How Translation Studies is gaining its recognition in the field of Literature

Photo by Tima Miroshnichenko on

“The secrecy behind that pacifism among language is due to the beautiful alteration of those alphabets which allowed themselves to dwell into those anonymous letters and accepted those outlandish cultures!”

Yes, definitely!  It’s the mere alphabets that give consent to the translator who translates them into a different language and give them a new beginning as something which often becomes phenomenal.

It’s always not prominent that the one who thinks great and writes great texts and even the audience who extols it, will be the legendry texts of all time. Certain times, we as a reader forget that those minute things which make a text more fabricated are due to those editors, translators who make a text complete.

Profoundly the question which hikes up is: Do these translators get any recognition for their work? Do they have any popularity like the writers or they are just considered a person who steals a writer’s copyright?

If we talk why translating is a bad job? we will get a plethora of reasons behind not being a translator. But taking the example from the fictional world of literature, translating is somewhat recognized. One of the outs of context but yet one of my favorites is the translated book – After Dark by Haruki Murakami. One of the best Japanese books translated into English which does not make it less beautiful than the original one.

It’s just not only one translated text, but many texts like this play a major role that tackles the problems in language barriers.

Translation and Language in the world of Literature:

Merely when we focus on the job of translation:

            “A translator is an artist who paints those structure, language, and sentence in such a form that it decodes the message to the other sectors of society for whom language built a bridge”.

The notion of translation was encrypted by different critics and poets according to their ages, to which they belonged too. As looking into the 16th century, during the flourishing dazzling age of romanticism, where many poetries were paraphrased and translated. Translation of classics was the only matter of importance in the 18th century. But as in the 1970s, the main focus was on innovation and novelty.

The concept and theories applied in the romantic age were somewhat experimentative, as theories of translations given by John Dryden, Pope, and then by Alexander Fraser Tytler was so much popular in the literary world.

The main hitch that occurred in the field of translation was when it was surrounded by allegations of plagiarism and many writers made certain rules and boundaries or rather principles upon the translations. Translation theories were largely formed around Bible translations in the sixteenth century. Etienne Dolet is credited with the first formulation of a theory of translations.

Certain critics like Dryden, – one of the earliest English translation theorists, classifies translation into three types:

 1. Metaphrase – word for word, line for line rendering,

 2. Paraphrase – wherein translating sense is given more importance

 3. Imitation –   were sense matters in translation.

E.g.: Horace’s Ars Poetica tars by Ben Jonson – metaphrase

Virgil’s Aeneid tars by Waller – paraphrase

Pindar’s two odes by Abraham Cowley – imitation

In 1789, George Campbell suggests three criteria for good translation:

  1. There should be just a representation of the original.
  2. The spirit and manner of the original should be conveyed through consistency with the language of the translation.
  3. The translation should have the quality of original performance to appear natural and easy.

In 1790 Alexander Taylor in The Principles of Translation set up three different principles

  1. The translation should give a complete transcript of the idea of the original work
  2. The style and manner of writing should be of the same character as that of the original.
  3. The translation should have all the cases of the original composition.

Translation maintains the authenticity:

The translation is the right job to do and it maintains the authenticity of the author and it works and keeps the work original.

 As Aristotle rightly said that imitation is not a mere, it’s a photostat copy of life or the world, but it is a recreated ideal copy of the world. Similarly, a translation is also crafted in such a way that it does not take the cultural rights of the original work.

  Yes, as a reader we cannot deny the fact that a translator copies the whole idea of the author and displays the work, but one should always remember that translation is not an easy task as it needs huge determination to learn the mindset, structure, and form of the writer’s mind and have to work accordingly so that the readers don’t repulse upon the translator and it should not hurt the sentiments of the readers of the authors. As translation according to me breaks the bridge created by the prejudicated norms in favor of language.

Literature and Translation are counterparts of each other:

As we know a language has the power to bring war, riots, and bloodshed among the 2 communities, whereas literature is binding the difference and helping to bring harmony among the language in such a way that the translation will help them to cover the gap. By taking the foreseen principles of these writers a translation can portray us in a better way and be fruitful to our literature.

 “The best form of mourning a writer is to read their body of work” — and include the act of translation.

 As rightly said by, Fahmida Riaz that what my interpretation is about the translator is the one who goes through the soul of the author reads it, interprets it, notions all those ideas according to the writer, and then translates it.

“Translation is mere not a copy, rather a piece of art which beautifully presents the bio of the author, the story and the translator”!

Categories: Literature, World

Tagged as: ,