he has bought his dresses, of course he has changed the names of the countries and states. He changes Italy into Hyderabad,

France into Deccan and Germany into Bangladesh. As he wanted to localize the entire play, he makes such changes. He has not omitted any concept. KPP and ARS also have rendered this text word by word whereas TNS has omitted this text.

The second type of equivalence enunciated by Popovic is

Paradigmatic equivalence where there is equivalence of ‘the elements of a paradigmatic expressive axis’ i.e. elements of grammar. This equivalence is of higher category than lexical equivalence. The translators can have the grammatical accuracy. In no way it proves to be a barrier for them. But very rarely they violate grammar rules. It is because of the emphatic usage of languages. Suppose the translators feel that something should be emphasized, they make a statement into questions. The example here in the chosen translations for this study is that Shylock wants to ascertain the elopement of his daughter with Lorenzo. It is known only to 161

Salarino. All others do not know. Thus Shylock intends to know it from

Salarino.

You knew, none so well, none so well as you,

of my daughter’s flight

(A.W.V.3.1.22-23)

PSM, in his translation makes it an interrogative because he thinks

that tonal meanings can be conveyed only when it is rendered in the

question form. How PMS has rendered in Tamil is translated as follows.

The translation is mine.

Shylock : You only know the fact of my daughter’s elopement from

my home, As you know, is it known to any body else? (p.57

in Translated version)

Thus PSM, has brought in the tonal meaning of the text. KPP has done it

verbatim. ARS and TNS translate that Shylock say “You know very well

about my daughter’s elopement. Others do not know as much as you

know about it.”

Thus PSM cares more for taking the matter, to the target audience

or readers beyond the grammar rules.

The third equivalence is stylistic (translational) equivalence which

insists functional equivalence of elements in both original and translations

aiming at an expressive identity with an invariant of identical meaning. 162

There are many contexts where this particular element could be identified. The obvious example is Bassanio’s comments on the meaningless speeches of Gratiano.

Gratiano speaks an infinite deal of nothing,

more than any man in all Venice. His reasons are as

two grains of wheat hid in two bushels of chaff: you

shall seek all day ere you find them; and when you have

them, they are not worth the search.

(A.W.V.1.1.114-118)

Identical meaning is invariably conveyed by PSM and ARS, of course

with a change in the grains – wheat into rice which is more familiar with

Tamils. They have very appropriately brought in the idea without causing any damage to the original. Of the other two chosen translators for this study, KPP has identically expressed the ideas excepting the phrase two grains of wheat into general grain. TNS has just conveyed the intended meaning of the texts. At the same time he has touched upon the comparison made between the speeches of Gratiano and their meaning.

Thus all the first three translators have rendered with stylistic

(translational) equivalence.

The fourth equivalence is textual (syntagmatic) equivalence where there is equivalence of the syntagmatic structuring of a text that is equivalence of form and shape. As far as this equivalence is concerned, 163 there is no possibility to have a unique syntagmatic structure between

English and Tamil. Thus the chosen translators have not strictly followed this equivalence in their renderings.

Shifts in Translation

Anton Popovic establishes the following shifts.

(a) Constitutive shift (in translation) described as an inevitable

shift that takes place as a result of differences between two

languages, two poetics and two styles.

(b) Generic shift, where the constitutive features of the text as

a literary genre may change.

(c) Individual shift, where the translator’s own style and idiolect

may introduce a system of individual deviations.

(d) Negative shift, where information is incorrectly translated, due

to unfamiliarity with the languages or structure of the original.

(e) Topical shift, where topical facts of the original are altered in

the translation.

It is an amazing fact that all these chosen translators have followed these shifts enunciated by Anton Popovic. There are gulf of differences between English and Tamil phonemically, syntaxically and even socio-culturally. PSM changes the word ‘hazard’ into luck. It is Tamil convention to state about the luck when something or somebody is going 164 to be preferred. To be free from verbatim PSM renders the following utterance of Portia differently

Portia : First, forward to the temple; after dinner

Your hazard shall be made.

(A.W.V.2.1.44-45)

It is pathetically said by Portia mindful of the destiny of the Prince of Morocca. But PSM changes it conveniently. It is a nice constitutive shift indeed. In English it is plainly stated “hazard” which means danger but PSM wants to avoid stating this negative aspect for good thing. KPP says “boldly select the casket”. ARS has just given it in the form of instruction “First go to the temple of MÀtha (Mary), to take vow. After

dinner, selection ritual will be held.” TNS renders that the prince can try

his luck having taken the oath. Before this, he can go to the temple of

MÀtha (Mary) and have dinner.

Generic shift is quite common in translation. PSM renders the play in the form of prose, of course with conversation style. KPP translates the play in the form of prose and poetry. ARS and TNS have rendered the play in the form of prose only. This shift is inevitable because of the prevalence of inequality in the style and nature of the two languages.

The third shift is known as individual shift. Since PSM’s rendering is an adaptation, he follows his own style and idiolect on many contexts.

He chooses examples from the life style, habits and customs of typical 165

Tamils and Tamil society. The rests of the Tamil translators also follow their own style. Thus each translator is unique in rendering the same play.

The fourth shift known as Negative shift could also be identified in the renderings of the play. The obvious example could be found in PSM’s version. Bassanio forces Portia (in disguise as a lawyer) to accept something in memory of winning the case. But Portia is against receiving the offer. Bassanio goes a step further and persuades.

Dear sir, of force I must attempt you further:

Take some remembrance of us, as a tribute,

(A.W.V.4.1.419-420)

PSM renders,

Sir, however, I must attempt to rape you to accept our offer not as

labour but as remembrance.

This is totally negative or contrary to the original. The word

“attempt” has made the translator think negatively. This is entirely contrary to the intended meaning conveyed by Shakespeare. It is not so with the rest of the chosen translators for this study.

The fifth and the last shift known as topical shift has also been made by PSM. Since he wanted his translation to be reader-oriented, he brings in the entire situation towards the Tamil scenario. The classical allusions employed by Shakespeare are adapted from the great Indian epics such as The RÀmÀyaõÀ, The Mahabharata etc. These epics and 166 legends are very popularly among the Tamils. Equivalent and more appropriate examples have been extracted and employed by him. KPP has faithfully followed the original. But, he has given elaborate explanations for each allusive remark in the foot-note. ARS and TNS also have not

changed the allusive remarks. Except PSM, the rests of the three chosen

translators have identified all the topical matters as they are. But they have

given explanation either in the foot-note or within brackets. This is how

they have shifted and surmounted the problem encountered by them.

Barring all these barriers, set backs and hurdles, the plays of

Shakespeare have crossed the boundaries of Europe with the help of

translation and his classical works are read and viewed with a very great

fascination and crazy throughout the world. In fact the translation proves

to be a window to the world. The next chapter deals with how the

translation proves to be a window to the classical literary works.

Chapter IV

TRANSLATION AS A WINDOW TO THE WORLD CLASSICS

4.1. Popularity of the play in Translation

The pivotal role played by the translators especially in the

dissemination of knowledge of Shakespeare is highly remarkable. His

plays have been rendered into almost all the languages of the world. His

thoughts have reached far and wide, nook and cranny and even to the rural

folks of the world. As Bakaya says:

Literatures interact with each other and are influenced by one

another. Writers in all languages would be the poorer if they had no

access to the work of writers in other languages. There are, of

course, people in India, as in any other country, who read and can

enjoy literature in more than one language. But the worldwide

dissemination of literary wealth takes place thanks mainly to the

difficult and highly creative work of translators. Kalidas,

Shakespeare, Goethe, Tolstoy, Romain Rolland and Tagore would

not have become world writers but for their translators, many of

whom remain almost unnoticed by the readers of the translated

work. (129)

168

4.2. Impact of the story on the college and school students

At the college and University levels, his plays are prescribed not only to the students of literature but also to the students who study English

as part II. Plays such as Romeo and Juliet, The Merchant of Venice, Julius

Caesar, The Tempest, King Lear, and As You Like It are some of the plays

very popular among the students of advanced academic institutions. Apart

from prescribing full plays for study, excerpts from famous tragedies and comedies formed part of the syllabus in these institutions. The trend is still existing. Arangasamy says as far as schools are concerned:

Teachers in middle and secondary schools encouraged the boys to

display their histrionic abilities before guests at school function at

which some quotable quotes would invariably figure. The practice

of reciting favourite passages includes Antony’s Oration, Hamlet’s

soliloquy on death, Portia’s appeal for mercy, Shylock’s out burst

against Christians, Jacque’s seven ages of man etc. (5)

Quality of mercy as spoken by Portia in the court of Venice in the

chosen play for the study The Merchant of Venice is quite popular among

the student community. The remarkable lines are as follows:

The quality of mercy is not straind,

It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven

Upon the place beneath: it is twice blessed;

It blesseth him that gives and him that takes: 169

’Tis mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes

The throned monarch better than his crown;

His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,

The attribute to awe and majesty,

Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings;

But mercy is above this sceptred sway;

It is enthroned in the hearts of kings,

It is an attribute to God himself;

And earthly power doth then show likest God’s

When mercy seasons justice.

(A.W.V.4.1.182-195)

There is a universal truth that the quality of mercy blesses not only the giver but also the receiver. It has got its own power. It is the mightiest.

It drops as a gentle rain from heaven. Every king has temporal powers to rule whereas mercy has powers permanently. The chosen translators have rendered this court scene exceedingly well.

These lines are often quoted by many scholars to emphasize the quality of mercy. It is very rightly pointed out by William Blake in his poem “The Divine Image” an excerpt from his Songs of Innocence and

Experience (1917). If a person has mercy, pity, peace and love he is the reincarnation of God himself. Obviously it is correct if the king has all these qualities primarily mercy, he is equivalent to God and God is 170 dwelling in him. Hence, a king was considered God on Earth and his word was the word of the Divine.

Apart from these remarkable lines, there are many quotable quotes used by the scholarly public and orators. The obvious example is the description of the beauty of Portia by Bassanio.

In Belmont is a lady richly left;

And she is fair, and, fairer than that word,

(A.W.V.1.1.161-162)

Shakespeare with his skilful writings takes all the readers and viewers of his plays to an enchanting world of imagination. This play also does so without fail. Night is very beautifully described by Lorenzo to

Jessica.

The moon shines bright. In such a night as this,

When the sweet wind did gently kiss the trees

And they did make no noise, in such a night

Troilus methinks mounted the Trojan walls

And sighed his soul toward the Grecian tents,

Where Cressid lay that night

(E.C.P.5.1.1-7)

The readers are carried away by these romantic lines. There are innumerable examples like this. All these chosen translators for the 171 present study have excellently attempted and brought in the real time experience through their Tamil renderings.

Thus the prescribed abridged stories of Shakespearea’s plays have won the hearts of the students and viewers on enactment. These stories not only develop their ability to read, enjoy and cherish but also to retell in comprehensive narration besides enriching vocabulary. The students who study Shakespeare’s plays are greatly influenced mainly with the theme.

They become familiar with idioms, images, phrases, dialect, phrasal verbs,

proverbs, maxims, literary allusions, adaptation, style, culture and

traditions of the English and various other aspects and use them or follow

them.

Once they become familiar with all these literary miscellany, they

are prepared to apply them in their own writings, if any. The entire play or

an interesting part of a play is enacted by the students of schools, colleges

and universities especially in the Annual Days. It has been a convention to

add the enactment of Shakespearean plays in the programme schedule

until recently and even now. All his plays are available in Compact Disc.

They are screened instead of enacting on the stage now. Some of the sites

in the internet also have the play either fully or excerpts in English and

also in several other languages of the world. 172

There were films adapted from literary works which were fuelled by Shakespeare. The chosen play was filmed by Serukulathur Sama in

Tamil but with the different title. As in the words of Randor Guya

There was even a Tamil film called “Shylock” (1940) made by the

talented Serukulathur Sama who wrote, directed and played the

title role in it. Interestingly, he not only retained the Shakespearean

names for all the characters, but even designed costume similar to

those used in Elizabethan theatre (www.thehindu.com).

The visual medium has become an effective tool in dissemination of knowledge of Shakespeare especially in these days of declining trend prevalent with respect to the habit of reading as rightly pointed out by

Bakaya, “with the development of such mass media as the cinema, radio and television, reading habits are on decline” (138).

It is undeniably true that the reading habit in the present world, especially among the youngsters has become very poor. Therefore visual form proves to be a boon. Shakespeare wrote his plays for enactment only.

It is often said that Shakespeare never intended his plays to be read;

he wrote them to be performed as state-spectacle under certain

conditions; if we take the plays out of this context, we immediately

falsify them. Yet reading him is what most of us, students of

Shakespeare do nearly all the time. We analyse him in the study

more than we watch him in the theatre (Kenneth and Oxley 46). 173

4.3. The effect of the play on enactment

To view any play on the screen is quite interesting invariably of the age of viewers. With the advent of electronic media, dissemination of knowledge has become easier, effective and instant. It is appropriately stated by Gentzler: The impact of American television, radio, music and international advertising, bears more and more heavily upon any discussion of translation worldwide (184).

It is not only for discussion but also for dissemination. Unlike other plays, Shakespeare’s plays have got their own unique qualities to enthrall the audience or readers. It is true as stated by Das in his A Handbook of

Translation Studies “Further more, a dramatic text exhibits its full

meaning only in its performance” (49).

In fact the audience become spell bound. The court scene in The

Merchant of Venice thrills the audience with awe and wonders as to how

the case would proceed anticipating the final verdict. The audiences are

made to be sure that Antonio is going to lose a pound of his flesh. The

entry of Portia and Nerissa in disguise becomes the climax of the play.

Apart from many other aspects, since the story deals with the human

survival that is hanging at the mercy of the jew, it gains its momentum.

The comic elements have been introduced in the play in Act II,

Scene ii, through Launcelot Gobbo, a servant of Shylock and clown and

his aged father Old Gobbo. When the Old Gobbo comes in search of his 174 son Launcelot Gobbo, he meets him on the way to Shylock’s house but he could not recognize his own son, owing to poor visibility caused by age.

Launcelot takes it as an advantage and makes fun of his own father who comes with a basket containing a dish of doves to meet Shylock the jew.

He confuses his father who asks for the way to go to Jew’s house.

Old Gobbo : Master young Gentleman, I pray you, which is the

way to master Jew’s?

Launcelot

Gobbo : Turn up on your right hand at the next

turning, but, at the next turning of all, on your left;

marry, at the very next turning, turn of no hand, but

turn down indirectly to the Jew’s house.

(A.W.V.2.2.35-38)

Similarly there are obvious examples of comic interludes to make

this play more interesting with humour to the audience. The villaineous

speech made by Shylock on the inability to repay the loan borrowed by

Antonio, Shylock’s views on lending loan on interest, his sarcastic

remarks on Antony about the later’s business, attitudes of Christian and

Jews mainly pertaining to lending loan are well portrayed in the play. The

viewers of this play are carried away to the city of Venice and Belmont,

ships, trade practices, Rialto, Venetian court, revengeful attitude of

Shylock, helping tendency of Antony unmindful of foregoing his life for 175 the sake of his genuine friend who is very badly in need of financial assistance and disguised Portia as lawyer and Jessica as a clerk. These are

well picturised in this play. Since the rousing curiosity on the subsequent

occurrence is through out the play, the audience become spell bound.

4.4. The impact of the play on the mass when screened as film

Cinema is the most appropriate medium to take any concept to the grass root level. As stated by Bakaya,

The cinema and television, though useful media for the

dissemination of art, have adversely effected our reading habits.

Serous literature is published in lamentably small editions, leave

aside being translated. It is interesting that unlike in literature,

inter-lingual influences have of late become much more marked in

the cinema, which is accessible to the literate as well as to the

illiterate. Whereas a good book is read in India at best by a few

thousands, a good film (and not only good films) is seen by

millions. (131)

The most popular plays of Shakespeare have been filmed in Tamil not as a whole but as parts. Such plays have won the admiration of the theatre goers and the public.

The obvious example is a part of Othello in the film KaÒva¸i¸

KÀthali has much delighted the audience. 176

4.5. Estimation on its reaching the society

The translated versions of the play have reached even beyond the boundaries of Tamil Nadu and in countries where Tamil speaking people are in large numbers. Its reaching to the grass root level is immeasurable.

Plays such as The Merchant of Venice, Julius Caesar, King Lear, Hamlet,

The Tempest, As You Like It and Othello are very popular even among the rural literates and semi-literates. Especially when it is filmed and screened, it is received well. Bakaya very rightly says:

The net work of radio and TV stations has registered a significant

expansion in recent years. These media are effective means in the

dissemination of good literary works (in adaptation) to larger

audiences than readers available to printed literature. Here too

translations play a very significant role. (138)

“You too Brutus”, “Smile, Smile and Yet to be a villain”, “To be or not to be”, “That is the questions”, and “All the world is a stage where everyman and woman are mere actors and actresses” are the quotable quotes from the dialogues “She is fair and fairer than that word” from

Shakespeare plays that are quite often used in the Tamil films. Play within the play is a technique adopted by Shakespeare has been sincerely followed by many film story-screen play and dialogue writers in Tamil.

Many scholars well versed in English and Tamil have been strongly influenced not only by the thematic content of Shakespeare but also by the 177 structure of his plays. The five-act structure of Shakespeare, his play within the play, plots and sub-plots have been followed by a number of vernacular dramatists. Mention may chiefly be made of Prof.Sundaram

Pillai who has penned a Tamil drama Man½¸maõiyam, which is actually a modified Tamil version of Bulver Lytton’s The Secret Way. But still, the

Tamil drama shows the influence of Shakespeare in various aspects as explained above.

Thus the translation has been proved to be an intellectual link between the two languages and window the world literatures. This art has enabled to have exchange of ideas, technicality of the play etc. for the dissemination of the rare concepts baring the boundaries of the nations of the world. Chapter V

SUMMING UP

5.1. A broad overview of the study

This Anglo-Tamil literary study has revealed several remarkable factors to the researcher. Translation as a separate link and a tool has made many literary genres to penetrate the ideas of any playwright from one country to another. No wonder therefore that Shakespeare’s plays have entered every nook and cranny of the world. He would not have travelled to many countries but his plays have traversed across the world both in English and in renderings. His reaching of the grass root level is highly immeasurable. Even semi-illiterate of any nation has at least known something about him.

5.2. Place of Shakespeare’s plays in the curriculum of schools and colleges

During the reign of Britishers in India, many English medium schools were opened up. The reason behind it was to produce clerical assistants for whom there was a heavy demand. So, with the vested interest the Britishers started the schools. Though it was the primary aim, the secondary objective unknowingly became as an offshoot, the popularisation of English literature among the Indians. Thus the school 179 curriculum included prose pieces, literary essays of great English writers and excerpts of famous speeches from Shakespeare’s plays. The most remarkable thing is that such excerpts were prescribed as poems for memory and recitation. The students had to learn them by heart. This was the intention of the scholars who were in the syllabus framing committees.

Similarly in the collegiate curriculum apart from various other classical poetry, and prose pieces, Shakespeare’s plays have also been included both as detailed study or as a supplementary reader. The primary objective of introducing Shakespeare’s plays into collegiate studies was to enrich

the students’ knowledge in the English language. Their proficiency in the

language skills was exposed through enactment of Shakespeare’s plays in

the college Annual Days. This practice of staging Shakespeare’s plays

enabled them to acquire a thorough knowledge and understanding of the

play besides exhibiting their talents. Thus Shakespeare has unfailingly

reached the minds of both the school and college students in those days.

This inclusion has equipped the students with a mastery over the language

skills such as listening, speaking, reading, writing, narrating,

comprehending and analyzing. The students who came out of the portals

of the institutions became really learned scholars and proved their mettle

in their career invariably of all the fields they served in through out the

world. Since the Britishers made the inclusion of Shakespeare’s plays 180 compulsory both in school and collegiate education, the resultant effect was remarkably good and it continues to be even now.

5.3. Changes in trend after Independence

Though the Britishers left India, the English flavour did continue for years together and even now the fragrance gets breathed by us. At the same time it was no longer studied as a separate text for a while. There were excepts from poetry and prose pieces which were included in the school curriculum of both the Central and State Boards of Education. Full text and abridged versions were included in the collegiate curriculum. In these forms, Shakespeare’s plays were also included. To understand the

English plays, the students of both higher institutions of learning and the schools had to seek the help of mother tongue with a view to enhancing their understandability, since English was an alien language and the general fear of the students over the English language. Hence the bilingual scholars started rendering the plays into Tamil and vice-versa. This intellectual exchange has mutually helped both the foreign and the local readers. It is notable that the same trend continues even now.

5.4. Estimation of the future of Shakespeare’s plays

In general the reading habit which proves to be a vital one to acquire knowledge and information in the present scenario is on the 181 decline. Such a state is prevalent especially among the youngsters. It may be attributed to the advent of electronic media which fascinate them easily. In spite of this, still there are a few group of readers who evince greater interest in reading novels, short stories, fiction, science fiction,

abridged and full length plays of modern writers. Quite a few scholars are

reading the plays of Elizabethan dramatists particularly Shakespeare.

Since the plays are available in many language with the help of bilingual

scholars through translation, the plays of Shakespeare are read, viewed

and enjoyed by the people. Many plays including the chosen play for this

study are available in the form of compact discs and the internet too in

different languages of the world. Those who do not like to read the play,

resort themselves to viewing them on the screen. Medium is not a barrier,

whereas reaching of the play to the grass root level matters much. Thus

Shakespeare’s plays would undoubtedly cross generation after generation

surmounting the barriers and blocks. Its popularity has no end. Only thing

is the mode will differ. Apart from printed mode, there are soft copies

now. It may be changed into some other mode depending on the

technological developments in future. On contrary to this, the general

public feels that both the comedies and tragedies of Shakespeare will have

a bleak future. This opinion will certainly be disproved by the technology.

Mindful of lacking of the reading habit, particularly with younger

generation, they opine so. But the same trend will not continue in future. 182

5.5. Shakespeare with Scholarly Public

It is undeniably true that Shakespeare in translated version is read, enjoyed and quoted on various forum and contexts by the scholarly public.

They learn the chosen portions and purple passages of the plays by heart.

They cherish and make use of the concepts. Some scholars like comedies.

Some others tragedies. Some other scholars both. Scholars never fail to

quote Shakespeare. His words are subtle, heart rending and even

sensational. They touch the very life of the readers. So they enjoy reading

all the plays of Shakespeare through all media. Only people of the

younger generation do not evince as much interest as that of elders with

respect to reading of Shakespeare’s plays.

5.6. Establishment of Facts and Findings

As rightly pointed out by S.T. Coleridge Shakespeare is not for an age but for ages. He is a dramatist, actor and poet attained pinnacle of

success. He has got universal acclaim through translation which proved to be an effective agent between Shakespeare and the readers or viewers of non-English speaking countries of the world. While translating the

Elizabethan plays particularly Shakespeare’s, translators faced a lot of obstacles mainly pertaining to the culture, behaviour, attitude, tradition, classical allusions, colloquial ways of conveying concepts, idioms, phrases, local dialects, idiolects and registers as identified and 183 documented in the third chapter. Barring all these hurdles, the translators became successful in their endeavor. They have changed several things for

the suitability of Tamil conventions and cultures. They localized many

concepts. All these facts have been arrived at and well documented in the third chapter. They have made many omissions and additions as

accounted in the second chapter. It has been found out that the chosen

translators were at liberty either to localize the concepts that were sexy or

to omit mindful of keeping the Tamil tradition intact. It has also been

found out that they did not cross the limitations excepting PSM who

sometimes translates an ordinary situations into a very serious one and

vice-versa. He has been very careful in rendering the play through out as

stated in the chapters III and IV of the thesis.

This study has analysed the necessity of translations, its origin and

development briefly besides accounting the entry of Shakespeare into

Tamil and how far the translated plays have been helpful to understand the

English play thoroughly especially by the non-native speakers of the

English language. In fact the translated plays have enhanced the readers’

understandability.

The researcher has not brought in the theories of translation in this

research work. His main aim is to approach the translations with the angle

of aesthetic flavour. Since translation precedes theories, there is no

compulsion on his part to fit in the translated works into theoretical 184 framework. However the researcher has put for the views of the

Translation theorist Anton Popovic on the theories such as stylistic equivalences and textual shifts enunciated by him.

The amazing facts studied by the researcher and the findings are as

follows:

 The translators omitted the texts that proved to be socially and

culturally unsuitable for the conservative Tamil society.

 Additions have also been made with a view to orienting the readers

towards understandability of the texts free from ambiguity.

 Any text that has sexual undertone or sexy has been omitted or

mitigated of its effect or even deviated by the translators.

 The colloquial expressions employed by Shakespeare were refined by

the translators.

 Shakespeare’s reference to classical and biblical allusions has been

replaced by Indian epics such as The Ramayana, The Mahabharatha

and other familiar literary works in Tamil by PSM.

 The select four translations for this study have very cleverly

surmounted all these barriers faced by them.

 The additions made by the translators towards clarity have been found

to be most appropriate. 185

 The foot note explanations given by KPP for classical, Biblical

allusions, etc that are new to the Tamil readers and viewers are quite

useful and appropriate and they prove to be ready reckoners to them.

Instantly even without turning the pages, the readers know about them.

 For a foreign reader, the Act wise and Scene wise story given by KPP

besides a brief note on William Shakespeare eases the process of

learning or reading the poetic and prose version with a thorough

background knowledge of the play. Without facing any difficulty, the

readers go through the play and understand.

 PSM, the father of Tamil drama has done remarkable wonders in

rendering the chosen play for this study. The readers or viewers could

feel that they are in their native land while reading or viewing the play.

 ARS’s rendering of the play has its own significance.

 TNS renders the play distinctly in prose form with lucid expressions.

5.7. Scope for Future Research

Unlike other dramatists, Shakespeare will never be exhausted. He

continues to be alive, enriching the imagination of the intellectual world.

More and more researchers can undertake research works in Shakespeare.

His is a treasure house of knowledge where there are adequate 186 possibilities for further research and findings. There are diversified concepts. The researchers can go indepth and make their study. Even the same study can be carried with a different approach. There are several areas that are left to be studied, analyzed and documented with respect to the translation of Shakespeare’s play. Background knowledge of both the cultures acquired by the translator can be exhaustively studied.