A.K.Singh's View on Translation

Name :-Darshangi Andharia K.

Paper no:-05 Translation Studies 

Topic :-A.K. Singh's View on Translation

Sem :-III Part:-II

Year:-2012-2013

Submitted to,

Dr.Dilip Barad 

Dept. Of English

M.K Bhavnagar University

Bhavnagar

What is translation?

             Translation is the interpretation of the meaning of a text in one language which is known as source language and the production in another language, of an equivalent text which is known as target text or translations that communicates the same message. It is, in that sense a bridge that makes the journeys into newer territories of alien literature.

             Avadhesh kumar has discussed about outs nature and strategies, and he has discussed his essay with the experience of Milan Kundera  when The Jock was translated. When he himself has read all those work he felt surprise because in all of the translation some major changes were done by the translator. He says in France, the translator rewrote the novel by ornamental language, in England, the publisher cut out all the reflective passages, eliminated the musicological chapters, changed the order of the parts, recomposed the novel. Through that epigraph he says that translation has often been condemned as an act of violence-parasitic an subservient to creative act. It is second hand product ignited by an already existing work.

             He further discussed about T.S Eliot’s view that language is disconnected from reality. The moment writing commences the disjunction between author “Enters onto his death.” It is the death of empirical author who employs language to express himself. It is the language which speaks not the author, for author fails in mastering the language. In the process of mastering language he ‘surrenders’ himself to language and becomes it servant. Baths here death of ‘Historical’ and implied author as well. In non existence of the implied reader, the text fails in finding a fixed meaning but a “Plurality of meaning and irreducible plurality.” The meaning of the text exists in the system of rules and conventions-not in the text itself as believed for long.

              A.K Singh accept the idea of ‘Decentering’ presumes presence of center before it was disinterred and thus followed reentering which is given by Jaques Derrida.And the moment we are in view of the center, the author creeps in. Thus Derrida at least succeeded in pushing the author to periphery. There is no denying the fact that translation is an act of violence. But creative act too, if examined closely, terms out to be an act of violence, we would try to see that creativity too is an act of violence in the sense criticism is an act of violence.

              There are five stages in the process of creation like

(1)Experiential/perceptional intentions

(2)Systemic/linguistic intentions

(3)Authorial/writer intentions

(4)Textual intentions

(5)Reader intentions

       In the initial stage the creator wrestles with his/her experiences and perceptions. When a situations, event or experience, real an imaginative, factual or factional. But prier to its textual formation the systematic/linguistic intentions clash with experiential intentions. The author surrenders himself to linguistic system in the process of mastering it but the system too does mat remain unaffected when it trams grasses other of intentions. Language is an artificial system and it perpetuates artificiality as may be witnessed in emptiness of the language of social translation.  However incompetent artificial and limited system may be, it is the only articulating device that serves as social and mental ‘Safety valve’ by giving an outlet to surging complication .Nevertheless, as it deals with experiences real and unreal ‘Bitten’ and ‘Beautiful’ it contrast some of the properties of these perilous problem and at times get trapped in itself.

              It is also to be admitted that language/linguistic as a medium of articulation suffers from limitation, incompetence and in adequacies. That is why the linguistic meaning weavers so much. It has failed in coping with demands for newer idiom capable of expressing increasingly complex experience, perception and realities rendered more complicated by every fleeting moment of explosion of new experiences, sicknesses, situations and sensations. The experiential and perceptions intentional are conditioned violently by linguistic system and than by authorial intention and limitations and further by textual intentions. Which constraint authorial intention, its possible interpretation, its form and medium. Thus, the authorial intentions tri to grasp certain experience/experiential intentions with the help of linguistic system, and authorial intentions wrangle with textual intentions. And the ultimate synthetically issue of this continuous yet invisible violence results in a creative work.

            In the last stage text goes through violent processes at the hands of reader –critic it is inconceivable to indulge in critical enterprise without doing some-sort of violence to the work concerned. It is ironical may e even tragic to some that violence and critical acts are inseparable as Barthes called criticism as an ‘Act of Violence.’ Violence is centripetal to critical exercise. As a critic lays his hand on a creative work to criticize or create meaning, there beings a tug of war in intentions particularly between ‘Authorial intentions’ and ‘Reader intentions’ to use archaic physiological terms. It is reader critic who sees the work he wants to see it and the work becomes what this reader critic intends it to be. As the text is ‘Dead’ It’s beauty and ugliness to a good measure depends on the way of viewing it. Thus, creation of a new text outside the text rests on violence –Gentle, invisible and creative violence. This new text  and meaning are created through subtle persuasive violence of the text by competent reader-critic. This reader imposes his intentions on the text and creates his own text which is resisted by textual intentions and at times he may react so violently to the text that he may reject the textual intentions and make his own text absolutely different from the text itself.

           Translation is an extension of creative exercise in the same sense as critical act is extension of creative exercise characterized by almost the same process. Translation is like serving two masters. It is a demanding task as the translator is in continuous quest of proper words. Translation helps in preserving ancient literary and cultural heritage. When translator translates language one translates culture. Thus translation becomes a cross cultural event.

           He ends his essay with question that “Can the author be the ideal translator?” And gives the example of Ravindranath Tagore’s work “Geetanjali” and he says that no author should do wait for other translator for itself in deference period and ages and responded to its emotional and social needs.