In al-Khalili’s text, “Translation and the House of Wisdom,” there’s one section in the piece that discusses the ways in which great sums of knowledge were translated into Arabic from languages vastly different from the scholars’ own. Although much of the article focuses on “scientific” and “mathematical” knowledge, it also touches on al-Rashid’s love for the arts. Within this paragraph, the author writes that Muslim scholar studied Indian and Greek works and attempted to assimilate them into Arabic culture. Later in the paragraph, al-Khalili refers to this rush for translation as a movement and a fervent passion to infuse teachings outside of the scholars’ own cultures into their own heritage.
We have learned a lot about how idioms, connotations, and other characteristics of language that can easily be lost in translation. What do you think are the effects of trying to do this on a large scale in the context of translating cross-cultural contexts? Once something is assimilated into another culture, does it then become a hybrid or does it “belong” to the new culture into which it has been adopted? Do you see this pattern in our own environment?
~ Michelle
By
4 thoughts on “House of Translation”
jpuvogel
Different nuances in language are bound to be lost in translation, but I think that as long as it does not significantly warp or change the meaning of the text there is no harm done. The exchange of ideas is important, especially when it comes to the sciences and the arts. Language can often be a barrier for this exchange of ideas. But, that is just looking at language alone. When culture comes into the conversation, it brings up another issue. It is interesting that we often view certain ideas as “belonging” to a certain culture, such as Greek philosophy. But I wonder if it would be better to think of ideas just as ideas, not belonging to a certain culture or country. Of course, this could be problematic as well, because then the original creators may lose credit for their ideas. I see this pattern in our environment, especially in America. For example, the idea of democracy itself is seen as inherently American, even though the idea originated in Greece, as far as we know. We see this in other things that are viewed as American. Rodeos actually originated in Mexico, and jazz music originated in Africa, not the U.S. It is interesting to think about how society views certain ideas and practices as belonging to a certain culture, almost as a way to define and make sense of it.
gsbaum
The effects of translating cross-cultural contexts can be beneficial and useful for individuals who do not speak the original language, however, believe the context will not be entirely the same. Different languages have different grammar styles, word choice, punctuation, structure, etc., therefore, if translated, the document or context will not be correct and more of a hybrid of the original piece. This can be crucial in certain concepts especially in the Qur’an which is the verbatim word of God, and if translated, it won’t be exactly the same as what God actually said in comparison to the original Qur’an
stabakha
I believe that translations of beliefs can have its pros and cons. Translation of religious texts is extremely important so that others who want to learn about the religion are able to do so, however, there are cons like misinterpreting a belief in the wrong manner. That is why there is sometimes the case where a certain ideology becomes a “hybrid”. The idea is still there but changed slightly with the culture it is being practiced in, which can go wrong, as then that teaching can be taught in the wrong way throughout generations. It is important for translations to be “peer-reviewed” by a group of scholars who have the majority of the same thoughts that were passed correctly throughout generations. It would not be helpful if the texts are reviewed by scholars with different beliefs. I have always had this question, how do we know what is being passed is right? Do people have to have a certain range of belief with the thoughts that are being passed down, what do you guys think?
mmrajan in reply to stabakha
I’ve also wondered the same thing! At the moment, I wonder if maybe our framework for the solution is what’s stopping us from attaining an agreed answer. To be more specific: maybe we should stray from trying to assigning what is “right” and “wrong”? This makes me belief that there are hard boundaries for what’s acceptable and not. Instead, maybe we need a more flexible framework that is subjective for each practicing individual.