An issue affecting two or more countries Article

An issue affecting two or more countries - Article Example While CIA provided information from the satellites about abandoned soviet trucks and weapon depots for the Taliban, ISI transferred the information to the men on ground (Coll p. 291) making it possible for the Taliban to conquer Afghanistan with astonishing speed uniting the country for the benefit of Pakistan, United States and Saudi Arabia (Reeve p. 191). After the September 11 attacks, US invaded the Taliban controlled Afghanistan asking all countries to cut off Taliban support. Pakistan ordered the Taliban embassy to be closed in 2001, allied with the US and supported the invasion by providing its forward military bases. The hard war in Afghanistan followed up by a bloody insurgency caused US to lose unprecedented amount of war founds trying to control Afghan territory. Adding to the troubles were lack of understanding of terrain and psyche of the local people. The overwhelming force and technology, while allowed the US to have complete air superiority and highly reinforced milit ary bases in the region, could still not help them achieve actual victory and control over the territory outside their bases. The insurgency caused alot of contention between USA and Pakistan as allies and the US still ended up blaming Pakistan for supporting Afghan Taliban after calling it their top non-NATO ally. This paper compares and contrasts BBC reports and The Washington Post with respect to the US allegations and Pakistani denials. BBC reports Pakistan being accused of playing a double game by the US (Collyns). After interviewing a few prisoners, according to BBC, the US officials concluded that Pakistan was actively supporting Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan for a hidden agenda. This can be seen as a fallacy of composition created from a single point of view being viewed as the resulting aim of country’s net actions. Pakistani ISI has been a powerful element both in the country and in its defense against the enemy powers when it came to proxy wars. The BBC uses th e circumstantial prisoner witnesses to support the accusation by the US officials. While attributing repeated denials to Pakistan in two instances, the report suggests the US accusations overly weighed and further states them as a fact by presenting a BBC documentary to back up the accusations as facts. This strains the neutral point of view of the report which should be there in an international news article fully attributing views to their actual sources and not stating contentions opinions or conflicting truths as facts. Furthermore, in addition to the US accusations, the BBC report itself alleges that Pakistan has helped and harboured Afghan Taliban in its territory stating it as a ‘plain to see’ fact (Collyns). The Washington Post, on the other hand, also attributes accusations to the US and denials to Pakistan but keeps it to that (Leiby). The report can be contrasted with that of BBC’s in a clear cut way. As a clear contrast to the BBC report, this report presents quotations of US accusations in text with conflicting quotations of Pakistani denials making it more balanced and neutral in its point of view. The Washington Post report also uses the BBC report as a reference but puts it in a more neutral way without any presumptions. The BBC excerpts are quoted to tell the US side of the story while the Pakistani foreign minister is clearly attributed to have categorically put

Harp of Burma Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Harp of Burma - Essay Example This position regarding the message of the book is accentuated by the author’s opinion that the war was unjustified and that the Japanese soldiers ought to have absconded the war. This position infers that the tone of the literature discouraged the active involvement of the Japanese soldiers in the war. Published in 1948, the book was later translated from Japanese language to English by Howard Hibbert. The title of the book was not just a convoluted idea, it stems from the fact that the Japanese soldiers engaged in the war were encouraged to sing as a way of boosting their confidence e and morale to emerge victors in the fight. Amidst this was a soldier who use to play Harp for other solders in the same spirit of building confidence and the zeal to vigorously fight. This book is also directed as a film. The central theme discussed and that can be inferred after reading the book is the need to avoid war confrontation and instead opt for peace. The literature in the book recounts how the Japanese soldiers were killed in thousand and the bodies decomposing in the jungle. It shows how Japan’s involvement in the war made any other agenda for the country lag behind in the interest of pursuing war. Japan, Italy, and Germany were skewed on one side forming one axis against the British and her allies on the other side. Japan and the allies in the war were trounced and in this book, the Japanese soldiers captured by the British were told to inform the rest that the war has ended and one of the soldiers who happen to be playing the Harp volunteer to dutifully undertake to the responsibility (Takeyama, 46). He left the rest of the solders to pursue other in the effort to deliver them the message. In the jungle, he is surprised to find most of his colleagues killed in millions that he co uld not even make arrangements to bury them as he initially wished. The soldier is taken aback by

Unabashed Substance Abuse Analysis Society Essay

Unabashed Substance Abuse Analysis Society Essay Substance abuse is something that is very common in today s life. There are many substances that are called abused and the most common abused substances are the street drugs. The other abused substances include alcohol followed by medical and prescription pills. Anything and everything can be abused if consumed in excess and this can include medicines as well. Substance abuse is identified by unusual behavior and it is because of this that there is a restriction on the abuse of substances. There are two types of substance abuse and they are the normal, frivolous way of using substances without getting addicted to them, these people either stop the use of these substances or end up getting addicted to these substance abuse. The second type is the people who are addicted to these substances. Normally people think that they can get out of the addiction whenever they want and this is not something that happens. People end up getting so addicted that they feel they cannot survive without it. This is the stage where one loses complete control and is impossible for one to recover from this stage without outside help. Normally a person can gain control once in a while and this control keeps changing stance and there is a gyration between control and no control. This may go on for an infinite time unless the person accepts outside help. Substance abuse is something that is really dangerous and once addicted it is very difficult for that person to lead the normal life he/she has been once leading. The person starts experiencing a drift towards the negative aspect of life and it becomes difficult for the person to live life the easy way. This addiction can be overcome if the person is willing to accept help from others and this can help them regaining their happy life free of addiction. Substance Abuse Treatment An abused substance is one which is consumed in quantities exceeding the prescribed one. There are many abused substances such as drugs, alcohol etc. There are many people who are addicted to substance abuse and they are in need to be treated immediately. Substance abuse treatment is the treatment of a person addicted to substance abuse such that he can be relieved of this addiction. This treatment is normally provided in substance abuse facilities. If a person you know is addicted to any substance then putting that person into treatment in a substance abuse facility is probably the best option available. It s not an impossible task to make that person get relieved of his addiction and walk freely as a normal person. Also the task is not very easy. The person in treatment needs all the moral support that can be given and the person should be made to understand the importance of living a life free of addiction. Normally a person addicted feels that he/she should stay away from people and it is our responsibility that we take care of our beloved ones and make them feel that we care for them and make available all the facilities that is required to relieve them from the addiction. The time spent in a substance abuse facility is precious as the person coming out of it comes back as a normal human and leads life like they once did. Not many people feel confident about their recovery while some go in with a mindset of recovering from the addiction. Even after recovery many people have not felt it positive to walk back and lead a normal life owing to the time they spent during the addiction. The bottom-line is that treatment given to an addict results in two things. It either makes them or breaks them it is depending on how they take it and with what attitude they went into the facility that matters. Management Of Substance Abuse Addiction to substance abuse is something that has become a very common issue now days. Also there has been an increase in the number of treatment facilities that avail rehabilitation to people with this addiction. When a person is admitted into this facility there are many professionals who deal with these addicts talk to them on a personal basis to know how they came in contact with the substance. Where they into it on their own or where they influenced by some other. All this helps the professionals to understand the extent of addiction and the mindset the patient has regarding the treatment of the addiction. Individual treatment is something that has to be given to every drug addict and this is required because the level of addiction and the way they were introduced to this substance might change from one person to the other. Hence it is required that each person is individually spoken to and dialogue is made with the addict. This is done because the therapists have only this way to know more about them and thereby find a way to recover from this addiction. Also one cannot recover from addiction without a moral support from people close to him. Thus the staff attending the person needs to decide on who the visitors are going to be and the type of conversation they are going to make with the person. This is the most important phase as the person needs to gain self esteem and self belief that he/she will be able to recover from this addiction. There are addicts who understand their problem and feel the need to discuss their problem with a professional. It is to be kept in mind that these addicts need to have a good rapport with these therapists. It is only by a combined effort of the addict and the staff that they will be able to come out of this addiction. Symptoms Of Substance Abuse One of the most serious issues in today s world is substance abuse. People with substance abuse addiction not only harm themselves they also pose as a threat to people living close to them. The best way to ensure safety is to make sure that one is able to recognize the signs that indicate substance abuse. There are a few areas which one must look into keenly to find out about the substance abuse. Finding out irregularities in these fields might give us a greater chance in finding out whether the person is under the influence of substance abuse or not. The first thing that one must look into while investigating for substance abuse is the person s performance in doing tasks. The next thing to check is the person s behavior with people around him. There is variety of behavior changes that one can notice if a person is under influence. It can be a low morale, arguments with the co employees, lack of memory and other signs. All this might indicate that a person is under influence or is in a state of hangover. The next thing to be noted is the physical signs. These can mostly confirm a person s influence over a substance. The first thing is to note whether the person s eyes is bloodshot or watery. Then check whether the co ordination of his body parts synch and also look for co ordination in speech. Also if the person shows extreme fatigue or extreme stimulation then the person might be under influence of a substance. Also one should have a keen look into the person s belongings and should carefully check if the person is in possession of any materials such as syringe, needles, pipes, lighters, etc. if a person is using such items often then there is a higher probability that the person is addicted to a substance. Overcoming Substance Abuse Substance abuse is the consumption of a substance more than the prescribed amount. Normally consumption of substances can give a person a special kind of sensation. But due to greed for more one might end up consuming too much and get dependent on it. Normally people consume drugs and alcohol just to get away from emotional stress and at times end up going too far. Continuous consumption of these drugs and alcohol may lead to not only deterioration in health they also lead to decline in a person s social life. It may weaken relationship and may depreciate a person s respect in a community. It will lead to weakening of relationships with loved ones and let down rapport with colleagues. Taking into account these entire effects one must consider throwing away the addiction from such substances in order to maintain their health and ensure constant participation in social life. Thus one must plan and look for the type of treatments they are going to take in order to recover from this addiction. The most important step involved is detoxification which ensures good recovery. The dosage injected into the addict will not affect body organs as they get out of the body quickly. There are two types of detoxification. One is inpatient detoxification and the other is outpatient detoxification. The inpatient detoxification should only be done in a rehabilitation center or in a hospital. This is because the type of detoxification used varies and it requires special facilities to be administered into a person s body. This is generally recommended for people who have been addicted for a long time while the outpatient is for people with mild addiction but this also requires a professional who can administer is safely. While overcoming the addiction it is important that we have enough information on the withdrawal symptoms that one will face. Once they start kicking in one should know how to deal with them and what kind of remedies one should take in order to get out of the pain without getting into addiction again. Reasons For Substance Abuse Many people feel that people under substance abuse are social burdens and cause problems to social community. They feel the abusers are people who are morally weak, and are people who require assistance to lead a better social life. The problem is that most people chip away most of the facts and come to a conclusion just based on the behavior and attitude of the addict. They do not go into understanding the root of the problem and just give away conclusions based on what they see. But the real problem that has forced people to go into addiction may not be moral weakness it can be something else that has lead to them taking such a drastic decision. The most common reason that recovered people come up with is that they heard a rumor which claimed that consumption of a particular drug enhanced the self esteem of a person and make the person feel better by striking the person s pleasure sensors. The substances consumed provide different types of sensation and each varies with the substance. Moreover there are many people who choose the consumption of restricted substances with the hope that they will be able to come out of the stress and tension they have in their life. The stress caused could be due to emotional problems or due to workload. The abuse of substances due to stress related reasons is the most typical reason for a person becoming a habitual consumer of abused substances. In today s world as it has been seen many times teens and adolescents are the ones who have been affected most defenseless to these substances. Though this age group has been the most vulnerable the other people of this group are also equally susceptible. Substance abuse is not an age related problem it can affect any person of any age. Even people who are icons and are considered mentors by many are exposed to substance abuse as they face a lot of stress and related problems. How To Overcome Substance Abuse Substance abuse normally refers to the over dosage of a substance in comparison to the prescribed quantity. Mostly abuse is referred to drugs and other illegal products but many people forget that even products like Vicks inhaler can be used as a substance which can be abused. Also people can rely on alcohol and prescription drugs and this is also a dangerous addiction. For a very long time people who indulged in substance abuse were considered immoral beings and were placed away from the community. They were being made ashamed for their doing and this made them refrain from meeting any person even from their family. But today substance abuse is considered as a disease of the brain where it has become reliable for a particular substance and it cannot live without it. These substances also work in a similar manner and they also bond with the brain like a normal medicine and once the supply of these substances stop it becomes difficult to let go. These substances are responsible for producing certain neurotransmitters in the brain and this brings about a feeling of being drunk and feeling high. It can also make a person feel relaxed or feel highly excited. Because substances like this produce such neurotransmitters and produce certain emotions it becomes difficult for a person to live without these emotions and craves for more thereby creating an addiction for such substances. Fortunately for people who are addicted to such substances there are facilities which help them to get rid of these addictions. It is entirely dependent on a person whether he will come out of the facility a responsible person and the one who he really was. These facilities are available to anyone who wants to get rid of these addictions and if the person feels he can get rid of the addiction and co operates with the therapists in that facility then there is a great possibility that the person comes out a renewed person. Help With Substance Abuse Facilities Substance abuse facilities are centers which treat people with addiction to certain substances. Substance abuse generally means the overdose of certain substances than the prescribed amount. Too much consumption of a certain substance makes the body rely on it and it thereby becomes difficult for a person to get rid of the substance. Substance abuse facilities helps a person get rid of these addictions and has proved to be very effective when it comes to removing addictions such as this. There are many ways that a person can be treated for substance abuse and the most common method used is detoxification. Detoxification is the process of administering certain chemicals into the body which try and remove the substances and then get out of the body. The detoxification agent used is not addictive and it gets out of the body quickly. There are two ways in which a person can be detoxified the first is inpatient detoxification and the other is outpatient detoxification. Inpatient detoxification generally is done in hospitals and rehab centers and they require certain equipments to be administered. They are normally for people who have been addicts for a real long time. The outpatient detoxification is for mild addicts and it does not require equipments but the administration should be done by an experienced therapist. Also there is the twelve step method to recover form substance abuse. This task involves twelve tasks which a person must follow in order to recover from drug abuse. When a person follows the twelve steps the person learns that addiction is something he can control and one can recover from addiction only by abstaining from it. It teaches the addicts to learn from their previous mistakes and makes him correct his mistakes thereby making him a better person. It lets him boost his self confidence and self esteem and makes a person feel no different from a normal human being. Stages Of Substance Abuse Substance abuse involves the addiction of many types of substance which includes a list of legal and illegal drugs. Legal drugs such as alcohols and prescription pills which contain sedatives are consumed over the prescribed level. Depending on the substance consumed a person can face different health problems. These substances are generally consumed by people in order to gain different mood alteration according to their wish. The substances consumed provide different moods. Some substances makes a person feel relaxed while some other makes a person feel more excited. In addition to this these substances produce a disability in the person s brain that makes the brain generate signals that crave for more of the same substance. This gradually leads to addiction. Normally people feel that they can come over their addiction and feel that the will not consume it the next time. But every time they fall for the addiction .And ultimately achieve a state where they have no control over the addiction. There are five stages in which a substance abuse gradually develops into and addiction. The first stage is known as experimentation where people start thinking that trying the substance once might not lead them to addiction. Normally experimentation starts at a very early age and at this age people might not know the effects of these substances. There are also other reasons why a person starts using these substances and it could be stress and related problems. The next stage deals with the regular use of these substances as one is not able to resist the emotions that they trigger. It could either be a happy feeling or sad one. But people just don t want to lose it and start consuming it regularly. The next stage deals with the over use of the substance and this is the stage where a person gradually starts losing control. The final stage of the or nearly the final stage is dependence in which the person is not able to survive without the substances and the body starts demanding for more and more of that substance. The final and the ultimate stage is addiction which makes the person get addicted to the substance and thereby lose any resentment that the person has towards that substance. Effects Of Substance Abuse Indulging in the over consumption of a toxic drug or any other addictive substance is known as substance abuse. This phenomenon has become a common issue in many parts of the world. The drug consumed causes a nervous imbalance and causes the person consuming it to experience a change in mood and this mood changes based on the type of substance used. The effects of these substances are detrimental to ones health. It affects both the physical and mental aspects of a person s body. There are many substances that can be abused and they are illegal drugs such as marijuana, cocaine and legal drugs such as alcohol, prescription pills and many other drugs. The initial reason for a substance reason for a substance abuse might be for fun or it might be for gaining emotional pleasure due to personal problems. It can also be for the fact that there might be stress and related problems and hence to relax a person may indulge in substance abuse. When a person indulges in substance abuse he/she feels a deep desire to continue consuming it. And it thereby becomes an addiction. Substance abuse can change the behavior of a person. Can change his perception of judgments and can create imbalances in physical control over the body and speech. The negative impacts of substance abuse can be seen at substance abuse facilities. Here the addicts face the withdrawal effects and are seen suffering of pain and poor health. One can clearly see the trauma in these people and the desperation to get hold of that substance. The body becomes numb and at times the person goes into a depreciated condition. People tend to forget their aim in life and they forget reason for living. It can change a person s mood immediately and the person can become violent and harm the people trying to tend them. More About Substance Abuse Substance addiction is something that has become a major social issue in many parts of the world today. This is a problem that does not have an immediate solution. The practice of drug abuse has increased in today s world because the world has become busy in their own work and don t have the ample time required to look into these matters with utmost care. Young kids without any guidance from their parents have become easy targets for substance abuse. There are a lot of symptoms that can indicate substance abuse. There are cases when it may be difficult to predict, these cases are mostly seen when the person starts hiding things from people. Mostly there are people who want to avoid telling people about drug abuse within their families. It mostly involves parents who don t want people knowing about their kids involved in substance abuse and thereby don t take proper care of this alarming matter and do not even admit them into a rehab center. Substance abuse has a profound effect on a person s health and is not something that must be left unattended to. It has adverse effects on the physical and mental health of a person. It changes a person s behavior and affects the person s stance and also affects the way he speaks. Their perception of things changes and at times they have a sudden change in emotions and they get too violent and harmful. There are various treatment programs that are available to treat people addicted to substance abuse. The programs provided are either residential or are outpatient treatment. The treatment period normally ranges from about a month two three months. The time period mostly depends on the level of addiction. These treatment procedures mainly treat the inner man present in a person. It helps a person regain his very own self and helps him realize the mistakes he made and makes correct the mistake. Evaluating Substance Abuse Many people around the world have experienced a lot of substance abusing cases .to get out of substance abuse is not an easy thing for that professional counseling and medication is needed. But evaluation of substance is not as we think. It is a tedious process and normally doctors don t opt for this process they can find out about a person involving in substance abuse without any test s but just to satisfy people they go for this evaluation. But it is recommended that a person undergoes this test in case a person is being admitted to a rehab center. The test is common in every place and the test is called CAGE test. The test at first looks very easy and one feels that it is not very difficult. There are four questions that is involved during a CAGE test. The first question that is asked is whether a person has ever had the intention to cut down on drinking? Has the person ever been annoyed by the criticism they face towards drinking? Has the person ever been guilty about drinking? Has the person ever had a drink in the morning? Based on the answers given by the person the doctors can decide whether the person is addicted to drugs or not. There are many other methods to evaluate if one is abused to a substance or not. The many methods available are the MIST method, the MAST method. These methods are highly efficient in finding a person s addiction towards addiction to a substance. Based on this it is decided whether he should be admitted to a rehab or should he be sent to a outpatient treatment where one is treated in their home only. The rehab centers are also dedicated and they provide the right type of treatment based on the level of addiction and the rehab gives an assurance to bring back that person to normal and help him recover from that person s addiction.

Rockets and Space Travel Essay -- Space Exploration Essays

Flying into orbit, at times, seems just an ordinary event. We have been launching objects into orbit for several decades now. Over time, it seems that the knowledge of the first attempt to send an object into the atmosphere was lost. One lone American was very absorbed into the science of this very thing. He had an obsession about him. John Goddard spent endless hours trying to perfect a small rocket launch. Though it sounds simple, lighting a fire underneath a small projectile, and make go in a straight line toward the heavens, is very detailed orientated. In a book written by Arthur C. Clark, he talks about early work that was done in the world of rocketry, but at the time it was only for entertainment. It happened hundreds of years ago. One of the first experiences with rockets came from â€Å"thirteenth century Chinese† (Clarke 71). Today, the technology is so advanced; flights of hundreds of miles are not uncommon. In the beginning of rocket experimentation, there were many trial and errors. They would fire up the engine of a projectile in hopes of a spectacular launch into the atmosphere. Many times it would only result in some kind of explosion. Catastrophe, if anything, is the nature of launching any projectile. Mans attempt to send objects toward the clouds has sparked interests in going further than ever before. The moon and the outer planets of our solar system have now become an obsession with not only the science community, but with a lot of ordinary folks as well. In order to satisfy this obsession, ways had to be found in order to get to these distant objects. The world we live on is small compared to the surrounding planets and universe but it is large compared to the complexities of ways to leave its ... ..., the commander will create a steeper angle of descent to minus 20 degrees (almost seven times steeper than the descent of a commercial airliner) (http://science.howstuffworks.com)†. This is only a small glimpse of what goes on before and after the lift off of the space shuttle. Details of micro gravity during the orbital maneuver and the interaction of the crew during its mission can add volumes to this report alone. In the end, the space shuttle is a very versatile instrument. From experiments in human research to inserting the Hubble space telescope into orbit. What would it be like in another 200 years when man has established colonies on mars or the moon? What an interesting life our future children will have. Works Cited: Arthur C. Clark http://science.howstuffworks.com http://science.howstuffworks.com Physics, a worldview, Kirkpatrick and Wheeler,

Literary Translation Essay

Literary studies have always, explicitly or implicitly, presupposed a certain notion of `literariness’ with which it has been able to delimit its domain, specify, and sanction its methodologies and approaches to its subject. This notion of `literariness’ is crucial for the theoretical thinking about literary translation. In this paper, I have attempted to analyze various recent theoretical positions to the study of literary translation and sought to understand them in the context of the development in the field of literary studies in the last three decades of the twentieth century. The recent developments in the literary studies have radically questioned the traditional essentialist notion of `literariness’ and the idea of canon from various theoretical perspectives. I have contrasted the traditional discourse on literary translation with the recent discourse in order to highlight the shift in the notion of `literariness’ and its impact on translation theory. The traditional essentialist approach to literature, which Lefevere (1988:173) calls `the corpus’ approach is based on the Romantic notion of literature which sees the author as a quasi-divine `creator’ possessing `genius’. He is believed to be the origin of the Creation that is Original, Unique, organic, transcendental and hence sacred. Translation then is a mere copy of the unique entity, which by definition is uncopy-able. As the translator is not the origin of the work of art, he does not possess `genius’, and he is considered merely a drudge, a proletariat, and a shudra in the literary Varna system. This traditional approach is due to the Platonic-Christian metaphysical underpinning of the Western culture. The `original’ versus `copy’ dichotomy is deeply rooted in the Western thought. This is the reason why the West has been traditionally hostile and allergic to the notion of `translation’. The traditional discussion of the problems of literary translation considers finding equivalents not just for lexis, syntax or concepts, but also for features like style, genre, figurative language, historical stylistic dimensions, polyvalence, connotations as well as denotations, cultural items and culture-specific concepts and values. The choices made by the translators like the decision whether to retain stylistic features of the source language text or whether to retain the historical stylistic dimension of the original become all the more important in the case of literary translation. For instance, whether to translate Chaucer into old Marathi or contemporary are very important. In the case of translating poetry, it is vital for a translator to decide whether the verse should be translated into verse, or into free verse or into prose. Most of the scholars and translators like Jakobson (1991:151) believe that in the case of poetry though it is â€Å"by definition impossible †¦ only creative transposition is possible†¦ â€Å". It is the creative dimension of translation that comes to fore in the translation of poetry though nobody seems to be sure of what is meant by creativity in the first place. The word is charged with theological-Romantic connotations typical of the `corpus’ approach to literature. The questions around which the deliberations about translation within such a conceptual framework are made are rather stereotyped and limited: as the literary text, especially a poem is unique, organic whole and original is the translation possible at all? Should translation be `literal’ or `free’? Should it emphasize the content or the form? Can a faithful translation be beautiful? The answers to the question range from one extreme to the other and usually end in some sort of a compromise. The great writers and translators gave their well-known dictums about translations, which reflected these traditional beliefs about it. For Dante (1265-1321) all poetry is untranslatable (cited by Brower 1966: 271) and for Frost (1974-1963) poetry is `that which is lost out of both prose and verse in translation ‘(cited by Webb 203) while Yves Bonnefoy says `You can translate by simply declaring one poem the translation of another† (1991:186-192). On the other hand theorists like Pound (1929, 1950), Fitzgerald (1878) say† †¦Ã‚  the live Dog is better than the dead Lion†, believe in freedom in translation. The others like Nabokov (1955) believe â€Å"The clumsiest of literal translation is a thousand times more useful than prettiest of paraphrase†. Walter Benjamin, Longfellow (1807-81), Schleriermacher, Martindale (1984), seem to favour much more faithful translation or believe in foreignizing the native language. While most of the translators like Dryden are on the side of some sort of compromise between the two extremes. Lefevere has pointed out that most of the writings done on the basis of the concept of literature as a corpus attempt to provide translators with certain guidelines, do’s and don’ts and that these writings are essentially normative even if they don’t state their norms explicitly. These norms, according to Lefevere, are not far removed from the poetics of a specific literary period or even run behind the poetics of the period (1988:173). Even the approaches based on the `objective’ and `scientific’ foundations of linguistics are not entirely neutral in their preferences and implicit value judgements. Some writings on translation based on this approach are obsessed with the translation process and coming up with some model for description of the process. As Theo Hermans (1985:9-10) correctly observes that in spite of some impressive semiotic terminology, complex schemes and diagrams illustrating the mental process of decoding messages in one medium and encoding them in another, they could hardly describe the actual conversion that takes place within the human mind, `that blackest of black boxes’. Lefevere notes, the descriptive approach was not very useful when it came to decide what good translation is and what is bad. Most of recent developments in translation theory look for alternatives to these essentializing approaches. Instead of considering literature as an autonomous and independent domain, it sees it in much broader social and cultural framework. It sees literature as a social institution and related to other social institutions. It examines the complex interconnections between poetics, politics, metaphysics, and history. It borrows its analytical tools from various social sciences like linguistics, semiotics, anthropology, history, economics, and psychoanalysis. It is closely allied to the discipline of cultural studies, as discussed by Jenks (1993:187) in using culture as a descriptive rather than normative category as well as working within an expanded concept of culture, which rejects the `high’ versus low stratification. It is keenly interested in the historical and political dimension of literature. Paradigm shift’ to use Theo Hermans’ phrase or the `Cultural turn’ in the discipline of translation theory has made a significant impact in the way we look at translation. Translation is as a form of intercultural communication raising the problems that are not merely at the verbal level or at the linguistic level. As Talgeri and Verma (1988:3) rightly point out, a word is,’ essentially a cultural memory in which the historical experience of the society is embedded. H. C. Trivedi (1971: 3) observes that while translating from an Indian language into English one is faced with two main problems: first one has to deal with concepts which require an understanding of Indian culture and secondly, one has to arrive at TL meaning equivalents of references to certain objects in SL, which includes features absent from TL culture. The awareness that one does not look for merely verbal equivalents but also for cultural equivalents, if there are any, goes a long way in helping the translator to decide the strategies he or she has to use. Translation then is no longer a problem of merely finding verbal equivalents but also of interpreting a text encoded in one semiotic system with the help of another. The notion of `intertextuality’ as formulated by the semiotician Julia Kristeva is extremely significant in this regard. She points out that any signifying system or practice already consists of other modes of cultural signification (1988:59-60). A literary text would implicate not only other verbal texts but also other modes of signification like food, fashion, local medicinal systems, metaphysical systems, traditional and conventional narratives like myths, literary texts, legends as well as literary conventions like genres, literary devices, and other symbolic structures. It would be almost tautological to state that the elements of the text, which are specific to the culture and the language, would be untranslatable. The whole enterprise of finding cultural equivalents raises awareness of the difference and similarities between the cultures . It also brings into focus the important question of cultural identity. Else Ribeiro Pires Vieira (1999:42) remarks that it is ultimately impossible to translate one cultural identity into another. So the act of translation is intimately related to the question of cultural identity, difference and similarity. A rather interesting approach to literary translation comes from Michel Riffaterre (1992: 204-217). He separates literary and non-literary use of language by saying that literature is different because i) it semioticicizes the discursive features e.g. lexical selection is made morphophonemically as well as semantically, ii) it substitutes semiosis for mimesis which gives literary language its indirection, and iii) it has â€Å"the` textuality’ that integrates semantic components of the verbal sequence (the ones open to linear decoding)-a theoretically open-ended sequence-into one closed, finite semiotic, system† that is , the parts of a literary texts are vitally linked to the whole of the text and the text is more or less self contained. Hence the literary translation should â€Å"reflect or imitate these differences†. He considers a literary text as an artefact and it contains the signals, which mark it as an artifact. Translation should also imitate or reflect these markers. He goes on to say that as we perceive a certain text as literary based on certain presuppositions we should render these literariness inducing presuppositions. Though this seems rather like traditional and formalist approach, what should be noted here is that Riffaterre is perceiving literariness in a rather different way while considering the problems of literary translation: `literariness’ is in no way the `essence’ of a text and a literary text is, for Riffatere one that which contains the signs which makes it obvious that it is a cultural artefact. Although he conceives of literary text as self-contained system, Riffatere too, like many other contemporary approaches sees it as a sub-system of cultural semiotic system. However, if one is to consider Riffatere’s notion of `text’ in contrast to Kristeva’s notion of intertextuality one feels that Riffaterre is probably simplifying the problem of cultural barriers to translatability. The assumption that literary text is a cultural artefact and is related to the other social systems is widespread these days. Some of the most important theorization based on this assumption has come from provocative and insightful perspectives of theorists like Andre Lefevere, Gideon Toury, Itamar Evan -Zohar, and Theo Hermans. These theorists are indebted to the concept of `literature as system’ as propounded by Russian Formalists like Tynianov, Jakobson, and Czech Structuralists like Mukarovsky and Vodicka, the French Structuralists thinkers, and the Marxist thinkers who considered literature as a section of the `superstructure’. The central idea of this point of view is that the study of literary translation should begin with a study of the translated text rather than with the process of translation, its role, function and reception in the culture in which it is translated as well as the role of culture in influencing the `process of decision making that is translation. ‘ It is fundamentally descriptive in its orientation (Toury 1985). Lefevere maintains, `Literature is one of the systems which constitute the system of discourses (which also contain disciplines like physics or law. ) usually referred to as a civilization, or a society (1988:16). ‘ Literature for Lefevere is a subsystem of society and it interacts with other systems. He observes that there is a `control factor in the literary system which sees to it that this particular system does not fall too far out of step with other systems that make up a society ‘ (p.17). He astutely observes that this control function works from outside of this system as well as from inside. The control function within the system is that of dominant poetics, `which can be said to consist of two components: one is an inventory of literary devices, genres, motifs, prototypical characters and situations, symbols; the other a concept of what the role of literature is, or should be, in the society at large. ‘ (p. 23). The educational establishment dispenses it. The second controlling factor is that of `patronage’. It can be exerted by `persons, not necessarily the Medici, Maecenas or Louis XIV only, groups or persons, such as a religious grouping or a political party, a royal court, publishers, whether they have a virtual monopoly on the book trade or not and, last but not least, the media. ‘ The patronage consists of three elements; the ideological component, the financial or economic component, and the element of status (p. 18-19). The system of literature, observes Lefevere, is not deterministic but it acts as a series of `constraints’ on the reader, writer, or rewriter. The control mechanism within the literary system is represented by critics, reviewers, teachers of literature, translators and other rewriters who will adapt works of literature until they can be claimed to correspond to the poetics and the ideology of their time. It is important to note that the political and social aspect of literature is emphasised in the system approach. The cultural politics and economics of patronage and publicity are seen as inseparable from literature. `Rewriting’ is the key word here which is used by Lefevere as a `convenient `umbrella-term’ to refer to most of the activities traditionally connected with literary studies: criticism, as well as translation, anthologization, the writing of literary history and the editing of texts-in fact, all those aspects of literary studies which establish and validate the value-structures of canons. Rewritings, in the widest sense of the term, adapt works of literature to a given audience and/or influence the ways in which readers read a work of literature. ‘ (60-61). The texts, which are rewritten, processed for a certain audience, or adapted to a certain poetics, are the `refracted’ texts and these maintains Lefevere are responsible for the canonized status of the text (p179). `Interpretation (criticism), then and translation are probably the most important forms of refracted literature, in that they are the most influential ones’ he notes (1984:90) and says, ` One never translates, as the models of the translation process based on the Buhler/Jakobson communication model, featuring disembodied senders and receivers, carefully isolated from all outside interference by that most effective expedient, the dotted line, would have us believe, under a sort of purely linguistic bell jar. Ideological and poetological motivations are always present in the production, or the non production of translations of literary works†¦ Translation and other refractions, then, play a vital part in the evolution of literatures, not only by introducing new texts, authors and devices, but also by introducing them in a certain way, as part of a wider design to try to influence that evolution’ (97) . Translation becomes one of the parts of the `refraction’ â€Å"†¦ the rather long term strategy, of which translation is only a part, and which has as its aim the manipulation of  foreign work in the service of certain aims that are felt worthy of pursuit in the native culture†¦ † (1988:204). This is indeed a powerful theory to study translation as it places as much significance to it as criticism and interpretation. Lefevere goes on to give some impressive analytical tools and perspectives for studying literary translation, `The ideological and poetological constraints under which translations are produced should be explicated, and the strategy devised by the translator to deal with those constraints should be described: does he or she make a translation in a more descriptive or in a more refractive way? What are the intentions with which he or she introduces foreign elements into the native system? Equivalence, fidelity, freedom and the like will then be seen more as functions of a strategy adopted under certain constraints, rather than absolute requirements, or norms that should or should not be imposed or respected. It will be seen that `great ‘ages of translation occur whenever a given literature recognizes another as more prestigious and tries to emulate it. Literatures will be seen to have less need of translation(s) when they are convinced of their own superiority. It will also be seen that translations are often used (think of the Imagists) by adherents of an alternative poetics to challenge the dominant poetics of a certain period in a certain system, especially when that alternative poetics cannot use the work of its own adherents to do so, because that work is not yet written’ (1984:98-99). Another major theorist working on similar lines as that of Lefevere is Gideon Toury (1985). His approach is what he calls Descriptive Translation Studies (DTS). He emphasizes the fact that translations are facts of one system only: the target system and it is the target or recipient culture or a certain section of it, which serves as the initiator of the decision to translate and consequently translators operate first and foremost in the interest of the culture into which they are translating. Toury very systematically charts out a step by step guide to the study of translation. He stresses that the study should begin with the empirically observed data, that is, the translated texts and proceeds from there towards the reconstruction of non-observational facts rather than the other way round as is usually done in the `corpus’ based and traditional approaches to translation. The most interesting thing about Toury’s approach (1984) is  that it takes into consideration things like `pseudo-translation’ or the texts foisted off as translated but in fact are not so. In the very beginning when the problem of distinguishing a translated text from a non-translated text arises, Toury assumes that for his procedure `translation’ will be taken to be `any target-language utterance which is presented or regarded as such within the target culture, on whatever grounds’. In this approach pseudotranslations are `just as legitimate objects for study within DTS as genuine translations. They may prove to be highly instructive for the establishment of the general notion of translation as shared by the members of a certain target language community’. Then the next step in Toury’s DTS would be to study their acceptability in their respective target language system followed by mapping these texts, `Via their constitutive elements as TRANSLATIONAL PHENOMENA, on their counterparts in the appropriate source system and text, identified as such in the course of a comparative analysis, as SOLUTIONS to TRANSLATIONAL PROBLEMS’. Then a scholar should proceed to `identify and describe the (one-directional, irreversible) RELATIONSHIPS obtaining between the members of each pair; and finally to go on to refer these relationships- by means of the mediating functional-relational notion of TRANSLATION EQUIVALENCE, established as pertinent to the corpus under study-to the overall CONCEPT OF TRANSLATION underlying the corpus. It is these last two concepts which form the ultimate goal of systematic studies within DTS†¦ only when the nature of the prevailing concept of translation has been established will it become possible to reconstruct the possible process of CONSIDERATION and DECISION-MAKING which was involved in the act of translating in question as well as the set of CONSTRAINTS which were actually accepted by the translator. ‘ (1985:21) Toury’s step by step procedure is descriptive, empirical and inductive, beginning with the observed facts and then moving towards uncovering the strategies and techniques used by translator and the implicit notion and presupposition of equivalence rather than treating the notion of equivalence as given. The concept of constraint puts him in the company of Lefevere. The essential question is not of defining what is equivalence in general, whether it is possible or not, or of how to find equivalents, but of discovering what is meant by equivalence by the community or group within the target culture. These approaches are also extremely useful in the area of comparative literary studies and comparativists like Durisin (1984:184-142) whose approach is in many ways similar to Lefevere and Toury in focusing on function and relation of literary translation in the target or the recipient culture. He is of opinion that it is impossible to speak of theories of translation without applying the comparative procedure, as the aim of analysis of a translation is to determine the extent to which it belongs to the developmental series of the native literature. He like the other two theorists discussed, considers the translation procedure as well as the selection of the text being ` primarily determined by the integral need of the recipient literature, by its capacity for absorbing the literary phenomenon of a different national literature, work, etc.  and for reacting in a specific manner (integrational or differtiational) in its aesthetic features’ as well as the norm of time. This type of theorization is far from the traditional paradigm of translation theory that is obsessed with the ideas of fidelity and betrayal, and the notions of `free’ vs. literal translation. Thanks to the proponents of system approach to literary translation, translation studies can boast of becoming a discipline in its own right due to the development of powerful theoretical models. However, the problem with Leferverian system is its terminology. The words `refracted’ and `rewriting’ presuppose that a text can be written for the first time and that it exists in a pre-non-refracted state. These presuppositions take him dangerously close to the very `corpus’ based approach he is so vigorously attacking. Perhaps Derridian philosophy can explain why one is always in danger of belonging to the very system of thought one is criticizing. Another obvious limitation of these types of theories is that they are rather reductionist in their approach. Though Lefevere maintains that the system concept holds that the refracted texts are mainly responsible for the canonized status of the corpus and the intrinsic quality alone could not have given canonized status for them he fails to point out the exact features and qualities of the literary text which solicit refractions. Then there are problematic words like` the system’ which Lefevere points out `refer to a heuristic construct that does not emphatically possess any kind of ontological reality†¦.’ and `is merely used to designate a model that promises to help make sense of a very complex phenomenon, that of writing, reading and rewriting of literature†¦ (1985: 225). Besides types of theories are descriptive and hence have a limited use for the translator as well as translation criticism, which is a rather neglected branch of translation studies till date. Lefevere says that translation criticism hardly rises much above, `he is wrong because I’m right level†¦ ‘(1984:99). He also points out that it is impossible to define once and for all, what a good translation is just as it is impossible to define once and for all what good literature is. And † critic A, â€Å"judging† on the basis of poetics A’ will rule translation A â€Å"good† because it happens to be constructed on the basis of the principles laid down in A’. Critic B, on the other hand, operating on the basis of poetics B’, will damn translation A† and praise translation B’, for obvious reasons†¦ â€Å"(1988:176). He believes,† Translators can be taught languages and a certain awareness of how literature works. The rest is up to them. They make mistakes only on the linguistic level. The rest is strategy. † (1984:99). The perspective of course is that of a value relativist and a culture relativist, which seem to be the politically correct and `in’ stances today, but the stance can be seen as symptomatic in the light of deeper moral crises in the larger philosophical context. An ambitious and insightful essay by Raymond van den Broeck, `Second Thought on Translation Criticism: A Model of its Analytic Function’ (1985) attempts to go beyond the mere descriptive and uncourageous approach of Lefevere and Toury which tries to incorporate the ideas of their theories. Like Toury and Lefevere, Broeck stresses the importance of examination of the norms among all those involved in the production and reception of translations and remarks that it is the foremost task of translation criticism to create greater awareness of these norms but he also gives room for the critic’s personal value judgements. The critic may or may not agree with the particular method chosen by the translator for a particular purpose. He is entitled to doubt the effectiveness of the chosen strategies, to criticize decisions taken with regard to certain details. To the extent that he is himself familiar with the functional features of the source text, he will be a trustworthy guide in telling the reader where target textemes balance source textemes and where in the critic’s view, they do not. But he must never confuse his own initial norms with those of the translator (p. 60-61). Broeck attempts a synthesis of the target culture oriented inductive – descriptive approach and the notorious task of evaluating translation and the result is indeed very useful and commendable as translation evaluation is a neglected branch of translation studies. As opposed to this descriptive approach is Venuti’s The Translator’s Invisibility (1995). With a normative and extremely insightful point of view he examines historically how the norm of fluency prevailed over other translation strategies to shape the canon of foreign literatures in English. He makes a strong case for `foreignness’ and `awkwardness’ of the translated text as a positive value in the evaluation of translation. The other approaches to the study of translation which seem to be gaining ground lay greater emphasis on the political dimension of literary translation. The more recent literary theories like New Historicism are interested in reading the contexts of power relations in a literary text. In his critical exposition of New Historicism and Cultural materialism, John Brannigan (1998) states, `New Historicism is a mode of critical interpretation which privileges power relations as the most important context for texts of all kinds. As a critical practice it treats literary texts as a space where power relations are made visible ‘(6). Such a perspective when applied to the texts that communicate across cultures can yield very important insights and open an exciting way of thinking about translation. Tejaswini Niranjana’s book Siting Translation, History, Post-Structuralism, and the Colonial Context (1995) examines translation theories from this perspective. â€Å"In a post-colonial context the problematic of translation becomes a significant site for raising questions of representation, power, and historicity. The context is one of contesting and contested stories attempting to account for, to recount, the asymmetry and inequality of relations between peoples, races, languages. † In translation, the relationship between the two languages is hardly on equal terms. Niranjana draws attention to a rather overlooked fact that translation is between languages, which are hierarchically related, and that it is a mode of representation in another culture. When the relationship between the cultures and languages is that of colonizer and colonized, â€Å"translation†¦ produces strategies of containment. By employing certain modes of representing the other-which it thereby also brings into being–translation reinforces hegemonic versions of the colonized, helping them acquire the status of what Edward Said calls representations or objects without history ‘(p.3). She points out in the introduction that her concern is to probe `the absence, lack, or repression of an awareness of asymmetry and historicity in several kinds of writing on translation’ (p. 9). Harish Trivedi (1997) has demonstrated how translation of Anatole France’s Thais by Premchand was distinctly a political act in the sense that it selected a text which was not part of the literature of the colonial power and that it attempted a sort of liberation of Indian literature from the tutelage of the imperially-inducted master literature, English. St-Pierre observes the fact that translators when faced with references to specific aspects of the source culture may use a variety of tactics, including non-translation, as part of their overall strategy and use many other complex tactics in order to reinvent their relations in a postcolonial context (1997:423). Mahasweta Sengupta has offered a rather engaging and perceptive reading of Rabindranath Tagore’s autotranslation of Gitanjali. She points out giving numerous examples, of how Rabindranath took immense liberties with his own Bengali originals in order to refashion his Bengali songs to suit the English sensibility. He modified, omitted, and rewrote his poems in the manner of the Orientalists to cater to his Western audience (1996). Bassnett and Trivedi (1999) believe that the hierarchic opposition between the original work and translation reflects the hierarchic opposition between the European colonizer culture and the colonized culture. This hierarchy, they observe, is Eurocentric, and its spread is associated with the history of colonialization, imperialism and proselytization. Because of these historical reasons, radical theories of translation have come up in the former colonies. Recalling how members of a sixteenth century Brazilian tribe called Tupinamba ate a Catholic priest, an act which could have even been an act of homage, Bassnett and Trivedi suggest that the metaphor of `cannibalism’ could be used for the act of translation as it is one of the ways former colonies might find a way to assert themselves and their own culture and to reject the feeling of being derivative and appellative `copy’, without at the same time rejecting everything that might be of value that comes from Europe. Else Ribeiro Pires Viera has considered the translation theory of Haroldo de Campos, a renowned Brazilian translator who uses very interesting metaphors for translating like, perceiving translation as blood transfusion and vampirization which actually nourishes the translator and thus subverting the hierarchic polarities of the privileged original and inauthentic translation in a post colonial context. This type of approach to translation promotes the awareness of political and historical field in which translation operates among the readers as well as the translators. Another significant statement on `The Politics of Translation’ comes from Gayatri Chakaravorty Spivak (1998:95-118) who conceives of translation as an important strategy in pursuing the larger feminist agenda of achieving women’s `solidarity’. ` The task of the feminist translator is to consider language as a clue to the working of gendered agency. ‘ Translation can give access to a larger number of feminists working in various languages and cultures. She advises that a translator must `surrender’ to the text, as translation is the most intimate act of reading. It is an act of submission to the rhetorical dimension of the text. This act for Spivak is more of an erotic act than ethical. She also advises that one’s first obligation in understanding solidarity is to learn other women’s mother tongue rather than consider solidarity as an `a priori’ given.

Kenneth Burke’s Dramatism Essay

Life is drama; playing roles in relation to other people. Interest in the interaction of language and action. Symbolic Interactionist—Language is symbolic action. â€Å"Verbal symbols are meaningful acts from which motives can be derived (Griffin, p. 329).† â€Å"Human beings†¦are a symbol-creating, symbol-using, and symbol misusing animal (Littlejohn, 1978, p. 69).† A theory of Motives—why do people act (particularly rhetorically) the way they do? Assess motives. Texts/Speeches created by people to â€Å"DO SOMETHING.† Can be analyzed to determine what it is they are trying to do. Distinguishes human â€Å"Action† from Animal â€Å"Motion† Action Motion Done on purpose;Behaviors that are non- voluntary behavior purposeful/non-meaningful e.g. DramatismïÆ' ª ïÆ' ªAll animals and objects Peoplehave motion ïÆ' ªÃ¯Æ' ª Forms of ThoughtThe study of motion is ïÆ' ªmechanism Understood through motives ïÆ' ª Pentad (tool for understanding motives) Motive: Linguistic Product of Rhetorical Action Created a Grammar of Motives (â€Å"grammar† meaning rules, principles, elements, structure and/or book) Motives are viewed by Burke in terms of internal sources of action; but rather in terms of how language and terms are used to make actions understandable. Guilt as Motive: guilt is an â€Å"all-purpose word for any feeling of tension within a person—anxiety, embarrassment, self-hatred, disgust, etc. (Littlejohn, 1978, p. 70).† We communicate to purge ourselves of guilt. Guilt arises out of language. Three sources of guilt: 1. The Negative: Language allows for rules, morals, etc. that surround us and we can’t escape violating. 2. The Principle of Perfection: Language allows us to â€Å"imagine† the ideal (should). 3. The Principle of Heirarchy: Structure society with competing class and group distinctions We seek redemption (reduce or eliminate guilt) through communication/rhetoric/dramatism 1. Mortification: self-blame 2. Victimage: external enemy is the source 3. Scapegoating: blame other(s) Substance: general nature of a thing Consubstantiation: (shared substance, commonality) Identification: (same as consub) degrees of; conscious or unconscious; 1) material identification—goods, possessions, things 2) idealistic identification—values, ideas, feelings, attitudes 3) formal identification—form or arrangement of act/conventions; roles, customs, etc. Division—differences with others (source of guilt) PENTAD Tool for understanding motives Act SceneAgent Agency Purpose (Hexad: Attitude: delayed or incipient action) Statement of motives will answer: What was done (act), when or where it was done (scene), who did it (agent), how it was done (agency), and why it was done (purpose).