El cambio para alcanzar la paz

Just as there were concerns in the transcription, and transliteration processes that influenced the steps undertaken, there were also concerns in the translation process. These concerns regarding translation influenced the final presentation of the life narratives in their visible re-presentation in another language. There were two major concerns in the translation process: the attempt to be as honest as possible; and an attempt to translate not just lexical items, but the context and meanings associated with the lexis, as understood by members of the community. I was also extremely aware that any flaws in my translation would be picked up by members of the community, who might not be linguists, but who would be able to read and understand both languages. These readers could, therefore, pass judgment on the “accuracy” of my translations (cf. Cronin, 2003: 167 on translation ecology). Hence, the translation process was not seen as deserving any less attention than the transcription; nor does the English translation have a subordinate role to the Fiji Hindi transcription (cf. Jaffe, 2007: 835; Venuti, 1998: 32).

Consulting members of the community proved an important stage in the translation process. This decision arose when I found that there were instances where I was at a loss as to how to translate certain lexical items. These were lexical items that were either transferred from the regional Indian dialect of the Girmitya, or were lexical items that I, a fourth generation Fiji Indian, was not familiar. Such lexical forms are

expressions that have become, or are becoming archaic, although, still at times heard in the villages, spoken by the older members of the community. As an example, Jasoda Ramdin uses the term dhari in her life narrative, a term which was quite specific to the Girmit era, and a term that I did not understand:

J:

↑dhā:ri ↑pakrāis> (.)

clump.of.sugarcane hold.PFV

J:

and made (us) hold the clump of sugarcane

↑samjho ↑dhā:ri [(.)]

understand.IMP dhari

do (you) understand dhari

A: [ji]

AFM

A: yes

When Jasoda suspends her narration to query the primary interlocutor, a young man, “do (you) understand ‘dhari ”, she is acknowledging the chasm that lies between those who are Girmit-initiated and the others, who want to understand about her experience, but will never have to live it. As the interviewer is the vocal representative of the wider community, which will be hearing her life narrative, Jasoda takes the interviewer’s indication of knowledge of the term as a representation of the knowledge of the wider community, and consequently, does not elaborate on what dhari means.

For such translations, older members of the community proved invaluable. They listened to the recordings, and explained meanings to me, as well as gave me more information about those who had used such words at one time in the community. Hence, I not only acquired the meaning of the words but also learnt more about the history of the community.

Another issue in the translation was to do with the language structure, which is important for the interlinear glossing. Because there is limited work available on Fiji Hindi structure (Moag, 1977; Pillai, 1975a; Siegel, 1987; 1988: 121-49), the language structure required close attention, to decipher the meaning of the morphemes. The ‘ke’ use appeared the most complicated until I finally realized that there was more than one form.

In relation to the issue of attempting to capture the accuracy of the translation was the issue of polysemes, where a single lexical item has different meanings in different contexts (cf. Jakobson, 2004: 139). Polysemony occurs in all languages, making it difficult to provide the same translation for each word on its every occurrence, without being true to the meaning of the words in context (cf. Bucholtz's 2007: 801-2 on

Moerman's use of style shifting through the use of synonyms in translation of the same lexical item; Koller, 1979 on connotative equivalence). These differences in meaning may be a matter of degree within the same category. For instance, the Girmityas generally refer to those in authority as sardār or ‘sirdar’ for the Indian foreman and gorā or coolumbar for ‘Englishman’. gorā is used in reference to all Englishmen, regardless of their role in the indenture system. In this study’s translation and analysis, I have referred to the Englishmen according to their role in the life narrative. For instance, Ram Rattan Mishar’s conflict is with a gorā and he goes to see a gorā to resolve the conflict. To translate, I have relied on the information provided in the life narrative about the roles of these two different Englishmen. So the person that Ram Rattan Mishar is having a conflict with is labelled as the Manager, as he appears to be an employee of the CSR Company. The other gorā that Ram Rattan Mishar goes to see regarding this conflict is labelled as the Inspector of Immigrants, whose role during indenture was to resolve conflicts between the Girmityas and the plantation authorities.

As anyone who has been involved with the process of translation knows, these are difficulties that one constantly faces: how to capture the nuances of meanings, not just the literal meaning of the words on the page (Lewis, 2004). For these reasons I chose to use a three-way translation: “transcription in the source language, literal translation word-per-word in the target language, accessible paraphrase in the target language” (Slembrouck, 2007: 825). By providing a syntactic gloss following the Leipzig glossing rules (Comrie, Haspelmath & Bickel, 2008) under the Fiji Hindi transcript (cf. Jaffe, 2007: 835 on the benefits of interlinear glossing), I have attempted to mediate between the two languages and the alteration in meaning of lexical items (cf. Benjamin, 2004: 81-2). To do so, I have kept the Fiji Hindi lexical forms intact.

It is also impossible to not be aware of the politics involved in translation. The implications here are perhaps much more noticeable than those in transcription, and even orthography, in the eyes of both linguists and non-linguists. A major issue when considering politics in translation involves the manner in which the original language and the translated language are ordered. The placing of the two languages is intricately linked to the perception of the status of the translated version to the original transcript. The set up of the languages could, therefore, be:

Fiji Hindi

INTERLINEAR GLOSS

English

as illustrated with this excerpt from Guldhari Maharaj’s narration:

mātā pitā k sāt ai↑yā

MOTHER FATHER INV TOGETHER COME.PFV (I) came with my parents

our chhotā rah↑ā

AND SMALL AUX.PST And (I) was small

reis milat rah(.)

RATION RECEIVE.IP AUX.PST (We) used to receive ration

ahu mai jae khe-huwe fil me kām ↑kare

AND MOTHER GO.IP THERE FIELD LOC WORK DO.IP And (my) mother used to go to the field to work

This set up would imply that it is Fiji Hindi that is given prominence as being the original language, and English is given the subordinate role due to its being the translated language.

On the other hand, as shown below, the placing of the languages side by side with an interlinear gloss under the Fiji Hindi transcript, gives both languages equal status. Such a set up also provides the reader with the choice of language in which she wishes to read the life narratives. To facilitate this choice, I believe, this second set up is easier on the eye of the reader. For these reasons, this is my preferred form for presenting the life narratives:

Fiji Hindi

Interlinear Gloss

Using the same example above from Guldhari Maharaj’s life narrative, the textual representation of her narration is:

G:

mātā pitā=k sāt ai↑yā

mother father.INV together come.PFV

G:

(I) came with my parents

our chhotā rah↑ā

and small AUX.PST

And (I) was small

reis milat rah(.)

ration receive.IP AUX.PST

(We) used to receive ration

ahu mai jae

and mother go.IP

khe-huwe fil me kām ↑kare

there field LOC work do.IP

And (my) mother used to go to the field to work

In an attempt to translate the implied meaning in the cotext, and to facilitate

understanding in the translated version, I have had to, at times, build bridges between the Fiji Hindi and English versions. I have done so by inserting words that are not present in the original version, but are implied and understood by members of the community. Because Fiji Hindi is a pro-drop language, and English is not, I had to insert the absent, but implied, pronouns, and nouns in the translation. These insertions were placed in brackets. Below, is reproduced an example from Gabriel Aiyappa’s life narrative, as he describes how the Girmityas were chosen by the managers for their new life on the plantation:

tab ai ↑ke: (.)

then come COMP

then (the ship) arrived

nakaltipolā utārā

Nukulau drop.off.PFV

and dropped (us) off at Nukulau

wā ai ke

there come COMP

(we) arrived there

utār↑ā

drop.off.PFV

(and we were) dropped off

ek haptā yā ↑rā (.h)

one week here COP.PFV

and (we) stayed there for one week

tab i ↓kah ↓kah menajar ↓log (.)

then 3.PROX where where manager PL

then managers from all over

↑bā latok↑ā: lambā↑sā ke admī=

Ba Lautoka Labasa ACCLOC man

By placing the insertions in brackets, there is an acknowledgement that the words in brackets were not present in the original, but were inserted by me into the translation.

As pointed out by Bamberg (2004c: 366-367), and Diaz Cintas & Remael (2007: 63-4), even the most detailed transcription cannot capture the interactive nature of

conversation. This is a task even more difficult to achieve in a translation. One of the greatest difficulties I faced was attempting to capture the manner of narration in the translation as in the original language. As seen in the excerpt above, the Fiji Hindi version has segmental features of hesitations, repairs, pauses, backchanelling, and other suprasegmental features. However, these are difficult to insert at the exact points of occurrence in the English version, due largely to word-order differences between the two languages (cf. Jaffe, 2007: 835; Slembrouck, 2007: 825 on similar points). Hence, the translated version appears to be devoid of many of the prosodic features, overlaps, repairs and hesitations, and is not a true representation of the life narrative in context, and the manner of narration. This is a problem that cannot be wholly remedied. However, by placing the English version next to the Fiji Hindi version of the life narratives, with transcriptional notations maintained in this original transcript, and by using an italicized font for the translation, this visual presentation will serve as a constant reminder to the English reader that this is a translation of a language with its own system, and in its own context, and that these are aspects of language that cannot be wholly captured in another.

=sab menajar log ai↑yā (.h)

all manager PL come.PFV

all the managers came

sab koi ke bīn↑ā

all some ACC pick.PFV

and picked through all (the Girmityas)

i māŋo

3.PROX want.IMP

(I) want this

u māŋo

3.REM want.IMP

(I) want that

u māŋo

3.REM want.IMP

(I) want that

eisa bin↓ā

this.way pick.PFV

4.6 Summary and Discussion

Chapter 4 retraced my steps in transcribing, transliterating, and translating the life narratives. This chapter reflected on each step and explained why the life narratives have been presented in this form, using my knowledge of the original language, the knowledge of other members of the community, and my own training as a linguist. A great deal of thought was placed in the transcribing, transliterating, and translating processes. This is because one of the aims of the study is to give the life narratives back to the Fiji Indian community, which is bilingual in Fiji Hindi and English. At the same time, the aim is to make the life narratives available to the larger public. For this

reason, each life narrative is arranged in clause pattern in two columns, with the column on the left containing the Fiji Hindi transcription, and a gloss beneath, while the right column consists of the English translation. The created source text also contains prosodic features, as their presence is important in the reader’s understanding of the narrator’s point of view. The translated text, in the right column, contains lexical forms in brackets, which are implied, but absent from the source text. In this manner, I have attempted to provide easy access to the life narratives in two languages, allowing the reader to choose the language in which she prefers, or is able, to read the narratives.

However, because the word order of the two languages is different, the prosodic

features are difficult to encode in the translation. If, as I believe, these prosodic features underline the narrator’s point of view, then the lack of these features in the translated version may affect the non-Fiji Hindi reader’s understanding of the narratives. Similarly, while I have attempted to provide translations true to the original, it is still unavoidable that nuances are affected by the change of language. While these are issues that affect all translations, and are unavoidable, it is important to acknowledge them.

5