questions on chapter 5

In The Hermeneutic Motion, George Steiner lists four steps in the translation process: trust, aggression, incorporative and restitution. I’m really interested in how he gives his argument about aggression. From Heidegger’s point, Steiner claims that understanding is an act inherently aggressive and violent; it is an attack to appropriate another entity (page 157). Since translation is by its nature the “demonstrative statement of understanding” (page 156), it is inevitable to be violent and aggressive. It will tear apart the target culture with the exotic forces for sure, but will it attack the original as well? What might be the impact of translation to the original text/ source/ culture?

Steiner also mentions “Kabbalistic speculation” which interests me a lot. It is fascinating to think that can languages be independent entities without the necessity to signify anything? If it is so, how can we translate it? What should we draw from the text?

When it comes to the ideal of translation, which Steiner stresses as balance, are there any standards of balance? Can it really balance the original text and the target text when translation by nature is a violent act? Are there any specifications for translations of different genres? For example, is the criterion of balance for a novel featuring stream of consciousness the same as it for a romantic short story?


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

One response to “questions on chapter 5”

  1. Katie Faull Avatar
    Katie Faull

    Excellent questions!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *