Assignment 208: Analysis of the Article “Translation and Literary History: An Indian View” by Ganesh Devy

Academic Information

• Name: Rajeshvariba Rana

• Roll No: 16

• Semester: 4 (Batch 2022-24)

• Enrolment number: 4069206420220023

• Paper No: 208

• Paper name: Comparative Literature & Translation Studies

• Paper code: 22415

• Topic: Analysis of the Article “Translation and Literary History: An Indian View” by Ganesh Devy

• Submitted to: Smt. S.B. Gardi, Department of English, MKBU

• Email Address: rhrana148@gmail.com

• Submission Date: 26th April 2024

 Analysis of the Article “Translation and Literary History:

 An Indian View” by Ganesh Devy 

Introduction:

The Western metaphysical view stems from the Christian myth of the Fall and the idea of exile or banishment from the origin/source. In this view, translation is seen as a wandering away from the original text, an "exile" from the authentic origin. This metaphysical underpinning leads to a hierarchical view where translations are considered secondary, inferior, or a "diminution" compared to the original work. Western literary criticism, shaped by this metaphysics, tends to not accord the same status or authenticity to translations as it does to original works.

On the other hand, Devy argues that the Indian perspective is quite different due to the presence of a "translating consciousness" in multilingual Indian communities. He suggests that in India, literary traditions often originate from and are sustained through acts of translation between different Indian languages. This is because many Indian language communities use multiple languages simultaneously, treating them as part of a continuous spectrum of signs and significance, rather than strict linguistic boundaries.

Devy attributes this "translating consciousness" to the metaphysical belief in India about the unhindered migration of the soul/essence from one form to another. Unlike the Western guilt associated with translation as a "fall," Indian thought views translation as a revitalization or transformation of the original into another form/language without losing its essential significance.

While the Western view tends to prioritize and privilege the original over the translation, the Indian perspective sees translation as a natural, integral part of the evolution and sustenance of literary traditions across multiple Indian languages. Translation is not seen as a secondary activity but as a vital means of creative expression and transmission of literary works.

Role of Translation in Literary Traditions:

    1) English Literature:

• The authorized translation of the Bible into English was a revolutionary event that shaped the English literary style. 
• Writers like Chaucer translated the style of Italian writers like Boccaccio when creating seminal works like The Canterbury Tales.
• Translating classics helped revive literary movements (e.g. Dryden and Pope translated to recover a sense of order).

    2) Anglo-Irish Literature: 

The impressive Anglo-Irish literary tradition that produced giants like Yeats, Joyce, Beckett emerged from the practice of translating Irish works into English, initiated by Macpherson in the 18th century.

    3) Indian English Literature:

The conventions of Indian writing in English were gathered from the Indological translation activities during the 18th and 19th centuries. Many Indian English writers were also skilled translators.

    4) Postcolonial Writing:

In former colonies across the world (Spanish Americas, Africa etc.), postcolonial literary traditions arose from the "translation" of colonized peoples and their experiences into the colonial languages.

Devy argues that at their core, the origins of these major literary movements and traditions can be traced back to pivotal acts of translation across languages and cultures. Translation provided the bridge for creative expression, stylistic transmission, and cross-pollination of ideas that catalyzed new literary currents.

His key point is that the genesis and flourishing of literary traditions globally is deeply intertwined with, and in many cases directly enabled by, the activity of translation between languages. The origins of literary traditions "inhabit various acts of translation" across linguistic-cultural boundaries.

Need for a Theory of Literary Translation:

Devy highlights the lack of a well-defined theory of literary translation and its place in literary history, which he attributes to the ontological uncertainty surrounding translations. By this, he means that there is a lack of clarity and consensus on the fundamental nature and status of translations within the larger literary canon and historical narrative.

The key questions he raises are: Do translations belong to the literary history of the source language (T language) or the target language (S language) into which they are translated? Or do they constitute an independent tradition of their own? This ontological ambiguity has resulted in a lack of serious aesthetic consideration and theorization of translation within the field of literary studies.

Devy critiques the limitations of structural linguistics, which has been the dominant paradigm for understanding language and translation, for failing to fully capture the complexities of translation between different language systems. Structural linguistics, with its basis in analyzing monolingual data and situations, does not adequately account for the intricate dynamics and challenges involved in translating between distinct linguistic systems.

He argues that even sophisticated linguistic theories like Jakobson's threefold classification of translations (intralingual, interlingual, and intersemiotic) ultimately fall short in unraveling the nuances of the translation process. This is because they still operate within a monolingual framework and seek to preserve a notion of "complete semantic equivalence" between the source and target texts, which Devy considers an unattainable goal, particularly for literary works.

To address these limitations, Devy introduces the concept of a "translating consciousness" that is prevalent in multilingual communities, particularly in postcolonial contexts like India. He explains that in such contexts, different languages are not viewed as strictly separate systems, but rather as part of a continuous spectrum of signs and significance.

In India, for instance, language communities often employ multiple languages simultaneously, treating them as interconnected and fluid systems of communication. This "translating consciousness" allows for a more nuanced understanding of interlingual synonymy and challenges the Western notion of rigid linguistic boundaries.

The "Translating Consciousness":

Devy argues that this "translating consciousness" arises from the metaphysical belief in the unhindered migration of the soul (essence or significance) from one form to another, which is central to Indian thought. This perspective views translation not as a fall or exile from the original, but rather as a revitalization and transformation of the original into a new linguistic and temporal space, without losing its fundamental essence.

By introducing the concept of a "translating consciousness," Devy offers an alternative framework for understanding translation that is grounded in the lived experiences and worldviews of multilingual communities. This challenges the monolingual biases and limitations of Western linguistic theories and opens up possibilities for a more fluid and dynamic understanding of interlingual synonymy and the translation process itself.

Devy's call for a theory of literary translation that takes into account the "translating consciousness" is an attempt to bridge the gap between the ontological uncertainty surrounding translations and their undeniable role in shaping literary traditions across the world. By recognizing the fluidity and interconnectedness of languages in multilingual contexts, and the metaphysical beliefs that inform these communities' understanding of translation, Devy seeks to develop a more inclusive and nuanced approach to theorizing literary translation and its place in literary history.

Translaton as Revitalization:

Devy challenges the notion of translation as a mere replication or copy of the original text. Instead, he views literary translation as an "attempted revitalization of the original in another verbal order and temporal space." This perspective shifts the understanding of translation from a purely reproductive exercise to a creative and transformative act.

According to Devy, translation does not simply transpose the original work into another language; it breathes new life into the original by situating it within a different linguistic and temporal context. The act of translation involves an approximation of the original, but it also transcends it by revitalizing its essence and significance in a new verbal order and historical moment.

Devy draws a parallel between the way literary texts exist and evolve across successive chronological periods and the way translations relate to their originals. Just as literary works continue to inhabit and resonate with readers across different eras, translations simultaneously approximate and transcend their source texts, carrying forward the original's significance while also imbuing it with new dimensions and interpretations.

This understanding of translation as revitalization challenges the hierarchical view that relegates translations to a secondary or inferior status compared to the original. Instead, Devy posits translation as a vital and creative act that ensures the continued relevance and resonance of literary works across linguistic and temporal boundaries.

Indian Metaphysics and Translation:

Devy contrasts the Western metaphysical view of translation, which is rooted in notions of guilt, exile, and a "fall from the origin," with the Indian metaphysical belief in the unhindered migration of the soul (or essence/significance) from one form to another.

In the Western tradition, translation is often perceived as a banishment or departure from the authentic original, carrying a sense of diminution or loss of authenticity. This perspective stems from the Christian myth of the Fall and the idea of exile, which has profoundly shaped Western aesthetics and attitudes towards translation.

On the other hand, Indian metaphysics embraces the concept of the soul (or essence/significance) seamlessly transitioning from one form to another without any sense of guilt or loss. This belief informs the Indian view of translation as a natural process of revitalization and transformation, where the essential meaning or significance of a work is carried forward into a new linguistic and cultural context.

Devy argues that Indian literary traditions are essentially "traditions of translation," where the emphasis is not on slavish adherence to notions of originality, but rather on the writer's capacity to transform, translate, and revitalize the original. In this view, translation is not a secondary activity but a vital means of creative expression and transmission of literary works across linguistic and cultural boundaries.

Devy suggests that if originality were the sole criterion for literary excellence, many Indian classics would fail the test, as they often draw upon and transform existing narratives, plots, and characters. The true measure of literary merit, according to this perspective, lies in the writer's ability to revitalize and breathe new life into the original through the act of translation and adaptation.

Conclusion:

In article, "Translation and Literary History: An Indian View," Ganesh Devy presents a compelling argument for recognizing the central role of translation in shaping literary traditions, particularly from an Indian perspective. He challenges the Western biases against translation and offers an alternative view rooted in the "translating consciousness" of multilingual communities and Indian metaphysical traditions.

Devy's insights highlight the limitations of Western linguistic theories and literary criticism in fully capturing the complexities and nuances of translation between different language systems. He calls for a theory of literary translation that acknowledges the fluidity and interconnectedness of languages in multilingual contexts and the metaphysical beliefs that inform these communities' understanding of translation as a revitalizing and transformative process.

The concepts like the "translating consciousness" and emphasizing the Indian metaphysical view of the unhindered migration of the soul (essence/significance) from one form to another, Devy offers a fresh perspective on translation that challenges the hierarchical and guilt-laden Western attitudes towards the practice.

Devy's article invites us to reconsider the ontological status and significance of translation within literary history and to recognize the vital role it has played in shaping literary traditions across the world, particularly in multilingual and postcolonial contexts like India.

(WC: 1795, Images: 02)

Works Cited

Devy, Ganesh. "Translation and literary history: An Indian view." Postcolonial Translation. Routledge, 2012. 182-188.