Microsoft Word Revised Syllabus Ver doc

Choice of SLT 
Regarding the choice of the SLT, the two main principles that seem to guide the 
translator are the declaration of an award on a book or the success of a movie based on a 
particular book. As Mukherjee pertinently observes, “The ambition of all Indian writers and 
translators were undoubtedly fired by the Nobel Prize for the Literature in 1913.” Though not 
the Nobel Prize all the time, it is the annual literary awards declared by the Sahitya Academy 
or the like. 
When the selection is made on the basis of an award or the successful movie version, 
it often happens that many other good works off the same author or other authors are 
neglected; and the same work repeatedly gets translated even in the same language. 
Another fact to be mentioned in this context is that the success of the translation of 
one work of an author tempts the translators to translate his other works also and in their 
eagerness, they often neglect the quality. 
The final result of the manner in which the Indian English writer chooses his SLT is 
an imbalance, incomplete and lopsided picture of Indian translations in English. This could 
be well avoided if there is proper planning. The greatest drawback of this field is that there is 
no way for the translator to have an overall picture of what has been translated and what has 
not been. The first step to check this problem is to take a stock of what is available in print. In 
India this is an uphill task because there is no agency for making a regular, periodical stock 
taking and the dissemination of this information. 
Periods of Texts 
On taking stock of what is already available and locating the lacunae, the translator 
could draw a line of demarcation between the ancient and the modern literature. This is very 
important in the Indian context due to the vast difference between the two. The translation of 
ancient classics requires a greater degree of interpretation and adaptation. While translating 
an ancient text the translator has to continuously take care of the audience and make 
allowances with regard to the current literary taste. In such a case the translator is entitled to 
take a greater amount of freedom. In other words what the translator does is ‘transcreation’. 
This term was introduced by Purushotham Lal. In his introduction to his version of 
Shakuntala he writes that, “faced by such a variety of material, the translator must edit, 
rewrite, reconcile and transmute; his job in many ways becomes largely a matter of 
transcreation”. 
Classical literature in India has been almost equated with Sanskrit literature. The only 
competition in the field has been posed by Tamil literature. Ancient Tamil literature 
comprises of a good amount of religious and moralistic literature. This has been a great 
attraction for the missionaries. Consequently, some of the classics like the Thirukkural were 
translated by clergymen like W.H. Drew and G.U. Pope. The gap in the translation of the 
ancient literature therefore lies in the neglect of secular literature. Therefore, translation of the 
texts of classical literature remains in abundance to be done has to be done in a vast manner. 

---

99 
In the translation of modern literature the task of the translator is comparatively 
easier. Though he does not enjoyed as much freedom as the translator of the ancient literature 
is ‘permitted’ to enjoy, he is in an advantageous situation as he and his author are 
contemporaries. They are not separated by time like the translator and the author of the 
ancient literature. Both the languages and the cultures he deals with are alive. There is no 
additional difficulty of learning a language that is no more in use. The translator of modern 
literature is encouraged by yet another reason. The common reader generally opts to read 
modern literature. Therefore, the translator would get a vast audience. 
Once the translator has fixed his area as the ancient or the modern, he then has to 
further narrow down his area. If he has chosen the ancient literature, the task is easier. He 
may opt for the classics which are regarded down the ages as important achievements. When 
it comes to modern literature the task is a little tough. No modern text has achieved similar 
status. So the easiest method is to choose the important authors and their major works i.e. 
authors and works that have gained a better literary stand than the fellow writers of the 
period. Another major principle of selection is to make a time limit within the modern period 
and deal with materials written during this period-like the literature of partition period, the 
early post independence era, the eighties etc. There is yet another way of selecting the 
material by theme. On themes like women, love, social inequality etc. much has been written 
and the translator could choose any one of the themes. By adopting any of the three principles 
the translator gains a better time span to work in and is able to provide a representational 
view of the literature. By adopting the principles of selection based on genre or theme, the 
translator can present a good picture of the development of a particular form or theme in 
India.