‘[...]element of transcoding is what locates the recognisable violence of the recognisably political within the general violence of culturing as incessant and shuttling translation, a point much harder to grasp without familiarity with the discourses of the gift.’¹

According to Homi Bhabha, ‘Translation is the performative nature of cultural communication, and [he] goes on, in another figurative equation, to speak of the residual cultural unassimilability of migrant as an instance of what Benjamin called "untranslatability".’²

Language serves a greater purpose than just a means of communication. For a vast majority of Dalits, who may not have access to formal education or training in language, their ability to express and interact with the world in their own language offers a valuable insight. The lack of a formal language training gives the freedom to conceptualize and frame ideas which the written word may not be able to capture sufficiently. Dialects and variants of mainstream languages are more commonly spoken by the lesser numerous groups, which may also be backward or lower castes in composition. In an attempt to get these voices out into the mainstream, many researchers and scholars have attempted to translate literature written by Dalit authors from their regional language to other languages. While the idea of translating a piece of work is noble, some of the challenges of translation need close attention. The linguistic vocabulary of Dalit scholars is located in their personal experiences and occupations marked by their caste status. The world of the Dalits has never been a part of mainstream society; they lived on the periphery, outside of the village society. Many times Dalit writers derive words from the dialects they speak, thereby in mainstream translation one cannot find the analogy between the source text and the target text.

This piece will argue against the case of ‘Translation as Culture’ and ‘Cultural Translation’, in order to enumerate why Dalit literary experiences have not been able to transfer to the process of ‘doing translation’ in the current techno-socio culture. In other words, even after the number of English translations of Dalit texts, the question remains of why a caste/less relationship exists between the source language and target language. In an English translation one may find the presence of the Dalit world but on the other hand, one will also note the absence of the cultural words of Dalits in Indian translation studies.

 

Before discussing the process of culture, translation and untranslatability, one needs to dwell on the words and world of the Dalit (ex-untouchables). There exists a rupture between the cultural life of an elite English speaking class and the ‘unimaginable’ cultural world of Dalits. As a result, English translation of Dalit writing fails to express the ‘felt’ experiences of caste society, and is unable to find words to narrate their world in the game of knowledge production. However, Dalits became self-conscious about their status imposed by the repressive cultural forces in numerous ways – one way they challenged Brahmanical hegemony was through their literature. Autobiographies, short stories, poems have become recent additions in academic discussion, but their oral traditions such as Jalsa and Bheem-Geet also play an important role in their culture of resistance that remained absent from academic discussions.

There exists a void in the English speaking academic circles when exploring the oral literary tradition of Dalits. However, if we look at the post-Ambedkar Dalit resistance, their literary discourse has achieved a milestone. In the hierarchies of languages, dalit literary discourse remains at the margins within mainstream academic discussion. It has remained at the margins because Dalit literature is only available in the vernacular languages. However, with English translations of texts written by Dalits, there is now some scope for debate and discussion around the humiliating experiences of the Dalit ‘world’.

 

Illustrating the quotes mentioned at the start of this piece, that Dalit writing is part and parcel of understanding of culture of caste violence through which ‘discourses of the gift’, are presented to the wider public. However, when it is translated or transcoded, it is a ‘violence of culturing’ because at first, there is an unfamiliarity with the Dalit ‘discourses of the gift’, thereby caste violence remains unrecognizable. If one takes Homi Bhabha’s discussion, ‘translation is the performative nature of cultural communication.’

Historically there is no ‘cultural communication’ between caste lines, mainstream and the margins, and to maintain the status quo of upper caste hegemony, there remains a ‘residual cultural unassimilability’ between the Savarna and Dalit cultures. As a result of this ‘cultural’ unassimilability in post-modern and post-colonial times, we see that the ‘untranslatability’ of Dalit words and their world in the Indian English world has remained. The paper attempts to elaborate further to show why Dalit culture has yet to become a part of the culture of translation, in other words, translation studies in India are yet to do justice to Dalit writing and culture.

If one observes the field of translation studies closely, it has changed from translatology to translation studies and from ‘cultural turn in translation studies’ from the 1990s to ‘translation turn in cultural studies’ by 1998.³ In the cultural context of Indian translation studies, the grammar of Dalit writing counters the (dominant) hegemonic cultural knowledge production. It is also a rejection of existing dominant history and literary narratives. Bama suggests, ‘translation has an identity of its own ...translation is not only a language event but the most humanizing moment.’⁴ In addition, translation is the practice of representation⁵ and adaptation as well. In globalizing the Dalit discourse, mainstream Indian translation studies scholars have adapted it as a mode of representation and as a result, the Dalit identity and culture is lost.

 

The emergence of the Dalit literary movement in Maharashtra, which started in the 1960s, subsequently helped to shape the discourse of the Dalit Panthers movement in the 1970s. Dalit literature was a revolt against the ‘mainstream’ Marathi literary and political canon. As it was mostly written in vernacular/regional languages, it remained absent from mainstream Indian academia for many years. At the initial stage, translation of Marathi Dalit literature was not available for a larger readership. It came into the English public sphere when Eleanor Zelliot and Gail Omvedt began researching and exploring the field of Dalit literature and culture. Eleanor Zelliot mentions that ‘The Times Weekly Supplement of 25 November 1973, contains the first significant analysis of Dalit literature in English, together with the translation of poetry, stories and essays, and it remains the best introduction in English to this school of literature.’⁶

 

From the 1990s onwards, Dalit literature became a pan-Indian phenomenon as translations began to appear in English and other languages. Some pioneering anthologies of Marathi Dalit writing translated into English were Untouchable! Voices of Dalit Literature by Barbara Joshi (1986), An Anthology of Dalit Literature edited by Mulk Raj Anand and Eleanor Zelliot (1992), and Posioned Bread: Modern Marathi Dalit Literature edited by Arjun Dangle (1992). Bama’s Karukku (Tamil, 1992), Omprakash Valmiki’s Joothan (Hindi, 1997), Joseph Macwan’s Angaliyat (Gujarati, 1989), Arvind Malagatti’s Government Brahmna (Kannada, 1994), Urmila Pawar’s Ayadan (Marathi, 2003) are some well known English translated texts from the different regional languages.

These translations have helped to generate the discourse of Dalit studies in India and abroad. However, if one looks at Dalit literary writing, it incorporates idioms and dialects, generally known in lower caste localities and occupational surroundings. This has created a disconnect with the more sophisticated vernacular languages; idioms and words from the dialects of Dalit writers are not part of the vernacular vocabularies. Hence there is un/translatability in translating Dalit writing into English. While there may be a reciprocal relationship between the vernacular and English, the vocabulary of the Dalit writer is ‘completely’ antithetical to the vernacular and also with English. Spivak writes, ‘the word translation itself loses its literal sense, it becomes catachresis, a term I use not for obscurity, but because I find it indispensable.’⁷ Similarly, in the politics of translation, circulation and reception, because of the un/translatability of the Dalit writing, it loses its essence in translation and for any author, ‘essence’ is ‘indispensable’.

 

These days, translations are commissioned by organizations that create, as Maya Pandit suggests, ‘project English ...creates a product English that interlocks with economic/material systems, institutions and the US empire, which is supported ideologically in cultural (re)production and consumption in various educational, political and economic discourses by a story of the spread of English through metaphors of English as "international", global, God-given, and rich and thereby rationalizes the death of other natural languages as "legitimate linguicide".’⁸

If we look at the mechanisms of translation, such as the process of doing sense to sense translation, machine translation, cultural translation, none of the methods can grasp the intensity of the Dalit cultural vocabulary and from where it is drawn. If one tries to do a cultural translation, the translator who has not experienced that culture (generally belonging to the upper caste, English speaking class), cannot do a meaningful reading of the text. Eleanor Zelliot cites Vijay Tendulkar’s introduction to Namdeo Dhasal’s Gol-pitha – ‘Dhasal’s poetry is far too complex for me to even start to translate (Tendulkar himself lists twenty-six words and phrases he could not understand).’⁹

 

If we look at Arun Prabha Mukherjee’s English translation of Joothan, it is changed to Joothan: Dalit’s Life, published by Samya Press in Kolkata and it was published as Joothan: An Untouchable’s Life by Columbia University Press, it looks like a deliberate attempt by the publisher to attract an Indian and American readership. Although, ‘The word "untouchable" has had global currency… while Dalit is still unfamiliar in the western world despite the fact that the "untouchables" decided to define themselves as Dalits more than 50 years ago. This shift in self-identity from the pejorative and humiliating, externally-imposed word "untouchable", to a self-chosen identity, cannot be captured by a literal translation …[as] ground down…’, writes Christi Merrill.¹⁰ In this relation, one will also need to understand how globalization and market oriented projects of translation can have an impact in translating the text because of which the sense of ‘translation itself loses its literal sense’.

According to Namita Gokhale, ‘the genre of the novel (which by definition is always new) became available via translation to the Indian reader.’¹¹ Unlike novels, Dalit poetry, short stories, autobiographies and memoirs have also became accessible through the process of translation. Unlike the ‘colonial project’ that was successful in creating an Indian literary canon, English translation studies remain unsuccessful in doing justice to Dalit literary texts even after much change in post-colonial times. Translation is a way of globalizing the local. But in standard English, the localness of the language is lost, and when it is specifically about Dalit writing, translation is unable to capture the sense of caste hierarchies as it is illustrated in texts written by Dalit authors.

 

English translations of Dalit writing provide meaning to caste in a casteless language. The English language comes with ‘white supremacy’, which might be a casteless language for the elite English speaking class. Having kept ‘Brahmanical supremacy’ intact with the English tongue, the vocabulary of Dalits was excluded from the English dictionary. In the process of translation Dalit writing, the English language has not been able to produce a vocabulary to understand untouchability and caste discourse. There is an unfamiliarity with the source language, culture and the target language.

With Dalit authors who choose to first write in their own tongue, their ideas and thoughts remain intact as long as they are interacting with others who speak the same language. Once the thought transcends the boundaries of language and narrow socio-cultural circles, the challenge emerges. A translator might use her creative freedom to interpret the meaning of the original thought to make it understandable, or to retain the true meaning as far as possible. However, the translator’s own inputs at processing one language into another might hinder the authenticity of the original work being reproduced.

Take the case of Marathi spoken in the Vidarbha region in Maharashtra. It is well known that this variant of Marathi is different from that spoken in the Marathwada region, and the more economically prosperous regions of the Pune-Mumbai corridor. A translation of the term ‘ghosalunghe’ or ‘pusunkha’ (‘do not leave anything on your plate’) may be difficult into another language because it is intrinsically colloquial to the style of Marathi spoken by the Mahars, especially in the Vidarbha region. The term means an act of taking the remaining portion of food (usually curries) in a vessel and completely cleaning it by mixing it with rice. A non-native speaker or translator might be delighted by the interesting colloquial expression with food, but translating it to another language while retaining its authentic meaning might be complicated. While translations are often criticized for their inability to retain the true meaning of the original text, the challenge of translation is that much harder for the kind of languages used by Dalits.

 

Another related aspect is vernacular humour, and how it shapes the conversation and expression among marginalized communities. Humourous exchange among Dalits is characterized by the use of very specific colloquial phrases and terms, created within the framework of the language, with local sensibilities. Translating these might not help in conveying the exact same flavour as the original. A poor translation of a humorous phrase may not even appear funny to the reader, and this then defeats the purpose of translation. Dalit writing works through the theory of negation and the expression of the ‘lived experiences’ of caste. But how do these narratives lose the sense when translated into the target language, especially English?

Below is a short account of Jerry Pinto’s English translation of Baluta (2015), a translation of arguably the first Marathi Dalit autobiography written in Marathi by Daya Pawar (1978), and When I Hid My Caste (2018), a short story collection Jeva Mi Jaat Chorli Hoti by Baburao Bagul (1963).

‘This stone

Which was removed from the structure of a building

is therefore rendered useless.’¹²

– Jack London

 

‘Dagdu Maruti Pawar

Who carries as his portion, or share [vatyala]

This Baluta of Pain

Tied up in the folds of his dhoti

– Because of the structure of Indian society

I am only the beast of burden [bharvahak]

– Who manifests his words [shabdat shabdankan kelela],

His desire was that.

No one should be told,

I also feel

That we should not reveal this to anyone.’¹³

– Daya Pawar

 

The above poems are not available in Jerry Pinto’s English translation of Baluta (2015).¹⁴ In addition, when Anupama Rao translated these poems in her work, maybe she was unable to find suitable words in English, therefore, along with the English translation, Marathi texts are also scripted in English letters in italicized form. Even ‘in fold of his dhoti’ is not a suitable word for padar; in fact it is difficult to find the relative word for dhoti in the English language. The word bharvahak in the context of the ‘lived experience’ of the Dalits, presents what Spivak calls ‘discourses of gift’. In the first story of When I Hid My Caste; ‘Prisoner of Darkness’, one can see in the first line of the first para, an interpolation in the English translation. If we see the Marathi text of When I Hid My Caste (Jeva Mi Jaat Chorali Hoti!) there is no mention of the word ‘woman’ except bane tula...’!¹⁵ (banoo you…!), but if one takes a look at the English translation, the sentence starts with ‘The evening, a woman…’¹⁶ In the short story called, ‘When I Hid My Caste!’, in the first para one can feel a loss of the sense of pain and suffering of the Dalits in the English translation. Even in the selection of the words one could ‘feel’ the difference in the English and Marathi text. If we take an example of the word cheed, it could be translated in Marathi as ‘anguish’, but in Pinto’s English translation the word ‘rage’¹⁷ has been used. In the same para there is also erasure of a sentence like nagapramane halahal,¹⁸ which could be translated into English as ‘like snake venom’.

 

In addition, ‘This is how it came about’ is not even giving a sense of the sentence of ti ghatana ashi ghadali. Therefore, when one translates a dalit text one will also have to maintain stringent ethics of translation. Translation is a critical process and when it is about the translation of a text written by a Dalit intellectual, it becomes more difficult because their culture is always in conflict with the mainstream. Untranslatability of texts exist because the texts written by Dalit intellectuals remain untouchable¹⁹ and untouchability exists because of the experiences of not just caste but also intellectual humiliation which is untranslatable. This paradoxical analogy has to be dealt with in translation studies in India.

 

Indian translation studies, and the debate and discussion around the translation of Dalit writing, is in a nascent stage. In the hierarchies of vernacular languages there are cultural variations between the oral and the literary. Dalit authors fight with both because their language neither fits into the oral, nor into the literary. When there are no words for Dalit expression in a vernacular language, then how can it be possible to draw everyday experiences of caste humiliation into the English translation, where the language in the Indian context is dominated by Brahmanical hegemony.

There is a need to develop a dialogue between cultures, between the vernacular and their dialects, and a need to create a dictionary with colloquial keywords that Dalits use in their everyday lives. This could be the ‘gift’ to avoid the un/translatability of the Dalit world. Translation of Dalit writing in the time of globalization may have been able to generate an international debate around Dalit literature and the movement. However, the English language is not only influenced by ‘colonial hegemony’ but it is also exercised by the elite brahmanical English speaking class and therefore will not be able to deliver justice to the Dalit texts. Dalit intellectuals will have to develop their own vocabulary of the English language like African-American intellectuals who have developed their own idiom and syntax to express themselves.

 

Footnotes:

1. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, ‘Translation as Culture’, in Paul St-Pierre and Prafulla C. Kar (eds.), Translation: Reflections, Refractions, Transformations. John Benjamins Publishing, Philadelphia, 2007, pp. 265-266.

2. Cited in Harish Trivedi, ‘Translating Culture vs. Cultural Translation’, in Paul St-Pierre and Prafulla C. Kar (eds.), John Benjamins Publishing, Philadelphia, 2007, p. 283.

3. See details in Harish Trivedi, ibid., pp. 277-287.

4. A paper presented by Bama, ‘Dalit Literature in Translation’, Dalit Literature and / in Translation: An International Conference, the British Centre for Literary Translation, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK, 29-30 June 2015. https://www.uea.ac.uk/documents/595249 /9042348/ List+of +Abstracts+ May+18.pdf/1ca6f96e-3f0c-4d5d-b7bf-acfd36110f44 (accessed 24 June 2019).

5. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, ‘Translation as Culture’, 2007, op. cit., p. 264.

6. For more see Eleanor Zelliot, From Untoucable to Dalit: Essays on the Ambedkar Movement. Manohar, New Delhi, 2001, pp. 269-290.

7. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, ‘Translation as Culture’, 2007, op. cit., p. 264.

8. Quoted in Maya Pandit, ‘Global vs. Local: Problematising the Cultural Politics of English’, in Alladi Uma, K. Suneetha Rani and D. Murali Manohar (eds.), English in the Dalit Context. Orient Blackswan, Hyderabad, 2014, p. 115.

9. Eleanor Zelliot, 2001, op. cit., p. 277.

10. Christi A. Merrill, ‘Human Rights Singular-Plural: Translating Dalit Autobiography From Hindi’, Biography 33(1), Winter, 2010, p. 130.

11. Namita Gokhale, ‘Negotiating Multilingual Literary Spaces’, 2009. https://www. india-seminar.com/2009/600/600_ namita_ gokhale.htm (accessed 12 June 2019).

12. Daya Pawar, Baluta (Marathi). Granthali, Mumbai, 1978, on frontispiece. This is a short poem translated in English as a note by Anupama Rao in her book, The Caste Question: Dalits and the Politics of Modern India. Permanent Black, Ranikhet, 2009, p. 351.

13. Anupama Rao, The Caste Question: Dalits and the Politics of Modern India. University of California Press, London, 2009, p. 197.

14. Jerry Pinto, Baluta (English Translation), Speaking Tiger, New Delhi, 2015.

15. Baburao Bagul, Jeva Mi Jaat Chorali Hoti! (14th edition). Akshar Prakashan, Mumbai, 2016, p. 9.

16. Jerry Pinto, When I Hid My Caste. Speaking Tiger, New Delhi, 2018, p. 1.

17. Ibid., p. 116.

18. Baburao Bagul, 2016, op. cit., p. 78.

19. Sagar, ‘Biting My Tongue: What Hindi Keeps Hidden’, Caravan Magazine, 27 June 2019. https://carav anmagazine.in/caste/ what-hindi-keeps-hidden (accessed 5 July 2019).