Translation Studies

Moulana Jalal-ud- Rumis Poems

Translation Studies as Politics

Translation Studies has emerged as a thriving interdisciplinary and international area of scholarship. According to J.C.Catford, Translation is the replacement of the source language with equivalent target languagematerials. It is a branch of comparative linguistics as it deals with relation of languages. J.C.Catford, introduced two categories (1) Total translation (2) restricted translations

(1)Replacement by non-equivalenttarget language (phonology & graphology) (2) Replacement by equivalent target language material. In the process of translation there are two types of untranslations 1. Linguistic untranslation 2. Cultural untranslation Linguistic untranslation is due to lack of formal correspondence (oligosemy) or restricted meanings andCultural untranslation is due to lack of situational features. Due to linguistic and cultural untranslation, translation is greatlyaffected. In this case, it remains to the subjectivity of the translators and the way he wants to bring politics of translation where the sense of target text is totally lost (translation becomes a myth). Indeterminacy of language is due to the perpetual change of words and meanings. Axel Bhular states that every translation is a kind of interpretation and interpretation becomes tough when the translator wants to convey the communicative intentions and the same original effects that the author wants to produce in the audience by making the utterance.

According

to

Susan

Bassnett

translation

betrays,

seduces,diminishes,

reduces,and looses parts of the original. Translation is derivative, mechanical, andsecondary. The notion of translation as a betrayal of original is particularlyprevalent. LoriChamberlain, one of a growing numberof feminist translationscholars, draws attention to the sexualization of this terminology, pointing out that it appears perhaps mostfamiliarly asfaithful or beautiful as the women. Fidelity is defined in translation as an implicit contract betweentranslation (as woman) and original (as husband/father or author).The unfaithful wife/translation is publically tried for crimes the husband/original is by law incapable of committing. This contract, in short, makes it impossible for the original to be guilty of infidelity. Such an attitude betrays real anxiety about the problemof paternity andtranslation. Another model is the model of master/slave relationship. The translator as a slave, the servant of the source text, isa powerful metaphor that endures well into the nineteenth century. Implicit in this metaphor is the idea of dominance of the source text author over the subservient targettext.Fidelity to an original/husband as a metaphor for translation and the loyalty of the slave to the master both reflect profound changes in reading and writing in the post-Renaissance world. In 1920,Brazilian Modernism proposed a reevaluation of the ultimate European taboo: cannibalism. The images of translation ascannibalism, asvampirism, whereby the translator sucks out the blood of the source text to strengthen the target text, as transfusion of blood that endows the receiver with new life.

The art of translation is a subsidiary art and derivative. On this account it has never been granted the dignity of original work, and has suffered too much in the general judgment of letters. This natural underestimation of its value has had the bad practical effect of lowering the standard demanded, and in some periods has almost destroyed the art altogether. The corresponding misunderstanding of its character has added to its degradation neither its importance nor its difficulty has been grasped.(Hilaire Belloc 1931) In addition, Translation of poetry is the most difficult mode of translation. This is because it abounds in figures of speech such as similes, metaphors, irony, paradox etc. and unprecedented phonological, syntactical and semantic patterns such as rhyming alliteration, versification, morphological parallelism, syntactic parallelism, and above all syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations between words. Ornamental words based on lyricism are almost impossible to translate. The translator of poetry should remember that he is to translate a piece of poetry not to re-write or produce an interpretation of it. Keeping in view the theory of translationand the priority of original on copy text, we choseMaulana Jalal-ud-Deen Rumis poem I died as mineral as mistranslated by two translators in two different ways. MaulanaRumi is not only an icon of Islamic civilization but of global culture and a great symbol of great spirituality. The universal message of Rumi is ahopeful alternative to the ignorance and lack of spirituality in modern times. Rumis writings of thirteenth century advocate an understanding that there is something beyondreligion and scholarly learning that can open our eyes to the reality beyond this existence. To understand Rumi,we must climb a spiritual ladder of love.Furthermore, Rumienvisioned

a universal faith embodying all religions, because he understood that the cause of every religious conflict is ignorance. Rumi implies that religiosity consists in something other than outward religions. Real belief is apparent only on the side of a personwhich is not visible. He was a mystic of extraordinary devotion and self-dedication. A lover of God, seeking by every means a union with the Divine and secondly a teacher striving by his words and his example to lead others towards the same goal. He was peaceful and tolerant towards men of all creeds and urged his disciples to behave likewise. Application of Translation Theory on Rumis IDied asaMineral

Here is Rumi's original poem in Persian

This poem is been taken from Masnawi whereMystic feelings and ideas are narrated in story form. The same poem has been translated by two different translators A.J.Arberry and William Chattak in two different ways.

Here is atranslation done by A.J.Arberry "I Died as a Mineral"

I died as a mineral and became a plant, I died as plant and rose to animal, I died as animal and I was Man. Why should I fear? When was I less by dying? Yet once more I shall die as Man, to soar With angels blest; but even from angelhood I must pass on: all except God doth perish. When I have sacrificed my angel-soul, I shall become what no mind e'er conceived. Oh, let me not exist! for Non-existence Proclaims in organ tones, 'To Him we shall return.

Introduction of A.J.Arberry

Arthur John Arberry is a 20th century British "Orientalist", who translated this above mentioned poem into English. He is Fluent in Arabic and Persian and is considered as one of the most imminent scholars in the field of Islamic studies. His contributions to the field of Islamic studies are of enormous proportions, as he not only translated the Holy Quran, but also the major works of Rumi. Professor Arberry's following mistranslation of Rumi's poem has served as the basis of meaningless attacks on Rumi, accusing him as a "Sufi Darwin" and "Believer of Theory of Evolution", by the Muslim fundamentalists, whereas the close reading of the poem shows that the Rumi's entire philosophical argument in the following poem is based on Plato and Aristotle's "The Inanimate, the Animate, and the Supernatural logic. It has nothing to do with the "Evolution theory.

Another translation is being done by William Chattak

Poem

Background of translator

Comparison of two translations(verse by verse explanations)

Text

A. J.Arberry I died as a mineral and became a plant I died as plant and rose to animal.

William Chattak

())) +

Mineral

plant

We can see that Rumi has used the Persian words jamaadi and nami jamaadi in English = Inanimate naami in English= animate

How did both translators come up with "Mineral" and "Plant", if Rumi was referring to Aristotelian logic of "Inanimate and Animate? This is what we called Linguistic untranslatability, where translator cannot find exact equivalent for the word to be translated. We can see that both translators have devoured the source text, transmuted it, which is an act of vampirization. The translators have sucked out the blood of the source text to strengthen the target text, as transfusion of blood that endows the receiver with new life. They have added certain new words to the poem, they have deleted some others, and according to their own culture, context and taste of the readers they have introduced their own interpretations and injected a new blood to it. So its a rejection of power hierarchy which privileged the source text and transferred the translators to a secondary role. In the translations here above, we can see a new product. Translators have remade the passages and impart a new life to the poem.

I died as animal and I was

Man. Why should I fear? When was I less by dying? / Died/less dying

Prof.Arberry completely ignored Rumi's cleverly playing with the Persian words -Mordam[I died] and Mardoom-[ Mankind], as Mardoom[Mankind]- in second line- is entirely missing from Arberry's translation.Whereas WilliamKhatak

Yet once more I shall die as Man, to soar

With angels blest; but even from angelhood I must pass on: all except God - / doth perish.

angels blest/angels wings and feather

in English = Angel wings and feather Angels blest in Persian

On the one hand, Prof.Arberry decided to use "Angels blest", when Rumi was hoping to draw "feathers and wing" like the Angels?And William Chattak

Whe I have sacrificed my angel-soul, I shall become what no mind e'er conceived

Sacrifice

Prof. Arberry used theword Sacrifice" in Rumi's above Persian verse, whereas

Sacrifice in Persian = - There is no such word used in the original above verse.

Oh, let me not exist! for Non-existence Proclaims in organ tones, / 'To Him we shall return.'

let me not exist/organ tones

Despite profound respect and admiration for Prof. Arberry's vast scholarly knowledge and genius, there is an ambiguityabout Oh, let me not exist!".

The Persian word [ so, then], as a concluding remark in the last verse, [so, then] is entirely missing form Arberry'stranslation. Similarly the Persian word alsohave two meanings a- The Organ- a musical instrument. b- The Organon-Aristotle's Logical Works Rumi talks about concept of animate, inanimateand supernatural logic of Plato and Aristotle whereas both translators distort the real sense of meaning and their interpretation seems to suck out the blood of original. Analysis of Rumis another poem

This poem is taken from Masnavi (Vol.03) and the following version of translation is done by Coleman Barks. Recently, Coleman Barks's version of Rumi in English, especially The Essential Rumi which is the subject of this review, has become popular and a best-seller-book in the US. Barks did not know Rumi until 1976 when the American poet, Robert Bly handed him a copy of A. J. Arberry's translations saying "These poems need to be released from their cages".

Barks who does not know Persian, first rewrites some of the old translations in English. Then, by using an unpublished John Moyne's translation on one hand, and with the blessing of a Sri Lankan sufi saint living in the US, Bowa Muhaiyaddeen on the other hand, Barks publishes a new English version of rumi in free verse. No doubt that Coleman Barks's version of Rumi has released these poems from the confines of Departments of Near Eastern Studies but unfortunately, as we will see, he has tied them in the cage of his personal taste

"What Jesus Runs Away From" The son of Mary, Jesus, hurries up a slope as though a wild animal were chasing him.

Someone following him asks, 'Where are you going? No one is after you.' Jesus keeps on, saying nothing, across two more fields. 'Are you the one who says words over a dead person, so that he wakes up? "I am." 'Did you not make the clay birds fly?' "Yes." 'Who then could possibly cause you to run like this?' Jesus slows his pace. "I say the Great Name over the deaf and the blind, they are healed. Over a stony mountainside, and it tears its mantle down to the navel. Over non-existence, it comes into existence. But when I speak lovingly for hours, for days, with those who take human warmth and mock it, when I say the Name to them, nothing happens. They remain rock, or turn to sand, where no plants can grow. Other diseases are ways

for mercy to enter, but this non-responding breeds violence and coldness toward God. I am fleeing from that." As little by little air steals water, so praise Is dried up and evaporates with foolish people who refuse to change. Like cold stone you sit on, a cynic steals body heat. He doesn't feel the sun. Jesus wasn't running from actual people. He was teaching in a new way. The second version is by Camille and KabirHelminski, published in Rumi: Jewels of Remembrance, Threshold Books, 1996 Flee from the foolish; even Jesus fled from them. Much blood has been shed by companionship with fools! Air absorbs water little by little; even so, the fool drains you of spirit. He steals your heat and leaves you cold, like one who puts a stone beneath you. The flight of Jesus wasn't caused by fear, for he is safe from the mischief of fools; his purpose was to teach by example. Camille and KabirHelminski have translated these lines. The length of the poem is very obvious; the original ghazal of Rumi which consists of 60 lines is reduced to 9 lines in this version of translation. Rumis poems are known for its detailed style and ornamental

language (which is a mark of Persian poetry). Camille and KabirHelminski in their translation have failed to keep the same detail and pace of the original ghazal in Persian. It is a thematic translation: unlike the original piece poem begins with Flee from the foolish; even Jesus fled from them explicitly puts the theme available to the reader. Rumis poems are marked for its narration of fables (hikayaat Persian literary style) in this poem Rumi has put the theme in the last lines after giving an elaborate account of the scene.

Original poem

Translation by Camille Translation by Coleman Barks and KabirHelminski

Flee from the foolish; even Other Jesus fled from them

diseases

are

ways

for mercy to enter, but this nonresponding breeds violence and

coldness toward God. I am fleeing from that. In addition, both the translators have tried to translate the metaphors used in the original piece. Original poem Translation by Camille and Translation Coleman Barks As little by little air by

KabirHelminski

Air absorbs water little by little;

Even so, the fool drains you of steals water, so praise spirit Is dried up and

evaporates with foolish

people

It is important to note that deen is translated into spirit, and the metaphor is translated. Due to this literal translation the original fervor of the poem is lost somewhere. Original poem Translation by Camille Translation by Coleman Barks Like cold stone you sit on, a cynic steals body heat.

and KabirHelminski

like one who puts a stone beneath you.

These 9 translated lines have the thematic essence of Rumis original poem; it is better than Barks translation since the reader gets the theme and understands the essence of the poem but on the linguistic level the Persian poetic essence is lost. Because of lack of complete equivalence (in the sense of synonymy or sameness) ,Jakobson declares that all poetic art is therefore technically untranslatable; Only creative transposition is possible. In addition, the translators have not given it any title.

On evaluating the translation by Coleman Barks, it becomes apprent that certain lines are mistranslated. For Example, in the title of the poem,

Original Persian

English Literal Translation running away to the mountain from the fools

Coleman Barkss Translation What the Jesus Ran Away From?

elloep oFlooF

It can be inferred that in the original version there was no question. Rather the essence or the main crux is depicted. But in Barkss version, it is totally the opposite. The essence is lost in posing a question which refers to the manipulation of the text. Later on, in the poem, Rumi refers to the Lion as a symbol of terror and cruelty. The connotative meaning implies that foolish people are just as terrorizing as a lion is.

Original Persian

English Literal Translation

Coleman Barkss Translation

As if a lion would shed his as though a wild animal were blood. chasing him

noiL

dLa

doiia

But in Barks translation, lion is translated as wild animal and reference to blood is totally omitted. This is referred to as Addition and Deletion in Translation.
Original Persian English Literal Translation Coleman Barkss Translation

Who are you running away

from O noble one: If there is neither a lion, Nor an enemy, nor fear and danger after you?

Lines are deleted

In Barks version, it is apparent that the translator is going through a process of known as Transcreation where by there is a personal taste included either for the purpose of clarity or for some specific ideology, but it reflects the distortion of the original text. The target language and the source language do not convey exact meanings that can lead a reader into an ambiguity.

Conclusion
When we observe the real Persian text of poem and the translations, it becomes clear that translation is a not a pure/just activity. As to Bassnett,It betrays and loses parts of the original. Real essence is lost in translation. Linguistic untranslability appears to be a big hurdle in the process of translation, which occurs when there is no lexical and syntactical substitute in the target text for source language text.

In the above discussion, we also come across many words in Persian poem whose equivalents are not found in English. Due to which translators have interpreted them in a new way which has betrayed the original meaning of the word and aesthetic and spiritual sense of the poem has been lost. It becomes a process of transliteration.

References

Bassnett, S. Comparative Literature: A Critical Introduction. Blackwell Publishers Ltd: Unites States of America, (1993).

Bassnett, S.Mcguire Translation Studies. Rountedge:New York.1980 Tymoczko, Maria. "Translation and Political Engagement: Activitism, social change and the Role of Translation in Geopolitical Shifts." 2000. 23-47.

Venuti, Lawrence.The Translation Studies Reader. 2ndEd. New York and London: Routledge. 2004