2014, Vol.7, No.2

탈경계인문학Trans-Humanities 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.57

pISSN : 2092-6081 / eISSN : 2383-9899
https://journal.kci.go.kr/eih

Lee Gwang-Su and Yang Geon-Sik were the first to suggest the terminology of translated literature as a historical concept in Korea. Lee and Yang shared a modern notion of literature as introduced through Japan, and by grasping Chinese letters and Chinese literature as the other, they started to perceive the identity of the native language (national language) and native literature (national literature) in the context of literary history. Yang in particular perceived Chinese literature as foreign literature, and clearly showed a sense of identity in contributing to the establishment and development of modern native literature through translation. Yang Geon-Sik was the first professional translator of Chinese literature, and was the largest translating agent in the colonial period. He translated colloquial Chinese literature (báihuà wénxué) and the theory of literary revolution through double translations (second-hand translations) from Japanese, and changed the perception of Chinese literature into a modern one. Yang Geon-Sik was able to comprehend Chinese literature within the context of world literature by moving in and out of Western literature and Chinese literature, between classic and modern literature, and double translation (secondhand translation) and direct translation. By examining the beginnings of translated literature in Korea, the practicality of double translations (secondhand translations) and the historicity of world literature in East Asia can be re-evaluated.

This essay tries to reflect the ethics and politics of translation and then invites readers to rethink the process of world literature translation here in Korea. Briefly tracing the studies of Kim Byungchul who wrote the translation history of world literature in Korea from 1895 to the early 1980s, this essay invites readers to remap the arena of literary translation as the space of cultural acculturation. In the process, this essay questions the notions of cultural translation not as a all-purpose tool but as the practice of contacting otherness and difference of cultures. What does the phenomenon of translating world literature here in Korea imply especially in the process of constructing modern Korea and its national identity? What are the roles and ethics of literary translation? How can translators get over the cultural partiality that is deeply colligated in the field of translation? With the various questions embedded in publishing collected works of world literature, this essay problematizes the politics of translation and explores the possibility of rebuilding the cultural contact zone through literature translation where foreignness is cordially invited to the making of cultural identity. While the earlier translations of world literature focused on the acceptance of Western modernity, today’s translation of world literature might be meaningful as the active site of transforming our culture and identity.

The method of translation does not guarantee a plurality of possibilities. Both in East and West, the ways of translating are being discussed within the framework of dichotomy. The dichotomy between those who argue that you should translate the letter just as it is, and those who claim you should make the author’s message easy to read, has haunted every major moment of translation’s history, and it kept giving rise to controversies. Literary text is what makes most obvious the inability of these two aspects held as representative translation methods because a translation can only succeed through the process of translating the literary elements of a literary text, in other words, what turns a text into “literature.” Special configuration of sentences, a style that reflects the artist’s personality, and the use of specialized vocabulary, all these factors we often refer to as “literarity” (Jakobson) are the core upon which translators need to stay focused in their work of translating. What needs to be translated is the unique path the text draws, which corresponds to “the maximum value of subjectivity”(Meschonnic) in the text. The task of the translator is precisely the process of transforming this unique organization of the text into other languages, and to capture what occurs throughout this process. The uniqueness of literary translation is to make the reader feel he is reading a translated text through the translation of the author’s unique style. Literary translation is bound to cooperate with the process of criticism that assesses the particularities of the text. Literary criticism and literary translation work together inextricably.