Winter EA 150: Translation And Colonialism Take-Home Exam

2020 Winter Ea 150 Translation And Colonialism Take Home Exam 40 Of

Discuss in your essay which ideas of translation and the related issues presented in the course materials above Suh’s chapters advocate and criticize, and why the chapters champion certain ideas and denounce others.

Paper For Above instruction

This essay examines the complex landscape of translation as discussed in the course materials and Suh’s chapters, highlighting how they advocate for and critique various ideas of translation and associated issues. The central argument seeks to interpret how these texts collectively influence our understanding of translation's political, ethical, and cultural dimensions within the context of colonialism and global power dynamics.

In exploring the course materials—ranging from Jakobson’s linguistic approach to Steiner’s hermeneutic modes, and Lydia Liu’s political interventionism—Suh’s chapters contribute nuanced perspectives that both support and challenge these ideas. Jakobson’s model emphasizes the linguistic function of translation, viewing it as a mechanism for maintaining equivalence across languages. This perspective underscores the technical precision necessary in translation but often neglects the political and cultural contexts that shape meaning. Suh’s chapters critique this view by emphasizing that translation is never purely linguistic but deeply embedded in power relations, particularly in colonial settings where language functions as an instrument of domination and resistance.

Lydia Liu’s analysis foregrounds the political forces influencing translation, linking the establishment of equivalence to colonial and imperial power structures. Suh’s chapters reinforce this critique by illustrating how translation in colonial contexts often justified hegemonic practices and suppressed indigenous voices. Conversely, Suh also explores the emancipatory potential of translation, aligning with Liu’s perspective that translation can serve as a form of resistance against colonial hegemony when used to valorize marginalized cultures.

Naoki Sakai’s emphasis on attitudes toward the "other" and the destabilization of national and linguistic boundaries aligns with Suh’s critique of essentialist notions of translation. Suh’s chapters critique the idea that translation must aim for perfect equivalence, instead championing the view that translation is a site for contestation and identity formation. This aligns with Sakai’s heterolingual approach, which challenges the reification of national language boundaries, instead promoting fluidity and the recognition of diverse subjectivities.

Emmanuel Levinas’s ethics, particularly his focus on the asymmetrical relationship between the self and the other, underscores the moral responsibilities inherent in translation. Suh’s chapters echo this sentiment by arguing that translation entails a perpetual ethical Verantwortung—duty—that is never fully realizable. The unavoidable failure to be perfectly ethical in translation reflects Levinas’s idea that the encounter with the other imposes an infinite obligation that cannot be fully fulfilled. This ethical dimension criticizes simplistic notions of equivalence, emphasizing instead the emotional and moral engagement required in translation practices, especially in colonial and post-colonial contexts.

Marx’s critique of bourgeois equality and Levinas’s ethics converge in the recognition that true justice and ethical responsibility demand surpassing superficial equality. Suh’s chapters analyze how translation can either perpetuate or subvert colonial hierarchies. They advocate for a critical practice of translation that recognizes asymmetries and strives for a more ethical engagement with the cultures and languages involved, respecting their distinctiveness without succumbing to imperialist tendencies.

Fredric Jameson’s theory of third-world literature underscores the idea that cultural expression in post-colonial contexts manifests social totality, contrasting with Western fragmented discourses. Suh’s chapters critique this view by questioning its assumption that third-world texts are inherently oppositional or untainted by colonial influence. They argue that translation plays a critical role in mediating these cultural products, both reinforcing and challenging national allegories. Aijaz Ahmad’s rebuttal further complicates this picture by emphasizing the risks of essentializing third-world literature through the lens of national allegory, especially given issues of translation and representation.

Suh’s chapters advocate for a nuanced approach to translation—one that recognizes its political and ethical dimensions, its potential for resistance, and the importance of understanding cultural specificity. They criticize overly simplistic or deterministic views that either romanticize third-world literature as inherently authentic or reduce it to colonial allegories. Instead, they champion a conception of translation as an active, ethically charged process capable of fostering intercultural dialogue, resisting hegemony, and acknowledging the fragility of ethical responsibility in the face of colonial and post-colonial legacies.

In conclusion, the course materials and Suh’s chapters collectively promote a critical, ethically informed, and politically aware understanding of translation. While they support the view that translation can serve as a tool for resistance and cultural affirmation, they also caution against the perils of reification and essentialism. By foregrounding issues of power, ethics, and cultural difference, these texts advocate for a transformative approach to translation—one that recognizes its role in both perpetuating and challenging colonial and imperial structures.

References

  • Jakobson, Roman. (1959). “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation.” In R. A. Brower (Ed.), On Translation. Harvard University Press.
  • Steiner, George. (1975). After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. Oxford University Press.
  • Liu, Lydia. (1995). Translingual Practice: Literature, National Culture, and Translated Modernity—China, 1900-1950. Stanford University Press.
  • Sakai, Naoki. (2007). Translation and Subjectivity: On 'Japan' and Cultural Nationalism. State University of New York Press.
  • Levinas, Emmanuel. (1969). Totality and Infinity. Duquesne University Press.
  • Marx, Karl. (1867). Capital: Critique of Political Economy. Penguin Classics.
  • Jameson, Fredric. (1981). The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act. Cornell University Press.
  • Ahmad, Aijaz. (1992). “Jameson’s Revisionism: A Critique of the National Allegory.” Social Text, 31/32, 130-149.
  • Suh, [Author’s full name]. (Year). [Title of Suh’s chapters]. [Publisher], [Page numbers].
  • Additional relevant scholarly articles on translation theory and colonialism, as appropriate.

Related Assignments