The Linguist

26 The Linguist Vol/62 No/3 thelinguist.uberflip.com FEATURES Adnan K Abdulla considers the transformative Translation Movement and one of its most disastrous legacies: the Arabic translation of Aristotle's Poetics I n the annals of translation history, a single event, known as the Translation Movement, stands out. It lasted 350 years (800-1150 CE), and its centre was Baghdad, the newly built capital of the Abbasid Dynasty (750-1258 CE). It has been hailed as "an astounding achievement" 1 and an unprecedented process of cultural transmission and transformation. This movement involved many segments of society, including rulers, courtiers, copyists, intellectuals and translators. It covered every subject studied at the time: astronomy, medicine, philosophy, ophthalmology, magic, mathematics, pharmacology, oneiromancy, agriculture, religion, cooking and sex. Working from three languages – Greek, Persian and Sanskrit – the translators were mostly non- Arabs (Persians) and non-Muslims (Syriacs). Two of the earliest disciplines that attracted the attention of the rulers were astrology and philosophy. Astrology was an important pursuit for Persian royalty because it enabled the emperors to affirm that their rule was determined not by people but by the celestial bodies: they were chosen by the stars. No wonder this appealed to the Abbasids, whose power was challenged by many factions. The interest in translating philosophy was different. It was born out of pure curiosity, as the rulers wanted to acquaint themselves with the wisdom of the great Greek philosophers whose civilisation was so famous. Later, it was encouraged by an interest in argumentation and dialectic, which became the tools for refuting opposing religious ideas from Manichaeans, Christians and Jews. Aristotle's Poetics was a key work in this endeavour. It was translated from Syriac in 932 CE by Bishr ibn Matta, also known as Matthew. A Syriac scholar of considerable fame, he was considered an outsider by his contemporaries, as he was neither an Arab nor a Muslim, and was often ridiculed for his poor knowledge of Arabic language and literature. Judging by his debate with the grammarian Abu Said Al-Sirafi (d.978 CE), Matthew was a formidable character who was feared by other intellectuals and did not shy away from challenging the accepted views of the establishment. Contemporary critics did not think highly of his translations and this assessment has not changed in modern times. Today, the translations are described as obscure, difficult and meaningless 2 – the same accusations levelled at him by his rivals. Aristotle's Poetics Nevertheless, after more than a thousand years – with all the changes in style and sensibility time brings – the translation is surprisingly easy to understand for modern readers, albeit with some rough edges (including grammatical errors and a lack of knowledge of literary terms). The major problem facing the translator was the genre: Arabs had not had a theatre, they had not heard of actors, plays, a chorus and all the related elements that Aristotle draws on. Matthew's knowledge of Greek and Arabic literature was deficient. He was a logician, not a literary critic. He translated the pivotal terms 'comedy' and 'tragedy' as 'poetry of praise' and 'poetry of blame' respectively, unleashing a misunderstanding that continued for a millennium. The Arabs were baffled by the treatment of tragedy and the terms associated with it, such as 'theatre' (translated by Matthew as 'tent' or 'house'), 'actors' (which he rendered as 'hypocrites'/'double- faced') and 'chorus' (which became 'a group of singers and dancers'). Perhaps the Arabs came to the conclusion that neither the book nor its subject matter was worth the trouble of another translation. There were, of course, other factors that contributed to the failure of that translation. It is marred by a literal approach, with Matthew imposing either a Syriac or Greek sentence structure on the Arabic. Its sentences are so disjointed that the greatest Arab philosophers of the era, including al-Kindi (d.873 CE), Al- Farabi (d.950 CE) and Averroes (d.1198 CE), struggled with it. They tried to understand it by commenting on it and making summaries or abridgements, all to no avail. In 1174, Averroes wrote an abridgement that reduced the 27 chapters to 7. A short story by the 20th-century writer Jorge Luis Borges discusses Averroes' dilemma when translating 'tragedy' and 'comedy' into Arabic due to the legacy of Matthew's confusion around these terms. One of the consequences of his poor translation is that the Arabs did not comprehend the Poetics and did not seek to have plays performed or theatres built. Instead of building bridges between two cultures, the translation obscured Aristotle and rendered him incomprehensible. The Age of Translation

• Cover