Abstract

 This paper reviews the English translation by Nicholson of a Persian Sufi text Kashf Al-Mahjub by Hujveri, to explore the possibilities of translation from one culture to another culture and the strategies of translating specific terminology of Sufi text for Anglophone audience. The paper explains the ways adopted by translators to bridge the linguistic and cultural gap. The techniques and strategies adopted by the translator reflect the theoretical assumptions of the translator regarding the nature, process and purpose of the translation. 

Key Words

Autonomy, Equivalence, Function, Translatability, Cultural Gap, Orientalist Translation

Introduction

Translating a text into another language is as old a practice as the history of civilization itself. Usually, this activity has been purposeful and it has served some political, social, economic, religious, literary, or intellectual purposes. Apparently, it seems to be a very simple act of conveying the message of a text in one language into another language. However, the development of translation studies as a discipline has given rise to various debates which amount to the development of translation theories and translation paradigms (Pym: 2010). These paradigms and theories are applied now a day to explore the various factors involved in the act of translating. The theories have gradually emerged and got explored in the recent few decades. In spite of this fact, the act of translating has been in vogue for centuries before the birth of translation theories and paradigms.  

Pym (2010) is of the view that every translator who did translation in any period of history was supposed to have certain assumptions which might have been theoretical and paradigmatic in nature. Keeping this in view, this paper explores the theoretical assumptions of the famous orientalist translator R.A. Nicholson in the translation of a Persian Sufi text, The Kashf Al-Mahjub into English.

Theoretical Perspective of Translation Studies

The act of translating involves an original text produced by a writer in a particular language and for a particular audience, and a translator translates the same text in another language for another audience. This means that translating involves an author and a translator, an original text and a translated text, the language of the original text and the language of the translated version. Moreover, the target audience of the original text and that of the translation is not the same. It is obvious that the act of translating involves theoretical assumptions about the relation between author and translator, the original text and its translation, the two languages involved in it, and the purpose of the original writer and the translator. Venuti (2000) opines that, keeping this in view, all translation theories fall into three broader paradigms which he terms as autonomy, equivalence and function. The question of autonomy deals with the role of author and translator in the act translation. In this regard, the debate revolves around the role of translator, his/her visibility and invisibility, and the poststructuralist question of authorship and the creativity of the translator. As the translation is a process which involves decision-making in various contexts, the role of the translator becomes significant. Hermens (2009) has talked about the ‘inbetweeness’ of the translator. When the focus is on the comparison between the original text and the target text, the theoretical debate deals with the question of ‘equivalence’. The theoretical discussions have differentiated between the formal and dynamic equivalence (Fawcett: 2014). Pym (2010) has introduced the terminology of natural and directional equivalence. At this level, the comparison involves linguistic issues of semantics and pragmatics, sociolinguistics and stylistics. At this level of theoretical debate, the question of translatability and untranslatability also arises. The translation strategies used to create translated texts reflect the assumptions of the translator in this regard. The third category of debate in translation theory involves the function of translation and the target audience for which the translation is created. In this regard, the agency of the translation also becomes significant. This is the point where the postcolonial, feminist, and orientalist perspectives become significant for translation theories.

Translation Studies is an interdisciplinary field of knowledge. Its theoretical standpoint involves theories about language and theories about culture. Translating from one language into another language involves the comparison of the two languages at the linguistic level such as semantics, syntax and morphology and stylistics. Moreover, the relationship between the culture and the language also comes to the fore. All languages have their respective culture specific contexts. Therefore, translating from one language into another language becomes not only a linguistic comparison but also a cultural comparison. Therefore, evaluating a translation involves the theories about language, culture and the translation process. 

In the backdrop of the aforementioned theoretical perspectives of translation studies, this research paper evaluates the translation of a Persian Sufi text The Kashf Al-Mahjub, and its English translation for Anglophone audience by R.A. Nicholson who is a reputed Orientalist scholar. The purpose of the analysis is to foreground the theoretical assumptions of the translator, which are reflected through the strategies adopted by the translator. The primary objective of the paper is to highlight the theoretical assumptions of Nicholson through the strategies used by him in translating the Sufi text. In this regard, the data has been the translation of the introduction of the book and the various relevant items regarding the Sufi terminology in chapter xxiv of the book. The data discussion highlights Nicholson’s strategies of translating these items.

The process of translation involves various translation strategies which are rooted in multiple theoretical perspectives and their use indicates the theoretical assumptions of the translator. Nicholson has used various strategies in his translation, and the use of these strategies foregrounds his purpose of the translation. Newmark (1988) has pointed out a number of procedures which a translator may use. These include transference/transliteration, naturalization, cultural equivalent, functional equivalent, descriptive equivalent, synonym, compensation and paraphrase. These techniques and procedures produce various types of translation which include word for word translation, literal translation, faithful translation, semantic translation, adaptation, free translation, idiomatic translation and communicative translation (Newmark:1988). Venuti (2001) proposes two broader categories of translation strategies: domestication and foreignization. These strategies propose that languages and cultures are not similar and translating from one language and culture into another language and culture involves the strategies that would tackle the linguistic difference and bridge the cultural gap. The analysis of Nicholson’s translation of Kashf Al-Mahjoob reflects many strategies used by the translator at various places. 

Data Analysis and Discussion

S. No	ST	TT
1.	Hal, Waqt	(state, time)
2.	Maqam, Tamkin, Talwin	(station, untranslated)
3.	Muhadarat, Mukashafat	Untranslated
4.	Quad, Bast	(contraction, expansion)
5.	Uns, Hayat	(intimacy, awe)
6.	Qahr, Lutf	(violence, kindness)
7.	Navy, Ithbat	(negation, affirmation)
8.	Musamarat,Muhadathat	(nocturnal discourse, conversation)
9.	Ilm al-Yaqin, Ayn al-Yaqin, Haqq al-Yaqin	certain knowledge, certain sight, certain truth
10.	Ilm, Ma’rifat	(gnosis)
11.	Shari’at,Haqiqat	(law, truth)

Conclusion

Kashf Al-Mahjub by Hujvery is a culturally rich text in Persian language. It is a representative text of Muslim spirituality. Nicholson's translation is one of the earliest efforts to translate this text. The text is replete with culture-bound discipline-specific terms. Most of these terms do not have a suitable equivalence. Therefore, Nicholson uses a variety of techniques to bridge the cultural and linguistic gap. These strategies reflect the theoretical assumptions of Nicholson. He does not stick to any one theory. His techniques highlight the role of the translator in the decision making process. He also tries to manage dynamic equivalence between the two texts. Nicholson's assumption about the purpose of translation is that message of the text should be conveyed keeping in view the interest of the audience and necessary omissions should be made. Though, at the time of translation, translation theories had not emerged, but we may deduce many theoretical assumptions from this text. It may be concluded that translations before the birth of translation studies are site of theoretical assumptions and research in translation evaluation may benefit from it.     

References

• Akbari, M. 2013. Strategies for Translating Idioms. Journal of Academic and Applied Studies, 3(8), 32-41.
• Albakry, M. (2004). Linguistic and cultural issues in literary translation.
• Baker, M. (1992). In Other Words: A Course Book for Translation. London: Routledge.
• Baker, M. (1998). Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies. London: Routledge.
• Bell, R. T. (1998). Psychological/cognitive Approaches. In M. Baker (Ed), Routledge encyclopedia of translation studies. London & New York: Routledge.
• Catford, J. C. (1965). A Linguistic Theory of Translation; An Essay In Applied Linguistics. London: Oxford University Press.
• Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
• Fawcett, P. (1997/2014). Translation and Language Linguistic Theories Explained, Routledge: London
• Hermans, T. (1996). The Translator’s Voice in Translated Narrative. Target: International Journal of Translation Studies, 8(1), 23-48.
• Larson, L. M. (1984). Meaning based Translation, A guide to cross-language, Equivalence. Lanham: University Press of America.