Machine translation of the 'The Liar'

Name:  Nargis I. Saiyad

Paper: Translation Studies

Topic: Machine Translation

Class: M.A.II, Sem.: I

Year: 2012/13

Submitted To,

Dr. Dilip Barad,

Dept. of English,

Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University.

Bhavnagar.

Machine translation of the 'The Liar'

v Introduction :-

        Machine translation in the abbreviation is written as MT.  It uses the software to translate.  Sometimes it creates major issues like disambiguation. 

        That's why the evaluation of machine is not so authentic than human-evaluation.

v Short Stories :-

        The book 'Contemporary Indian Short Stories in English' Compiled by Shiv K.kumar is translate in Gujarati also but when we translate it with the help of machine, it gives totally different meaning.  Sometimes, it doesn't create any meaning at all.

        I have taken one short story 'The Liar' by Mulk Raj Anand for machine translation.  It is like this,

v 'The Liar':-

        When I first typed the title 'The Liar' the Gujarati word came out was ' the liar '.  The Real meaning in Gujarati for it is ' juththo' 'khota bolo'.

       

        The first line of English was,

        'Labhu, the old Shikari of my village, was a born lair.

And the Gujarati translation of it was,

'Labhu, mara gam na juna shikari, janm liar'

        

        This makes no sense.  A person who doesn't know Gujarati, if he will speak this line, it may create humour.

       

        So, me, times, the words like 'Therefore', 'And', 'tree', 'he' remained same in Gujarati and even in the same spellings.

        ' He was tolerated even to the extent of being given a seat at the foot of the banyan tree.'

        The Gujarati was totally different from the actual meaning.  The Gujarati of it was,

           'He, sahan karvama avyu hatu pan karvama vaniyo tree'

        We can see here the Gujarati was 'He', 'vaniyo tree' !! The real meaning is destroyed here.  If we do the translation without the help of Google translation or other site, the Gujarati we can say,

        ' Tene etlu sahan karavvama avyu ke tene vad na zad niche bethvu padtu.'

       

        The Gujarati translation by machine is very strange.  Machine shows totally different meaning.

        The word 'English' was in Gujarati as 'inglish' when the word was 'English Subedar', it was in Gujarati as 'Guajarati subedar'.

        And when I typed the line,

       

        "Labhu," I would say, " I am sure it is impossible to track any prey when you are half up the side of a hillock.

        The machine used two words in the end 'chhe' and also 'chhu'.  It Creates humour.

        In one dialogue, 'fool' is, 'ful', Labhu, is 'Labhu', 'Liar, 'everybody' is 'Everybody'  and there is no Gujarati word for 'silly'.   And this dialogue is like this,

        "oh, you are a fool, Labhu," I said. "And you are a liar.  Everybody says so.  And I don't believe you at all.  My mother says I am silly to believe your tales''.

        The Gujarati of it is,

        ''me kahyu oh,  tame ek ful, Labhu chhe.'' ''ane tame liar chhe. everybody tethi kahe chhe, ane hu tamne badhi manta nathi. mari mata kahe chhe hu tamari vartao mane koi chhu.''

       

        We can see here machine translation makes much difference in the meaning of real words.

        In some translations, ''All right'' is translation is ''All right'', ''chagrined'' is translation is also the same.

        In the English word 'either' and the Gujarati of it is 'kya' so, in line, it doesn't create any meaning and that line is,

        '' All right'', I said, chagrined and stubborn.  '' I don't want to speak to you either''.

        The machine doesn't give correct translation of long sentence.  At that time, we find word to word translation only.  It doesn't create any meaning.   Even word to word translation doesn't give any type of meaning. The best example from 'The Liar' is this,

              ''I waited eagerly for Labhu's return to confirm from his very much these stories of his incompetence, because, though incredulous of this scandal, I had been driven to a frenzy of chagrin by his insulting dismissal of me''.

                              Even the Gujarati speaker will not understand that what these words want to suggest.

v Conclusion :-

       

                         By this example, we can say that after all machines are machines.  It can not understand the hidden meaning, sometime it creates amusement.   So, machine translation is not authentic.  It has advantages as well as disadvantages, too.

Six Parts of tragedy from Aristotle's 'Poetics'

                                Name:  Nargis I. Saiyad

Paper: Literary theory and criticism

Topic: Six parts of tragedy from Aristotle’s ‘Poetics’

Class: M.A.II, Sem.: I

Year: 2012/13

Submitted To,

Dr.Dilip Barad,

Dept. of English,

Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University.

Bhavnagar.

 Six Parts of tragedy from Aristotle's 'Poetics'

Aristotle :-

         

          Aristotle was the disciple of Plato.  He was a genius. Aristotle contributed to all the branches of study through his deep neutral thinking.  He expresses his views on poets and poetry and about tragedy in his famous book 'The Poetics'. 

Ø Definition of tragedy :-

         

          "  Tragedy, then is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude', in the language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action, not of narrative', through pity and fear effecting the proper purgation- catharsis of these and similar emotions.''

          We can see here that we can elaborate each word written here.  In 'Poetics', he has also given six parts of tragedy.

Ø Six parts of tragedy :-

         

          According to Aristotle, every tragedy is made up of six parts and they are,

·        the plot (Fable)

·        Character(ethos)

·        Thought (dianoia)

·        Diction (lexis)

·        Songs or melody (melos) and

·        Spectacle (opsis).

Let's see those deeply, one by one:-

Ø The plot :-

 

          According to Aristotle, the plot is very important component of tragedy.  He says that to write the plot is very difficult task.

          For the definition of   plot,  David Daicher has said,

"  the way in which the action work itself, out, the whole casual chain which learn to the final outcome''

         

          According to Aristotle, plot is the "first principle", means the most important feature of tragedy.  We can say plot is the soul of tragedy.

          Aristotle defines it as,

"The harmonious arrangement of the incidents''

         The cause and effect chain of actions are superior to those who are depended on the character of the protagonist. 

          Aristotle also talks about the qualities which the plot should have.  He says that the plot must have beginning, middle and end.  The beginning should start not by depending on any outside thing and the end should be the result of the beginning and the middle.  

          Secondly, he says that the plot must have Unity of action.  It means that any outside intervention should be avoided.  He, says that the worst kind of plot is episodic in which one episode becomes successful without the link or connection with other.

          Certain magnitude is also very important.  It is needed in both the context, in length of the plot as well as the seriousness of the plot. 

          The plot can be Simple or Complex.  The complexity is better.  He says that simple plots have only a change of fortune but the complex plots have both "reversal of intention “and "recognition".    Suspense is important in good tragedy.

          Further, Aristotle emphasizes on action by saying that,

'Without action there cannot be a tragedy', there may be without character'

          Then he talks about group of soliloquies that though it looks entertaining, it may not create tragedy.

          According to him, man doomed before his birth  is not destiny.  So, according to him,  without good plot means without action. 

          Some modern critics thin that characters are more important than the action.

Difficult task

Modern critics-    to create character

Ancient critics-     to create plot

         

          He also gives the ideas of probability and necessity, which govern a good plot.

          To define law of probability given by him, Atkins says,

                         " and moreover, what is thus depicted is not what actually happened (i.e. history), but what would logically and inevitably happen, in other words, things which are permanently and universally (i.e. Poetry)".

Ø Character :-

 

          The second important element of the tragedy is the character.

          Goodness is very important according to him, He says,

"Even a woman may be good, and also a slave, though the woman may be said to be an inferior being, and the slave quite worthless."

          The very important quality of the character is that he should be true to life yet it should be more beautiful.

Ø Tragic hero :-

          In comedy, many characters are important but in tragedy, the hero is important.

          Aristotle has given four types of hero and the characteristics:

a)      A good man-coming to bad end,

b)      A bad man-coming to good end,

c)       A bad man-coming to bad end,

d)      A rather good man-coming to bad end.

          He gives the idea about error of judgment.  Just one weakness in the hero's character makes his downfall.  That character's misfortune affects the entire people staying round about them.  The best example of it is

  'Julius Ceasur'- In this the line presents this and that is,

  'heaven themselves blazon forth the death of a king'

          Aristotle uses one term 'hamartia'.  A.C.Bradely translates it as 'tragic flaw'.

          So, some, writers think the 'hamartia' and 'tragic hero' just like this,

Tragic hero                                                                   'hamartia'

1.       Oedipus                                            hasty in temper,

2.       Samson                                             sensually uxorious,

3.       Macbeth                                           ambitious,

4.       Othello                                              proud and jealous,

5.       Hamlet                                              too much thinking.

          But these things do not constitute 'hamartia' in Aristotle's sense.

Ø Thought :-

          It is found where something is proved to be or not to be.  Thought proves some particular point.

          In the ancient Greeks literature was good when it teaches more truth.  There were different among them as to what was truth but there was unanimity in that the function of literature was to teach but with pleasure. 

Ø Diction :-

          According to him, the diction is,

'' The expression of the meaning in words''.

          It is always proper to the plot, end of the tragedy, In simple

          He is interested in metaphors, He writes,

“But the greatest thing by far is to have a command of metaphor'.  it is the mark of genius, for to make good.  metaphors implies an eye for resemblances".

Ø Song or melody :-

          Aristotle says that the chorus should have importance like the actor.  They should integrate into the play like an actor.  It should have contribution to the plot of the play.  Its purpose is also to evoke or intensity the emotion of the audience.  It was a necessary part in Greek drama.

Ø Spectacle :-

          ''the production of spectacular effects depends more on the art of the stage machinist than on that of the port.''

          It is related with the stage performance.  But he also says that those who rely on spectacle create a sense which is not of the terrible, but only of the monstrous effect.  Thus, he take how on the spectacle to which extent.

Ø Conclusion :-

          Thus, in 'The Poetics' Aristotle has given the ideas about tragedy, its essential elements.  Aristotle and Plato talks about the story which is already written but to rewrite it in a different way is difficult task.  It needs creativity; Aristotle's view shows his logic, analysis and common sense.  That's why he still he is honored by us.