தினசெய்தி – 9 4 2023
பக்கம் எண் : 4
அருந்தமிழும் அன்றாட வழக்கும் – 156
நாடகங்களின் தமிழாக்கம் – ஒரு பார்வை !
முனைவர் ஔவை அருள்
தில்லிப் பல்கலைக்கழகத்தில் நான் வழங்கிய முனைவர் பட்ட ஆய்வின் ஏழாம் பகுதி வருமாறு:
Where they do not exist, translators become addicted to a number of approximations such as
a) transliteration
b) borrowing
c) coinage
d) literal translation
e) modulation and
f) paraphrasing,
to name a few.
Thus, fidelity becomes less conspicuous. In fact, loss of meaning is a sign of good translation and if a text is translated readily into another language without some loss of meaning, it is a sign of having no essence or style.
From the translator’s point of view the issues around translation acquire a new significance.
Justice Maharajan, a renowned translator of Shakespeare’s plays, in his preface to the translation of King Lear, acknowledges the greatness and universality of the playwright and also the spate of criticism on Shakespeare that the literary world has produced.
He begins to wonder whether even Englishmen have fully comprehended the genius of Shakespeare.
But he affirms his faith in the genius of the Tamils to enjoy and appreciate Shakespeare, since they have the vitality to understand a mystic poet like Thirumoolar or an imaginative genius like Kambar.
The beauty of the original is always difficult to be captured in translation.
Yet, he claims that within the limitations of his faculties, he has found it possible to put across in Tamil, 99% of the contents of the original, 60% of the moods of Shakespeare and about 20% of the spirit of his poetry.
One of his friends Vidwan L.Shanmugha Sundaram, who knew little English, but had a good taste for Tamil literature acted as sounding board for the translations.
It seems he was much impressed by the translations and admired the genius of Shakespeare.
Justice Maharajan also states that the first requisite of a translator of Shakespeare in Tamil should be a passion to enjoy Tamil literature and Tamil culture.
He should also revel in Shakespeare and identify himself totally with the artist, negating his own self. If this could be attained, the rest of the job is done and translation will take care of itself.
It will hunt for the proper linguistic equivalent and act as a bridge between the two languages.
The task of translating Shakespeare leads some to believe that Tamil language has greater potential in expressing philosophical precepts while English can express bare truths of life much better than Tamil.
For want of proper use and users, certain excellent Tamil words have fallen into disuse and abandoning the habit of expressing them in rich Tamil vocabulary over a prolonged period, could be a significant contributor.
Recollecting his stage experience, the veteran translator – stage actor Pammal Sambanda Mudaliar discusses the problem he encountered while translating Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
In his book Nadaka Medai Ninaivugal, he says that translation of any matter from one language to another, by itself, is a difficult task and more so, translating an English Text to Tamil, as both are genetically not related.
Each language has a particular curve of movement and idiom and to steer it towards another language is a difficult task.
Translating an English text into Tamil is thus no easy task and the difficulty of translating Shakespeare into Tamil needs no emphasis.
Such being the nature of the problem, the question arises as to why he undertook the task.
In the course of an interesting discussion on stage craft, one of his friends Vaman Bhai, threw a challenge that one can act any one role in any play, but the role of Hamlet can never be enacted on the stage.
Taking the cue, Pammal Sambanda Mudaliar decided to try out the role and began reading Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
He began to understand the difficulties after he finished reading the text and started wondering how he could translate it into Tamil.
While fear seized him on the one side, he was also not inclined to confess this inability on the other.
He realized that he can never achieve the excellence of a scholar, but his belief in the reward of labour made him plunge into the task of translating the text.
Like Achilles in war, he had to be reminded of his challenge to display his valour in translating Shakespeare.
What began as a challenge, assumed the shape of a literary endeavor and t took more than six years for him to complete the task.
The opening scene itself could be translated only after a few months.
Again, the long speech of Claudius in Act I, scene two, proved tough and could not be translated to his satisfaction.
As someone who would normally proceed only after he was fully satisfied with the work undertaken, his translation of Hamlet had come to a grinding halt.
– வளரும் . . . .
– முனைவர் ஔவை அருள்
தொடர்புக்கு dr.n.arul@gmail.com
Add a Comment