Theory of Translation 1 Introduction

2.5 Translation: Its Nature 
The word ‘Translation’ is derived from the Latin term ‘translatus.’ The prefix ‘trans’ 
means ‘passing something’, while the stem ‘slate’ means ‘cover’. The term 
‘translation’ has several implications such as alteration, change, conversion, 
interpretation, paraphrase, rephrasing, rendition and transformation. The specific 
meanings of the word are paraphrasing, interpreting, particularizing, generalizing, 
decoding, etc. 

---

34 
In the past, translation was thought to be a secondary activity. The well-known Italian 
epigram ‘traddutore-traditore’, which means that the translator is a traitor—a falsifier 
of the original, shows the status assigned to translation in olden days. A popular 
quotation goes thus: “Translation is like a woman, if it is beautiful, it cannot be 
faithful and if faithful, it cannot be beautiful” (qtd. in Krishnaswami et al, 82). Robert 
Frost, the well known American poet, once said, “Poetry may be defined as that 
which is left out of translations” (qtd. in Nair, 46). Benjamin Joorett comments, “All 
translation is a compromise, the effort to be literal and to be idiomatic” (qtd. in Lodha, 
2). Several such views expressed by critics, philosophers and thinkers explain the 
degraded status assigned to translation in the academic circles. These scholars mean 
to suggest that a great deal of loss of essence of the source language is inevitable in 
the act of translation.
If this view is held logical, it will be bold to claim that the particular literary piece is 
perfect rendition of the expression of the literary artist. In fact, no literary genius 
happens to be totally satisfied about his expression in literature. Every expression in 
literature, as Vatsyayan says, “is a translation as it presents an abstract (or invisible 
etc.) in language (or concrete form)” (qtd. in Sureshkumar, 28). Octovio Paz reiterates 
the same concept in different words: 
Each text is unique, yet at the same time it is the translation of another text. No 
text can be completely original because language itself, in its very essence, is 
already a translation–first from the nonverbal world, and then, because each 
sign and each phrase is a translation of another sign, another phrase (qtd. in 
Bassnett, Introduction, Post-colonial Translation, 3).
The concept of translation has been debated for centuries. When one speaks of 
translation, one inevitably speaks of its impossibility and the problems in the act. The 
inherent difficulties in the act of translation have created misunderstandings about the 
process. A few scholars have commented on its importance. Goethe, the German 
scholar, rightly states: “Say what one will of the inadequacy of translation; it remains 
one of the most important and worthiest concerns in the totality of world affairs” (qtd. 
in Sureshkumar, 6). However complex, impossible and uncalled for, translations are 
being carried out widely. Dilip Chitre aptly remarks that translations “constitute 

---

35 
bridges between cultures even if the traffic on these bridges is alleged to be 
illegitimate or illusory” (Says Tuka, 302). 
Hilaire Belloc explains the attitude of holding translation in low esteem has “almost 
destroyed the art altogether. The corresponding misunderstanding of its character has 
added to its degradation; neither its importance nor its difficulty has been grasped 
(qtd. in Das Bijaykumar, 9). However, in the recent times, the concept of translation 
has undergone huge changes. Translation has become an important activity—a 
creative-cum-cognitive enterprise. Translation, as Octovio Paz rightly claims, is “the 
principal means of understanding the world we live in” (qtd. in Bassnett, Introduction, 
Post-colonial Translation, 3).