Translation & Interpretation. One valuable lesson in semiotic epistemology is that words have meaning only in historical context

Transcription

1 Translation & Interpretation One valuable lesson in semiotic epistemology is that words have meaning only in historical context

2 Mahmoud Ahmadinejad s Talk at Columbia University The President of Iran was given the opportunity to speak to faculty and students at Columbia University His speech was in Farsi, the main language of Iran. A translator did simultaneous translation.

3 Simultaneous Translation versus Serious, Thoughtful Translation Anyone who knows more than one language knows that simultaneous translation is a rough and ready translation and does not necessarily get at the contexual nuances of what is said. President Ahmadinejad s comments were interpreted in ways he probably did not fully intend them to be viewed.

4 Columbia University: & True Scholarly Interpretation? When a world leader speaks to the general public it is possible to accept the fact that there will be misunderstandings. News media frequently distort the message through short news clips of major speeches. But when the President of an important country speaks at an Ivy League university it is not unreasonable to expect that many people would understand the basic idea that a simultaneous translation should not be understood as informal, familiar, colloquial American English. It would always be great if a speaker spoke the native language of the people to whom s/he is speaking, but we cannot expect all world leaders (and scholars) to speak everyday American or Canadian English (or French!).

5 Examples of Mis-communication (due to Bad Translation) Abound! You do not have to accept Peirce s semiotics to understand that signs are often misread. Often the misreading is based on a purposeful sophistry and rhetoric. But even when it would be in everyone s best interest to really understand there is much room for misunderstanding. In World War II the Japanese government sent a message to the United States government leaders saying they needed just a bit more time to make the final decision to surrender; but, the translation was incorrect and Americans assumed that the Japanese were merely stalling for time. This resulted in the deaths of thousands of people, Japanese and American.

6 Propaganda?

7 Does Iran have homosexuality? What does the term mean in Iran? The term homosexual was invented in c and went with another term, newly invented, heterosexual. Both were contrasted with married. Both were considered to be examples of sexual intercourse outside of marriage. Over time the terms have changed their meanings in ordinary English.Today we even refer to married people who are male and female biologically as having heterosexual sex. No one has asked what the Farsi term that the President of Iran was using is. No one seems to have stopped to think that he was using a cultural concept that needs to be understood contextually. We can oppose the idea that in Iran there is not much recognition of the current notion of homosexuality and that there is no gay movement; but, we should do so on the basis of a full comprehension and not on the basis of mis-understanding.

8 Freedom? Rhetoric? Honest Attempts to Get at the Truth?

9 Misquotes versus Valid Hermeneutic Rules Anyone who has ever been interviewed by the mass media knows that the reporters often misunderstand and misquote. Nothing that is stated in the popular media is true scholarship; it is by definition a popularization. There are many ways of doing interpretation. Those different approaches to interpretation are called different hermeneutics. But there are also some general principles of hermeneutics that always apply in every case. Always go back to the original! Do not rely on secondary or tertiary sources!

10 Be Wary of Stereotypes: e.g. Orientalism(s)

11 Basic General Hermeneutic Rules Always go back to the original text and the absolute best translation. Stay as close to the culturally-specific meaning as you can. The ideal is to read the text in the original language. It is also idea to have a detailed sociological understanding of the cultural context of the speaker Historical specificity in time and space (t-1 & s-1) is a must if we are ever going to understand another society and its cultural context. That does not necessarily imply complete cultural relativity (in the strong sense). It also does not mean complete absence of humor.

12 Be Specific in Making any Generalizations: The Concrete Reality is Complex: Where? Who? How? e.g. China or Zambia

13 What is your REAL Goal? If your goal is sophistry, rhetoric and winning debating points in a cynical manner then by all means distort what the other person is saying and use mass media propaganda. Why be honest, right? Why use humor?

14 If your goal is scholarship and science then be honest! For example, Jane Addams accomplished a great deal in helping immigrants to Chicago by presenting an honest picture of what was happening in the 1890s and early 1900s in that city.

15 There are demagogues; Part of a university education is to be able to recognize them in all their guises!

16 But do not automatically fall prey to propaganda and obvious exaggerations meant to bias you E.g. Fake cover of National Geographic

17 Freedom of Speech and Norms of Civility The President of Columbia University felt he had to make remarks about President Ahmadinejad before letting the President of Iran speak at the University. Do you agree with that tactic? Was it polite? Insulting? What if it had been the P.M. of Canada? What if the President of Columbia had studied Islamic religion and Arabic? What would it be like if the President of Columbia were to introduce President George W. Bush in the same way as he introduced the President of Iran? Would the mass media take the same approach? Does Bush always say what he means? Does the Republican Party actively support gay rights in the U.S.?

18 Is it possible that neither President is well versed in sociological theory and that neither is acting as a scholar or scientist?

19 A Semiotic Approach to Truth (Epistemology) Many Positive Sociological Theorists and Methodologists still take a Cartesian dualist approach to epistemology. They believe that it is enough to think in terms of subject and object (e.g. Galileo looking at the moon) But a Semiotic Approach, following C. S. Peirce, helps us to see that we have to always remember the importance of signs Between the subject and the object is the sign (icon, index, symbol)!

20 C. S. Peirce s Semiotics Peirce s Epistemology Signs (tt) Interpretants (tt) Representants (tt) Bakker s Semiotics is a simplification for sociological purposes Signs (tt) Interpretive Networks (tt) Operationalized Representations (tt) IN-S-OR Model

21 Interpretation of Signs in Society or Nature Requires Being a Member of Interpretive Networks (INs): Otherwise You are Likely to Misunderstand Subtle Points and Nuances

22 Do you get the joke? Humor depends on good hermeneutics and semiotics!

23 World Leaders Need to Understand One Another as Well as We Understand Jokes!