Evolution of Translation in the West

What is the place of translations in a given literature or culture? The literature and culture of any region is not a monolith; rather, it is more like a patchwork quilt that is a composite of influences from various places.So translations from foreign languages play a very important part in the formation and shaping of any literature or culture because it is through translations that a given society gets to know of the world outside, of its feelings and thoughts. Thus translations become a window to the world, helping them to assimilate those sights and sounds while developing a culture of their own. We start with a history of translation in the west, by which we mean primarily the English speaking, Anglo-American world. The Greco-Roman world was the major influence on the literatures of these countries and so it is befitting to start with them.

We can not speak of translations in ancient Greece as Greek was the only classical language that they knew of. But on the basis of pure conjecture, they must have translated ancient Indian and Arabic works into their language. Studies have shown the influence of Vedic thought on Greek philosophy. It is also said that Vedic mathematics came to Greece via Arabia. But it is difficult to pinpoint exact texts and translations here. For that we need to go to ancient Rome. As far as Rome was concerned, Greece was the ideal when it came to literature and culture. They looked up to Greek works as role models and unsurprisingly a lot of Greek works were translated into Latin. In fact, Quintilian a 1^st century Roman rhetorician, in his work Institutio Oratoria emphasized the importance of translation in a young man’s education. To develop the skill of rhetoric, he advised young men to analyse and paraphrase the texts that they read. In this context, he strongly recommended translation of Greek texts into Latin to develop their linguistic and oratorical skills.

But two of the first people to comment on translation were Cicero and Horace. Cicero was a Roman philosopher and statesman who translated Greek philosophical works into Latin. He can also be considered one of the first theoreticians of the practice as he has commented on the way works should be translated. He was of the view that translations should capture the essence of the original; so rather than ‘word for word’ translation it was better to go in for ‘sense for sense’ rendering.

The other major figure is that of Horace, the great Roman poet. He is primarily known for his poem “Ars Poetica” or “The Art of Poetry” in which he talks about the rules of poetic composition. Horace was also a translator. But translation was a means of enriching his own language and literature, as far as he was concerned. He too, like Cicero, did not believe in exact rendering of words into the other language. He was all for borrowing words from the original, thereby coining new words in his own language. Translation was a rich source which fed and replenished a language that was finding its feet. 

It is quite clear from this that the Romans did not believe in exact translations. They did not have a master-slave relationship with their original where it was expected to stick rigidly to each and every word of the master or original text. One of the reasons why the Romans could take such liberties was that most of the educated Romans were bilingual. So, translations were not just introductions to a foreign text, but also a means to highlight aspects of language and creativity.