1. Presentation on Comparative and Translation Studies
Siting Translation :
History, Post-Structuralism, and the Colonial Context
By Tejaswini Niranjana
Smt. S. B .Gardi
Department of English
Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University
Prepared by
Rinkal Dangar, Riddhi Rathod, Rajeshvari Rana
(Students of MA Part 2, Department of English, MKBU)
2. ❏ Presented by :-
Rajeshvari Rana
Sem - 4
Roll no. - 16
Enrollment no. -4069206420220023
Email ID: rhrana148@gmail.com
Riddhi Rathod
Sem - 4
Roll no. - 17
Enrollment no. - 4069206420220025
Rinkal Dangar
Sem - 4
Roll no. - 18
Enrollment no. - 4069206420220007
3. ❏ About the writer:-
● Tejaswini Niranjana (born 26 July 1958) is an Indian professor, cultural
theorist, translator and author.
● Tejaswini Niranjana is Professor of Cultural Studies at Lingnan University,
Hong Kong. She was formerly at the Centre for the Study of Culture and
Society, Bangalore, which she co-founded.
● Among her books is SITING TRANSLATION: HISTORY, POST-
STRUCTURALISM AND THE COLONIAL CONTEXT.
● She is best known for her contribution to the fields of culture studies,
gender studies, translation, and ethnomusicology (particularly relating to
different forms of Indian music).
● She is the recipient of the 2018 Humanities and Social Sciences Prestigious Fellowship, Research Grants
Council, Hong Kong. Niranjana was also awarded the Karnataka Sahitya Akademi Award for Best
Translation of 1994.
● Niranjana is best known for her theory of the relationship between colonialism and translation, writings on
feminism and the 'culture question' in India, and her practice-based research into music (specifically
Caribbean music, Hindustani classical music, and India-China collaborations.
4. Abstract
In a post colonial context the problematic of translation becomes a significant site for raising questions of
representation, power and history (people,races and languages).Niranjana contends that simultaneously
translation in the colonial context produces and supports a conceptual economy that works into the
discourse of western Philosophy to function as a philosopheme.Fixing colonized cultures, making them
seem static and changing rather than historically constructed. Her concern here is to explore the place of
translation in contemporary Euro American Literary theory through a set of interrelated reading.
She argues that the deployment of translation in colonial context shows us a way of questioning some of
the theoretical emphasis of post structuralism, Shows how they brings translation and its relevance to the
post colonial situation into being hegemonic versions of no western other.
The practice of power/knowledge is brought into being within multiple discourses and on multiple sites,
one such site is transaction. The argument presented underscores the obscured violence inherent in
constructing the colonial subject, emphasizing that hegemonic versions of the non-Western other, rooted
in powerful metaphysics of translation, perpetuate distorted portrayals. These representations, legitimized
through English education in formerly colonized regions, become ingrained as "natural" and "real,"
reinforcing ruling-class power. To challenge these distorted depictions, a critical examination of the
historicist tenets endorsing them is imperative
5. 1. Situating Translation
● Colonial discourse employs translation to construct dominant representations of colonized
subjects
● These representations are seen as truthful and circulate through philosophical, historical and
literary discourses
● Translation participates in constructing a hierarchical model of cultures that justifies imperial
conquest
● It also fixes colonized cultures as static rather than recognizing their historicity
● The notion of the colonial subject as 'living in translation' requires examining translation's role
in subjectification
● Questioning the notion of representation.
Key Points
6. 2. Translation as Interpellation
● Influential 18th and 19th century British translators like William Jones and James Mill constructed enduring
Orientalist representations of 'the Hindoo'
● Their translations presented the colonized as deceitful, effeminate, impervious to reason, and unfit for self-
governance
● Translation of laws suggested they precluded political liberty, justifying continued British rule
● English education introduced after 1835 perpetuated colonial discourse, providing access to Orientalist
translations rather than indigenous texts
3. The Question of History
● Postcolonial theory is skeptical of teleological historicism and its denial of coevalness
● It seeks to challenge colonial representations without invoking a false notion of recovering an undamaged
pre-colonial essence
● The concept of hybridity reveals the ambivalence and instability underlying imperial claims to dominate
● Postcolonial approaches try to rewrite history and recover occluded voices without essentialism
● Translation contains radical potential as an affirmative, disruptive practice challenging colonial discourse
● Its role in past and present asymmetries of power must be interrogated for translation to be decolonizing
Key Points
7. ● Domestication vs. Foreignization: Balancing faithfulness vs.
readability
● Loss & Gain in Translation: Untranslatable nuances & creative
adaptations
● Power Dynamics in Language Choice: Imposing vs. embracing
diversity
● Translation as Resistance: Subverting colonial narratives &
reclaiming agency
Key Concepts
8. ● Colonial translations shaped enduring Orientalist views.
● Translation contributed to a hierarchical model justifying imperial rule.
● English education reinforced colonial discourse via Orientalist translations.
● Postcolonial theory challenges teleological historicism.
● Hybridity exposes instability in imperial claims to dominance.
● Postcolonial approaches aim to rewrite history without essentialism.
● Translation is a radical, disruptive practice challenging colonial discourse.
● Examining translation's role in power asymmetries is crucial for decolonization.
● Epistemological assumptions of translation must be questioned.
● Despite complicity, translation holds promise as a tool of resistance.
● The Problematic of translation that authorises and is authorised by certain classical notions of representation
and reality;
● The Problematic opened up by the Post structuralist critique of the earlier one, and that makes translation
always “more”, or supplement in the sense of Derrida.
Key Arguments
9. ● Edward Said: Power shapes knowledge
● Charles Trevelyan: English = Colonized uplift
● Thomas Babington Macaulay: Western > Indian cultures
● Jacques Derrida: Translation isn't transparent
● Walter Benjamin: Translation & history linked
● Gayatri Spivak: Subaltern studies & silenced voices
● Homi Bhabha: Hybridity & mimicry in colonial contexts
● Michel Foucault: Discourse & power relations in translation
● Theorists of Postcolonialism: Questioning Western dominance &
cultural identity
Key References of other Scholars
10. Here are some key arguments made by the writer Tejaswini Niranjana in the
article.
❖ Colonial translations by figures like William Jones and James Mill constructed
enduring Orientalist representations of colonized subjects as deceitful,
effeminate, etc.
❖ Translation participated in creating a teleological, hierarchical model of cultures
that justified imperial rule.
❖ The introduction of English education perpetuated colonial discourse by
providing access to Orientalist translations rather than indigenous
texts.Postcolonial theory is skeptical of teleological historicism and its denial of
historicity to colonized peoples.
❖ The notion of hybridity reveals the ambivalence and instability underlying
imperial claims to dominate.
11. ❖ Postcolonial approaches aim to rewrite history and recover occluded voices without
succumbing to essentialism.
❖ Translation contains radical potential as an affirmative, disruptive practice challenging
colonial discourse.
❖ Its role in past and present asymmetries of power needs interrogation for it to play a
decolonizing role.
❖ The epistemological assumptions of translation must be questioned for it to resist rather
than perpetuate colonial subjectification.
❖ While complicit with imperial power, translation also holds promise as a tool of resistance.
❖ Niranjana argues that colonial translation constructed enduring Orientalist representations
that were complicit with imperial rule. She calls for rethinking translation to recover plural
voices and challenge hegemonic colonial discourse.
Continue…
12. Translation as an Interpretation
The most significant nodes of Jone’s work are :
● The need for translation by the European, since the natives are unreliable interpreters of their
own laws and culture.
● The desire to be a lawgiver, to give the Indians their own laws, and
● The desire to “purify” Indian culture and speak on its behalf.
● Stuart Mill’s ‘History of British India’: The Hindu like the the eunuch, excells in the qualities of a
slave.
● Charles Trevelyan wrote how the influence of the indigenous elite would secure the
performance of a change wrought by Western education.
● Antinio Gramsci’s Concept of hegemony.
Analysis of Arguments
13. The critical role of hybridity in both Subaltern critique of historiography and the
reevaluation of traditional notions of translation. The author contends that
understanding hybridity as "living in translation" should extend beyond a focus
on post-colonial elites, recognizing its pervasive impact across class boundaries
shaped by colonial and neocolonial domination. The complexity and ambiguity
associated with hybridity are acknowledged, emphasizing its historical
intricacies. The author rejects a simplistic narrative of global homogenization,
advocating instead for the reinvention of oppositional cultures in
nonessentializing ways. Ultimately, hybridity is portrayed as a cornerstone in
post-colonial theory, challenging essentialist reading models and pointing
towards a transformative approach to translation practices.
Continue…
14. By delving into Niranjana's insights, learners gain awareness of historical challenges. It's
crucial to note that Niranjana doesn't assert her study as a solution to translator
dilemmas or propose a foolproof method for bridging cultural gaps. Instead, the focus
lies on contemplating the gap itself, probing the absence of awareness regarding
asymmetry and historicity in discussions on translation. This approach encourages a
thoughtful examination of the complexities inherent in translation, emphasizing the
need to address these issues rather than providing simplistic solutions.The conclusion of
"Siting Translation: History, Post-Structuralism, and the Colonial Context" likely
summarizes key findings and insights regarding translation within historical, post-
structuralist, and colonial frameworks. It may highlight the interconnectedness of these
elements and the implications for understanding translation in diverse cultural contexts.
Conclusion
15. Niranjana, Tejaswini. Siting Translation:
History, Post-Structuralism, and the Colonial
Context. University of California Press, 1992.
Resources
