Tradução & Comunicação
TRANSLATION IN INDIA: HISTORY AND POLITICS
Nº. 20, Ano 2010
Tradução na Índia: História e Política
Revista Brasileira de Tradutores
ABSTRACT
Santosh K. Sareen
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi (IN)
[email protected]
Translation as an activity that promotes communication among people speaking
different languages has a long history and a unique complexity in India: its 2000
years of history; India’s greater complexity than Europe’s in the multiplicity of
major languages - 1652 living languages, 22 listed as major, 24 State languages
and 4 classical. This linguistic complexity has demanded interconnectivity and
communicability in a vast, distinct socio-cultural-political entity through a panIndian language of learning creative expression and a multi-directional
translation activity involving several kinds of translation situations with
characteristic problems of translating. To understand the ‘translatology’ of this
complexity, analytical parameters are needed. One can identify
reasons/motivations for translation – renewal, diffusion and borrowing. Then
there is the direction of translating-transaction as an index of the culturalintellectual status of languages involved, that is, the philosophy of translation.
Third, there is the cline of difficulty and nature of difficulty in the transaction.
Fourth, if translation involves displacement, there is also the double and possibly
even three-fold displacement. Finally, translation is an index of the contemporary
culture of a country –that translation-culture of a country at a given time is an
index of its intellect, sociology and politics. We dwell on the Indian translation
scene in this overall perspective.
Keywords: translation;
Languages.
translating-transaction;
translation-culture;
Indian
RESUMO
Anhanguera Educacional S.A.
Correspondência/Contato
Alameda Maria Tereza, 2000
Valinhos, São Paulo
CEP 13.278-181
[email protected]
A tradução como uma atividade que promove a comunicação entre povos de
diferentes línguas tem uma longa história e uma singular complexidade na Índia:
seus 2000 anos de história; uma complexidade superior à europeia quanto à
multiplicidade de línguas majoritárias – 1652 línguas vivas/faladas, 22 na lista
das mais importantes, 24 línguas oficiais e 4 clássicas. Essa complexidade
linguística tem exigido interconexão e comunicabilidade em uma vasta e distinta
entidade sócio-político-cultural através de uma linguagem pan-indiana de
aprendizagem de expressão criativa e uma atividade de tradução multidirecional envolvendo vários tipos de situações que apresentam problemas de
tradução característicos. Para entender a “tradutologia” dessa complexidade são
necessários parâmetros analíticos. Podem-se identificar as razões/motivações
para a tradução – renovação, difusão e empréstimo. Há também a linha da
tradução-transação como um índice do status cultural-intelectual de línguas
envolvidas, ou seja, a filosofia da tradução. Em terceiro lugar, há o continuum de
dificuldades e da natureza das dificuldades na transação. Em quarto lugar, se
tradução envolve deslocamento, há também um deslocamento duplo e,
eventualmente, triplo. Finalmente, tradução é um indicador da cultura
contemporânea de um país – essa tradução-cultura de um país em dado
momento é um índice de seu intelecto, sociologia e política. Nessa perspectiva
geral, nossa reflexão recai sobre o cenário da tradução indiana.
Palavras-Chave:
Tradução; tradução-transação; tradução-cultura; línguas da
Índia.
Coordenação
Instituto de Pesquisas Aplicadas e
Desenvolvimento Educacional - IPADE
Artigo Original
Recebido em: 02/06/2010
Avaliado em: 23/08/2010
Publicação: 30 de setembro de 2010
77
78
Translation in India: History and Politics
1.
INTRODUCTION
India is a truly multilingual country. The 2001 census had recorded 1652 languages, for
example. There are 216 languages with more than ten thousand native speakers; Hindi
has 337 million while Bangla 207 million speakers; official languages as of date are
twenty-two. But this linguistic richness has always been a feature of the Indian society
from the very beginning. Translation, therefore, has a long history in India as a means of
communication between speakers of different languages. From the point of view of
translation enterprise India is unique for a variety of reasons.
In the early centuries of the Christian era, Buddhist texts were translated into
Chinese and later into Tibetan. Apart from this northern connection, as attested by the
Arab sources, there was considerable interaction between the Hindus and the pre-Islam
Arabs, on the west. Not much direct evidence remains but it is acknowledged that Hindu
mathematics, astronomy, and philosophy travelled to the west in this phase. Even after
the advent of Islam, on Alberuni’s testimony, the relationship of give and take continued.
From the eleventh century onwards, with the rise of modern Indian languages, Sanskrit
technical/cultural texts began to be transferred to those languages (Assamese,
Maharashtri, Kannada, Telugu, etc.) as a method of preserving those texts through
diffusion. At the same time, translations began to be made into Persian. Zain-ul-Abedin
(1420-1470), the enlightened ruler of Kashmir, established a translation bureau for
bilateral renderings between Sanskrit and Persian. Dara Shikoh’s Persian translations of
the Upanishads and Mulla Ahmad’s rendition of Mahabharata are among the major
landmarks along this stream. In the seventeenth-eighteenth century, the great Sikh Guru,
Guru Gobind Singh ji, set up a bureau and had a large number of Sanskrit texts translated
into Panjabi.
In the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the encounter with the west
resulted in a complex, bidirectional, cultural-intellectual relationship. In the fields of
science, engineering, and in new disciplines such as politics and economics, English
became the donor language for translations into Indian languages. In the fields of
philosophy, religion, linguistics and literary theory, Sanskrit renewed its role as a donor
language for translations into English and other European languages. In fact in the
nineteenth century, Europe discovered India as much as India discovered Europe and the
mutual influence was perhaps equal. By 1820, all the major universities of Europe had
chairs in Sanskrit and Sanskrit studies had come to enjoy immense prestige. As the
century progressed, Sanskrit studies increasingly shaped the European mind. All the
major European minds of the nineteenth century were either Sanskritists or, on their own
Tradução & Comunicação: Revista Brasileira de Tradutores • Nº. 20, Ano 2010 • p. 77-87
Santosh K. Sareen
79
admission, had been deeply involved in Indian thought - Humboldt, Fichte, Hegel,
Goethe, Schopenhauer, Kant, Nietzsche, Schiller, Schelling, de Saussure, Roman Jakobson.
The list is impressive. In 1839-40, Otto Bohtlingk brought out an edition of Panini’s
Astadhyayi with German comment on rules and an index of technical terms with glosses.
In 1841, N.L. Westergaard brought out an edition of the Dhatupatha (enumeration of
Sanskrit verb roots) with Latin gloss and references. In 1858, Albrecht Weber published a
German translation of the Vajasaneyi Pratisakhya. In 1862, W.D.Whitney brought out his
translation into English of Atharvaveda Pratisakhya. In 1874, Lorenz Franz Kielhorn
published a translation into English of Nagojibhatta’s Paribhasendusekhara. This example
list, restricted to grammatical texts, is illustrative of Europe’s interest in Sanskrit technical
literature. This engagement with Sanskrit Literature continues and authentic translations
and data bases constitute major areas of research in European institutes of Indology.
The act of translation, in the historically multilingual Indian situation, is a very
complex act – purpose, situations, format/nature and effect or function differ widely. First
of all, inter-translatability is a philosophical problem as it involves inter-cultural
understanding, trans-cultural interpretation and trans-cultural evaluation. It also assumes
a state of mind, a certain psychology of translation. There is in each act of translation, an
attitude towards the source language and a certain assessment of the target language - it
is recognition of the intellectual strength of the source and of a vacuum or gap in the
target language/culture. All this means that a translation is preceded by a number of
judgements which may or may not be right.
We can envisage the following translation situations:
classical language
classical
modern language
(in the same tradition/culture)
modern language
(of a different tradition/culture)
from
modern language
modern
(in the same tradition/culture)
modern language
(of adifferent tradition/culture)
The first case is rare, a theoretical possibility. There are instances of some
Buddhists texts retranslated into Sanskrit in modern times. These are cases of translations
within the same overall intellectual tradition – a kind of special case of renewal, one of the
Tradução & Comunicação: Revista Brasileira de Tradutores • Nº. 20, Ano 2010 • p. 77-87
80
Translation in India: History and Politics
three functional parameters of translations, diffusion and borrowing being the other two.
Similarly, when a text is translated into a modern language in the same tradition, it is also
to be considered as a case of renewal – the text becomes accessible once again in a widely
spoken and used language. The code is re-coded and in the process is unfolded and
reinterpreted to make it intelligible to a much larger readership. The code becomes
pertinent – once again it begins to function as an explanatory construct for contemporary
realities. Translations of classical texts of literary theory, philosophy and grammar such as
Natyasastra, Mimamsasutra and Astadhyayi, among others, into modern Indian languages
are some recent examples of renewal. When a text is translated into a modern language of
another tradition / culture, it is a case of diffusion. Diffusion as a horizontal concept is a
special case of renewal - a code not only gets activated, it also spreads beyond its earlier
boundaries. The most recent example is the translation of Panini’s Astadhyayi (a seventh
century B.C. linguistic grammar of Sanskrit) into German, French and English in the last
quarter of the 19th century which made this proto-grammar available to a whole new
world of European and Anglo-Saxon scholarship. In such intercultural transfers, the
parameter of borrowing is also present. This is the most recent renewal of a text which in
the history of Indian thought has been renewed again and again through various
processes of abridgement, recension, reordering, and adaptation besides translation.
Translation of a modern language text into another modern language in the same
tradition / culture is also a case of diffusion while that into a modern language of another
tradition is a case of diffusion and borrowing.
In another sense, translation is not a homogeneous exercise. There is a translation
- grid:
1. change of script alone; for example a Gurumukhi text rendered into
Devanagari;
2. change of language with lexis unchanged or just adapted to the phonology
of the target language; for example a Sanskrit text rendered into a modern
Indian language with tatsama words (lexis unchanged) or tadbhava words
(words adapted). This is true for example, of translations from Sanskrit
into modern Indian languages. Are these ‘translations’ or ‘adaptations’?
3. change of language involving lexical and grammatical replacements, to a
more or less degree. Degree of replacement is greater, greater the distance
between languages; and distance is far greater if the languages belong to
different language families.
In recent times in India both the second and third kinds of translations have
flourished. But, as we said above, transfers from Sanskrit into modern Indian languages
are not really `translations’, because on an average, more than 85% of the vocabulary of
modern Indian languages are Sanskritic in origin – in the north Indian languages, Panjabi,
Tradução & Comunicação: Revista Brasileira de Tradutores • Nº. 20, Ano 2010 • p. 77-87
Santosh K. Sareen
81
Bengali, Gujarati etc., the percentage is as high as 90. Even in Malayalam, belonging to a
different family of languages, Dravidian, 81% of the vocabulary is of Sanskrit origin. Even
in Tamil, which shows the least influence of Sanskrit, the percentage is 71. Significantly,
the vocabulary of learning is common to all the Indian languages and is almost entirely of
Sanskrit origin. The learned vocabulary has, in fact, percolated down and become a part
of ordinary speech. In the process, the learned words have acquired various new
meanings as extensions around their core meanings. These living words are an evidence
of the intellectual continuity of the Indian civilization and of the fact that modern India is
not in disjunction with its classical past. From the translation point of view, this continuity
means that in the process of transfer, there is virtually no need for lexical replacement – all
that the translator has to do is to `paraphrase’ the grammatical endings of Sanskrit.
But while, in recent times, there have been numerous translations within Indian
languages and from classical into modern Indian languages, the overwhelming trend has
been of translations from European languages into modern Indian languages and these
too chiefly from English. This is virtually a unidirectional flow – as the few translations
that have been done into English (or, other European languages) are meant not for the
European audiences but for the Indian readers. Apart from the self-evident problems of
translating between such distant languages, there is in this process a characteristic oneway relationship, an implicit intellectual relationship, a recipient – donor relationship. In
the last hundred years or so, the Indian languages have been placed in a recipient role
with European languages, particularly English, as the donor. As we said above, there is in
this an implicit recognition of the source language as the intellectual reservoir and of the
relatively impoverished state of the target language. This could be just a state of mind
nurtured by quite extraneous reasons in the translators who are, almost all of them,
Indians. There are three presuppositions in this one-way traffic: that all the worthwhile
things are being said by the speakers of other languages, that what is being said is
worthwhile, and that we have nothing worthwhile to say in return. This state of mind is a
part of the general attitude of uncritical subordination to the western ideas. It is sad that
this kind of translation alone gets foregrounded in our discussions and makes its own
contribution to that unfortunate state of mind.
There is on the other hand another kind of translation activity– equally pervasive
and for its intellectual merit and wide usefulness much more significant – that has a long
history and has been going on in a big way in recent times as well but has not been taken
note of very much, by chance or may be by design. We are talking of the translations of
classical Sanskrit texts, technical as well as literary, into modern European languages
mostly by European scholars and also by modern Indian scholars. We say by design
Tradução & Comunicação: Revista Brasileira de Tradutores • Nº. 20, Ano 2010 • p. 77-87
82
Translation in India: History and Politics
because a focus on this alters the perception for we become the donor in that transaction.
On account of its unparalleled storehouse of literature of learning, Sanskrit has always
been a donor language for translations into Asian and European languages.
One may expect from this that India must be a storehouse of translations from
Sanskrit into Indian languages but with the British rule in India there began a subtle use
by them of English as a powerful tool for combating national aspirations. English was
used as a means to pursue the Anglo-Saxon way of thinking by the educated elite.
Macaulay’s Minute which marked the culmination of early missionary activity found no
intrinsic merit in Indian history, literature, culture or science and was convinced that
Indian people could be educated only through the medium of English. This marked a
significant deviation from the preoccupations of the missionaries. He wanted to create a
class of persons “Indian in blood and colour but English in opinions, in morals and in
intellect”. The aim of the group so educated was to act as interpreter between the rulers
and the ruled as well as be responsible for rejuvenating and modernizing Indian
languages and dialects. Thus without any substantial evidence, Indian languages and
people were perceived as degenerate not only by the missionaries but also by the
Anglicists in their debate with the Orientalists. In 1923, Raja Ram Mohan Roy wrote to
Lord Amherst against the Sanskritic system of education and recommended the use of
English in India. Lord Bentick’s approval of Macaulay’s Minute marked the end of the
Orientalist-Anglicist controversy and for practical reasons created a demand for English
education. As Gandhiji remarked: “Our love of the English language in preference to our
own mother tongue has caused a deep chasm between the educated and politicallyminded classes and the masses.” Language thus also created a power hierarchy, in which
those who mastered the dominant language became the elites of the society and thus
constituted the dominant community. This meant that the literacy movement in India
from the British/colonial times had a negative influence on the Indian languages while
the so-called illiterates had a positive influence in that they helped preserve the Indian
languages, which had their own individual identities and rich literary traditions even
prior to the British coming on the scene. The British rule resulted in the creation of certain
hierarchies among the languages since the British administration operated through
Presidencies which comprised of more than one linguistic region. The Madras Presidency,
for instance, comprised areas which included speakers of Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and
Malayalam. With major Universities being established at Madras, Bombay and Calcutta
lead to some polarization and inter-se dominant status conferred on certain languages like
Tamil and Bengali, which anyway have been traditionally rich in their respective
literatures. Fakir Mohan Senapati, the Oriya writer, held that “Bengalis had all the higher
Tradução & Comunicação: Revista Brasileira de Tradutores • Nº. 20, Ano 2010 • p. 77-87
Santosh K. Sareen
83
non-European posts in every single department in Orissa” (Paul St. Pierre). This kind of
polarization emanating from the British structure of administration led to domination of
some languages over others during the colonial period. It was an artificial divide that
could not be sustained in the post-colonial period.
Let us turn our attention now to the translation activities in the British period.
Though Macaulay’s Minute and the Anglicists victory in the debate with the Orientalists
marked an end to whatever translations were encouraged from English into regional
languages, the translation activity around Sanskrit still continued as we noted earlier due
to Sanskrit’s role as donor language. Furthermore, despite the multilingual character of
the Indian communities, the masses which shared a common heritage were largely
illiterate but deeply immersed in their respective oral cultures. They did not have to
traverse further beyond the confines of their respective languages; almost all the
languages had indigenous versions of classical epics such as Ramayana and Mahabharata.
So even if the British support was lacking for translation between Indian languages, a
situation that has not become much better in contemporary times despite much talk and
felt need for such translations, the awareness created by the filter language, English, and
the fall out of the freedom movement which brought Indians from all regions and corners
of the country together, did generate considerable translation activity. The nationalist
writings of Khandekar in Marathi and Bankim Chandra in Bengali became available to
readers in their own native languages. Besides, the campaign to popularize science led to
European textbooks being translated into Sanskrit, Bengali and other local languages.
Translation during this period became part of a larger process of resistance to alien
domination and a determining factor in the expression of cultural identity and the
reassertion of the native self.
The post-colonial scene brought new dimensions to the language and translation
activities. A crucial decision in this regard was to create division of states on the basis of
regional languages which kindled regional linguistic pride and acted as an impediment to
any single language successfully supplanting English as the common national link
language. The claim of Hindi to the status of primus inter pares arose from the fact that
Hindi happened to be the language spoken and understood by an arithmetically larger
number of people than any other single group speaking any other Indian language. Its
variant Hindustani also happened to be the court language before the advent of the
British Raj/ rule. But then the fact remained that the non-Hindi speaking population put
together is a much greater number. In addition, the fact that Hindi speaking population
was confined to a distinct geographic belt complicated matters for the pre-eminence of
Hindi. Had the British promoted Hindi as the link language or as a viable alternative to
Tradução & Comunicação: Revista Brasileira de Tradutores • Nº. 20, Ano 2010 • p. 77-87
84
Translation in India: History and Politics
English as the language of administration, the situation at the time of independence
would have been different. It is also a moot point whether Hindi could have staked its
claim had the British not changed the capital of the country from Kolkata (known as
Calcutta then) to Delhi.
The language situation in post-independence India was a tricky one; on the one
hand, the lingering nationalist sentiments viewed English as anathema in that it had been
the language of the colonizer, while on the other with the kindling of the regional
linguistic pride resulting from the creation of linguistic states, the various non-Hindi
speaking regions equated the adoption of Hindi as an imposition of one ethnic
community over another. The ethnic origin of languages, for example, Dravidian versus
Aryan, added fuel to fire. One of the solutions found to resolving the difficult language
situation of the country was in the 1966 Education Commission Report which suggested
adoption of the three-language formula. The spirit of the formula was that non-Hindi
speaking states would introduce Hindi learning and teaching while the Hindi speaking
states would encourage the teaching/learning of another regional language. The Central
government encouraged the learning of Hindi so that the Centre’s official work could be
carried out in Hindi as well where hitherto it was done in English alone. Special
incentives were provided to those officials who took to the learning of Hindi. While, to
begin with, for example, in some Southern States there was enthusiastic learning/teaching
of Hindi, the absence of learning/teaching of another regional language in Hindi
speaking states, led to a hardening of sentiments in states such as Tamil Nadu where
Hindi speaking and knowing people refused to respond to those who spoke to them in
Hindi while they responded if the other person spoke English. It was a parallel of the
situation in France where a French national would refuse to respond to someone in
English even if he knew the English language. I have encountered both the situations.
(Ex.) The situation only has helped the continuance of English, the Constitution bestowing
on it the status of an Associate Official language when the language issue came up for
review fifteen years later since the continuance of English required to be reviewed after
the initial fifteen year period. It was then at the end of the fifteen-year period decided by
the Indian Parliament that unless all the States agree Hindi or any other language would
not be made the national language, Hindi though was the only language staking claim to
that status.
English as a desired language of learning/teaching, more so in the urban areas,
has gained prominence also as a consequence of the country’s economic growth and
opening up of the economy globally. A pre-Independence agrarian economy changed into
a multifaceted economy of industry, trade and commerce. Unprecedented migration
Tradução & Comunicação: Revista Brasileira de Tradutores • Nº. 20, Ano 2010 • p. 77-87
Santosh K. Sareen
85
resulted, surpassing the barriers of language and distance. There has been a large spread
of Universities, Institutes of Technology and Management and the doors very soon are
likely to be opened to foreign Universities as well. This has taken the language attainment
beyond the three-language formula – the mother tongue, the language of the region of
domicile, and the two link languages of Hindi and English. Another myth that has been
negated is that of the pre-eminence of any one language to economic dominance. I say this
because Hindi happens to be the language of the economically less advanced region
comprising the States of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Bihar and Rajasthan. Also, to
prevent English from becoming an impediment towards attaining entry into prestigious
educational Institutions such as the I.I.T.’s, the compulsory English language qualifying
examination for the entrance examination has been done away with.
Another important factor that is worthy of note is the continual struggle of the
economically/socially/culturally disadvantaged for their betterment. The Dalits and
other backward classes today pose challenges to the entrenched hegemony of the socially
forward classes. The languages of the Dalits are emerging with renewed vigour to bring
out the subaltern into full bloom. The nuances of language, spoken and written, have
always differed from caste to caste and stratum to stratum even within the confines of the
same community and the same language. There is a common cause now emerging among
Dalits and the backward classes across geographic, linguistic and other frontiers. This is
bound to leave new impact on various languages, their dictions and specific nuances.
There is a conscious effort to revisit the classics from a subaltern perspective.
But the paradox remains in regard to the futility of limiting translation activity to
the basic requirements of economics rather than culture. Culture remains a trans-historic
unit of civilization, notwithstanding the successive onslaughts made towards
harmonizing and bringing into existence a universal culture. Translation remains the most
powerful tool for better understanding among cultures. Within post-colonial contexts
translation can be looked upon as policy, as prioritization, as empowerment, as
enrichment and as culture learning within post-colonial contexts.
To turn our attention to the Indian situation again in the years after
Independence or ‘new nationhood’ (Sujit Mukherjee), Indian literature in English
translation has been published under various circumstances. There have been public as
well as private enterprises. The Sahitya Akademi and the National Book Trust, both fully
funded by the government of India and both with their headquarters in Delhi, are
supporters of literary publications under the public enterprise. The Sahitya Akademi has
been commissioning translations and getting them published from its inception. Thus to
Tradução & Comunicação: Revista Brasileira de Tradutores • Nº. 20, Ano 2010 • p. 77-87
86
Translation in India: History and Politics
begin with, major texts of Indian literature were commissioned for translation into other
Indian languages. Later it added translation of classic texts of world literature into Indian
languages. This is a tremendous task and as Sujit Mukherjee calculated, this means that if
22 titles are selected for translation, each would have to be translated into 21 other
languages thus producing with simple arithmetic calculation 462 translated books. Of
course this is not something the Sahitya Akademi has ever done and it is anybody’s guess
if they will ever be able to do it. But that notwithstanding The Akademi has published a
three-volume anthology of Modern Indian literature, covering the period 1800 to 1975.
This project includes a two-volume anthology of Ancient Indian literature which presents
material from the earliest times to 1100 A.D. then there is to be added another volume
devoted to medieval Indian literature, though the word medieval has an overwhelming
European connotation and perhaps a Hindi word like madhyakal may be better.
As far as the National Book Trust (set up in 1957) is concerned, very often the
texts that get chosen for translation are the ones that are not popular with readers; in
other words, texts of wider readership are somehow not the ones selected for translation.
Hence, the change that NBT was to bring about through its pricing, publication and
translation has not happened. The moot point then is that what difference is there
between a private publisher and a government-supported organization such as NBT
which as one of its defined goals and objectives is required to promote bookconsciousness and nation building.
The private enterprise has really grown in size in the last couple of decades, 70
years or so. A remarkable project here was the two-volume anthology of English
translation of Indian writing, Women Writing in India, Vol. I: 600B.C. to the Present (1991),
Vol. II: The 20th Century (1993), compiled and edited by Susie Tharu and K. Lalitha. The
Feminist Press at the City University of New York published the book and OUP India
produced an Indian edition from Delhi. This translation brings to the fore the long history
of women writing in India for 2600 years, perhaps far longer than women in any other
culture. Another notable work is of a private organization called Katha (since 1988). This
project fosters and applauds translation, especially of short stories, both from Indian
languages into English and from one Indian language into another. It gives annual
awards to authors as well as their translators based on a formal competition and each year
the prize winning stories in English translation are collected and published in a volume.
Several such collections under the title Katha Prize Stories have been published. Among the
big publishers Macmillan has under its project Modern Indian Novels in Translation
published 40 to 50 English translations of ‘Modern Indian Novels in Translation’ this is an
example of private vision and commercial effort.
Tradução & Comunicação: Revista Brasileira de Tradutores • Nº. 20, Ano 2010 • p. 77-87
Santosh K. Sareen
87
To conclude then, Indian translators into English have never had it so good. They
used to be a neglected, even pitied lot, and often went unnamed in the translation, often
not paid as well. We have had many problems but many solutions as well. The one
important and constant factor inherited through the centuries is the fact that we have
always translated. Language is one of our greatest wealths and translation enables us to
continue to speak or write or read to each other. To voice again what may have been said
in many other contexts, in such diversity is our security, durability and unity.
REFERENCES
Bharata Natyasastra. Translated by a board of scholars. Delhi, Sri Satguru Publications. Otto
Bohtlingk (tr.) 1839-40. Panini’s Eight Book Grammar [a traslation into German] S.M.Katre 1988
Panini’s Astadhyayi .Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.
Franz Kielhorn (ed.,tr.) 1960. The Paribhasendusekhara of Nagojibhatta (Second edition by K.V.
Abhyankara of the original of 1868). Poona, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute.
H.D.Ingalls (tr.) 1990. Dhvanyaloka-Locana. Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.
K.Krisnamoorthy (tr.) 1974. Dhvanyaloka (of Anandavardhana). Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.
______. (ed.,tr.) 1977. Vakroktijivita of Kuntaka. Dharwar, Karnataka University.
P.U.Naganatha Sastri (ed.,tr.) 1927. Bhamaha’s Kavyalamkara. Tanjore, Wallace Printing House.
Shamasastri (tr.) 1954. Bhamaha’s Kavyalamkara. Delhi, Motilal Banarsidass.
S.C.Vasu (ed.,tr.) 1891. The Astadhyayi of Panini. Vols.1 and 2. Allahabad, Rpt.Delhi, Motilal
Banarsidass. 1962, 1977, 1980.
A. Weber (ed.,tr.) 1858. The Vajasaneyi Pratisakhya.[A German translation].Leipzig. Indische
Studien.
N.L.Westergaard (ed.,tr.) 1841. Sanskrit Dhatupatha.[A German translation].Bonn. Konig.
W.D.Whitney (ed.,tr.)1862. The Atharva-veda Pratisakhya:Text, Translation and Notes.
NewHaven. Journal of the American Oriental Society, 7:333-615. [Reprint: (=CSSt. 20) (Varanasi:
Chowkhamba, 1962).]
Santosh K. Sareen
President of IASA (Indian Association for the
Study of Australia). Professor and Chairperson at
the Centre for English Studies, School of
Language, Literature and Culture Studies,
Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India.
Tradução & Comunicação: Revista Brasileira de Tradutores • Nº. 20, Ano 2010 • p. 77-87