Cultural Barriers to Translation

J.C. Catford talks about two kinds of untranslatability.

1. First the linguistic untranslatability when you have no linguistic equivalent in Target Language for a word in Source Language (e.g. कल दो होते है एक बीता हुआ कल और दूसरा आनेवाला कल) and

2. Cultural untranslatability when a cultural concept or element in Source Language culture is absent in Target Language culture. (e.g. मंगलसूत्र, बलूतं, वटसावित्री पौर्णिमा etc)

There are some things which are universal and common to all cultures. But certain things are culture-specific. These are related to the unique beliefs or world view of a particular society. Such culturally specific expressions are difficult to translate. For example the institution of joint family is deeply rooted in Indian culture and we have strong family ties and relationships of different kind. So we have specific words for each kind of relationship ( मामा/ मामी/काका/ काकु मावशी/आत्या चुलत/मावस/आते/मामे/भाऊ बहिण इ.) English lacks precise kinship terms and so the English word 'aunt, uncle and cousin' are poor substitutes for Indian kinship terms because they are incapable of indicating the exact relationship. Similarly 'बलुतेदारी' and caste system were a social reality in the past in India. So the words related to it can not be satisfactorily translated in English. This is also trueabout the many religious rituals in Hindu culture. Words related to them can not be translated in English. This is why A K Ramanujan retained the title Sanskara in his translation of U R Anantmuthy's Kannada novel. He did not translate it as 'funeral rites' because the two rituals are not the same. 'Funeral rites" refer to a Christian burial while 'antysanskaras' refer to the burning of a dead body on a funeral pyre as per Hindu religious customs.

Khushwant Singh's translation of a Hindi or Punjabi dialogue in his novel Train to Pakistan also reveals this culture-specificity.

For example a railway porter asks a woman.

'Are you travelling alone sister?' 'No, I am travelling with my master, brother.

Address terms used here are very significant. Addressing an unknown woman as sister and addressing the man as brother and referring to the husband as master all this is unique to Indian culture where you establish a relationship with even an unknown person.

Eugene Nida rightly points out that a translator "ought to be constantly aware of the contrast in the entire range of culture represented by the two languages'. He feels that words are symbols representing different facets of culture. So words can not be understood in proper perspective without reference to culture. In fact language itself is a product of culture. For example Eskimos living in polar region have 12 words for different kinds of snow. English has only two snow and ice. Marathi has only one word barf.

Sometimes some concepts may seem universal or common but they are interpreted differently in different cultures according to the people's beliefs and ways of thinking. For example the two words for marriage 'vivah' and 'nikah' may seem equivalent. But they are not, Vivah' is a sacrament for many lives. While 'nikah' is a contract as long as the bride and groom abide by the terms of it.

Many words related to religious beliefs, social customs, and even food items can not be translated. Thus 'bhakari' is certainly not bread. Thus translating a text is not just translating language; but also the culture behind it. Sapir and Whorf declare that "No language can exist unless it is steeped in the context of culture and no culture can exist without .....a natural language."

According to Susan Bassnet language is heart and culture is like the body around it. The surgeon operating the heart can not neglect the body that surrounds it. Similarly the translator can not ignore the culture that surrounds the language of the text to be translated.