Philosophical

approaches

to translation

So far we have considered literary,

linguistic and cultural theories of

translation.

In this session we will move on to look at

modern philosophical approaches to

translation that have sought out the

essence of translation (mainly literary)

over the second half of the 20th century.

Steiner’s hermeneutic motion

Ezra pound and the energy of

language

The task of translator: Walter

Benjamin

Deconstruction Theory

Steiner’s hermeneutic motion

WHAT IS HERMENEUTICS?

Hermeneutics is an interpretive method,

named after the Greek word hermeneuin

meaning 'to understand'. Hermeneutics,

briefly, can be defined as the science

and methodology of interpreting texts.

The hermeneutic movement owes its

origin to the eighteenth and nineteenth

century German Romantics , especially

Friedrich Schleiermacher and Wilhelm

Dilthey.In the twentieth century,leading

figures included Heidegger and

Gadamer.However,George steiner’s After

Babel was the key modern reference for

the hermeneutics of translation.

Steiner defines hermeneutic approach:

the investigation of what it means to

“understand a piece of oral or written

speech and the attempt to diagnose this

process in terms of a general model of

meaning”.

After Bable: the first systematic

investigation of the theory and processes

of translation since eighteenth century.

Steiner’s description of the hermeneutics

of translation is based on a conception of

translation not as a science but as an

“exact art”. Steiner in his seminal work

“After Babel” states that the reason for

the lack of new developments in

translation theory is that translation is a

hermeneutical task, "not a science, but

an exact art.“

He then presents a new translation model

that combines philosophical

hermeneutics with existing translation

studies to form a "systematic hermeneutic

translation theory". The new model

comprises four "movements":1)nitiative

trust 2)aggression 3)incorporation

4)retribution (compensation).

1)Initiative trust: a belief and trust that

there is something there in the ST that can

be understood. Translator considers the St

to stand for something in the world, a

coherent "something” that can be

translated even if the meaning might not

be apparent immediately.

In this step translator selects a text and

approach it with this trust that there is

something there worth translating and

there is something that can be

understood . Steiner believed that in this

step, translator shows ‘generosity’ to an

alien text.

2)Aggression: means the translator's

perception and understanding of the

text, which as Steiner says "is always

partial. translator, at this point, is a reader,

He is different because he has to

understand, if not the deepest, he must

be much deeper than an average

reader.

. In order to bring home the most

meaning he can get, he attacks,

breaking the shell of the other language

and trying his best to capture the inner

core of it, because the serious

understanding here is not simply a matter

of words and structure, but the history and

culture within it.

. When a translator translated one

language to another, he must take away

or change something of the original text

which he considers unnecessary or

unsuitable to make the readers

understand.

3)Incorporation (or Embodiment):it refers

to the ST meaning, extracted by the

translator in the second movement, being

brought into the TL, which is already full of

its own words and meanings. Different

type of assimilation can occur:

1)complete domestication

(Domestication is the strategy of making

text closely conform to the culture of the

language being translated to, which may

involve the loss of information from the

source text)or 2)permanent strangeness

and marginality.

The crucial point Steiner makes is that the importing of the meaning of the foreign text can dislocate or relocate the whole of the native structure. He suggests the two ways in which this process function:

a)sacramental intake: the target culture ingests and becomes enriched by the foreign text.

b)infection:the target culture is infected by the source text and ultimately rejects it.

In this step, the translator realizes and tries to convey what he or she understands in his or her own language.

4)Compensation: The translator tries to achieve a balance by trying to be as faithful as he can and as freely as he must. The translator must be willing to give back to the SL as much as he has taken. Steiner emphasizes the fidelity in this stage.

Elective affinity and resistant

difference:

For Steiner, the concept of “resistant

difference” occurs in two ways:

the translator experiences the foreign

language differently from his or her

mother tongue.

Each pair of languages, SL and TL, differs

and imposes its vivid differences on he

translator and society.

Elective affinity occurs:when the translator

has been drawn to the text as a kindred

spirit and recognized him-or herself in it.

When elective affinity and resistant

difference are both present at the same

time,the text both reject and attract the

translator.

Ezra pound and the energy of

language

He was always experimental, seeking to

energize language by clarity, rhythm,

sound and form rather than with sense. his

whole work was influenced by his reading

of the literature of the past. Pound’s

experimentalism and challenging of the

poetic doctrine of his time continue to

provide inspiration for many later

translators.

his use of translation is describes as" a tool

in the cultural struggle". His archaizing and

foreignizing in translation leads to his

“marginalization". His view of translation as

a criticism and his own form of creative

translation influenced Brazilian poets.

whose role in the Brazilian cannibalist

movement was paramount.

The task of translator: Walter

Benjamin

We will discuss Walter Benjamin’s famous

essay ‘The Task of the Translator’ (1923).

For Benjamin a translation is part of the

‘afterlife’ of a text.

As a text in its own right, a translation

does not only carry messages; it recreates

the value given to the text throughout the

ages.

Moreover a translation appears as

something unique in Benjamin’s words for

it has the potential to convey what he

calls a ‘pure language’, where the

‘mutually exclusive’ differences among

two languages can coexist and where

the ‘complementary intentions’ of these

languages can be communicated.

The task of translator is not to ‘assemble’

or express what is to be conveyed since

the poet/writer has already done that

when writing the original text.

The task of the translator rather ‘consists

in finding that intended effect [Intention]

upon the pure language into which he is

translating which produces in it the echo

of the original’.

This pure language is released by the co-

existence and the complementation of

the translation with the original.

Thus the two texts, both the original and its

translation, share what Benjamin calls a

‘vital link’ and from this linguistic harmony

arises a greater language, a ‘pure

language’.

This is the reason why the task of translator is something unique and powerful for Benjamin because until he has released this greater language in his translation, ‘it remains hidden in the languages.’

It is the task of the translator to release in his own language that pure language which is under the spell of another, to liberate the language imprisoned in a work in his recreation of that work”.

Benjamin’s stress on allowing the foreign

to enter the translation language harks

back to Schleiermacher’s concept of

foreignization.

Deconstruction

Deconstruction is a method or practice of

reading developed by the French philosopher

Jacques Derrida to uncover that which is

forgotten, hidden or repressed in texts.

It thus interrogates key concepts in the

philosophical tradition, and questions the

dualisms or binary oppositions in Western

thought (presence/absence,nature/culture,

speech/writing, etc).

In literary studies, deconstructionists do

not seek to find a single meaning for a

work or works, but rather uncover the

multiplicity of meanings, often

unacknowledged and even

contradictory, that exist in literary texts.

Yet they do not attempt to reconcile

those meanings into a single, coherent

structure. Instead, they explore how those

meanings are ultimately irreconcilable

and proliferate in ways that call into

question received assumptions or “truths.”

Deconstruction seems to center around the idea that language and meaning are often inadequate in trying to convey the message or idea a communicator is trying to express.

Since the confusion stems from the language and not the object then one should break down or deconstruct the language to see if we can better understand where the confusion stems.

Translation and Relevance Theory

(Gutt,1991)

Relevance theory distinguishes between

descriptive and interpretive use of

language.

In descriptive use, the thought belongs to

the speaker and the speaker intends it to

accurately represent reality. In interpretive

use, the thought belongs (originally) to

someone other than the speaker and the

speaker intends his/her utterance to

accurately represent the original thought.

Someone speaking descriptively intends

to be faithful to reality; someone speaking

interpretively intends to be faithful to the

meaning of the original speaker (Smith

2000:39).

Derrida and relevant translation

Derrida first deconstructs a text, carefully

reinterpreting traces that overlapping

each other, which means to pay close

attention to the so-called intertextuality.

Since any text is no longer a completed

whole writing. Text is a web constituted of

various differences, a structure made up

of different traces.

The process of translation is a process to

endlessly pursue and erase traces, to

disseminate, graft, rewrite and

supplement. It opposes to the traditional

binary opposition in translation and

implants with an open, pluralistic and

subjective way.

It puts the undecidability and multiplicity

of meaning into spotlight and stresses the

relation between meaning and context.

Consequently, relationship between the

original and translated texts is redefined

as translation living more and better than

original.

Derrida is opposed to concept of

relevance in translation. Because

according to Derrida relevance depends

on a stable signified, signifier relationship

and aims at total transparency.

Thank you for listening

to my presentation

Presenter: Habibeh Khosravi

Professor:Dr.Jahandar