Translation issues in Jacques Derrida's deconstruction program
One of the most authoritative thinkers of the past 20th century nowadays is Jacques Derrida, whose program of deconstruction both largely determined the main directions of the world philosophical thought in the second half of the century and set major methodological attitudes and approaches in the field of contemporary humanities. In particular, the question of the translation issues role and place in Derrida's deconstruction program is of special interest and its investigation is the aim of this research. Its scientific novelty is determined by the fact that Derrida's translation philosophy extremely rarely acts as a special analysis subject. In his Letter to a Japanese Friend the French philosopher directly links his ideas of deconstruc-tion to the translation issues. Hence an intense translation reflection constantly accompanies the very translated versions of the French scientist's works into other languages. The book Jacques Derrida in Moscow: The Deconstruction of a Travel dedicated to the first visit of the philosopher to Russia is fundamental in this sense. It offers translation issues of Derrida's own works as an unusual gesture of representing the translated version of his new work Back from Moscow, in the USSR made by M. Ryk-lin as an original one (with a demonstrative English title). This author's gesture of Derrida is determined by principles of his philosophical program of logocentrism deconstruction. His translation conception is focused on the deconstruction of the traditional translation theory bases. Particularly, he considers its traditional "original text - translated version" opposition to be a typical "logocentrism" manifestation, which pretends to claim the "original one" to be the "center" and the "translation" to be nothing more than a periphery. But Derrida especially appreciates the translation and the possible translation multiplicity since he regards it as a manifestation of infinite possibilities and productivity of "writing". His reflections on translation issues are based on the biblical myth of the Babeldom, which he appeals to in a number of his works. Thus in his work The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond the philosopher dwells on the Babylon myth in the reflections on the fate of the name of God Himself after the confusion, which is exactly translation issues. Des tours de Babel (1985), or Around the Towers of Babel is the key Derrida's work on translation issues. The work is arranged as a dialogue with both R. Jakobson's article "On Linguistic Aspects of Translation" and W. Benjamin's essay "The Task of a Translator". Derrida represents Jacobson as a representative of the "classical" translation theory, which Derrida seeks to deconstruct. The initial closeness of Derrida's and Benjamin's positions is that the latter also rejects the traditional translation theory. He estimates the values of an original text and its translation(s) as equal and believes translations to be the zenith of an original text, interpreting both the original and translations in their historical and cultural unity. Partly borrowing these Benjamin's propositions, Derrida raises translation issues to a new level and interprets them in the light of the Babylon issue of God who confused the languages of the earthly people. Derrida's Around the Towers of Babel turns the issue of God as a supreme translation authority into the question of the Scripture sacred texts translation. As M. de Gandillac did earlier, Derrida asserts: "The intralinear version of the sacred text would be the model or ideal of any possible translation in general".
Keywords
теория перевода, философия XX в, Жак Деррида, Вальтер Бенья-мин, Роман Якобсон, translation theory, philosophy of 20th century, Jacques Derrida, Walter Benjamin, Roman JakobsonAuthors
Name | Organization | |
Novikova Elena G. | Tomsk State University | elennov@mail.ru |
References

Translation issues in Jacques Derrida's deconstruction program | Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya – Tomsk State University Journal of Philology. 2015. № 3 (35).