Textes hétérolingues et textes traduits : de « la langue » aux figures de l’énonciation. Pour une littérature comparée différentielle
Literature readily invents itself another tongue. Written simultaneously in several languages, texts said to be “heterolingual” don’t invent another language ; they imagine “language” otherwise. The particularly demanding reading pact they propose entails a veritable experience of difference....
| Summary: | Literature readily invents itself another tongue. Written simultaneously in
several languages, texts said to be “heterolingual” don’t invent another language ; they
imagine “language” otherwise. The particularly demanding reading pact they propose
entails a veritable experience of difference. Balanced at the intersection of idioms, the
subject of the heterolingual enunciation seems never to coincide with himself. When
approached from the perspective of the heterolingual imaginary, the translated text
reveals the presence of an instance of enunciation which is specific to itself. The
notion of ethos can be employed to characterise the one who is responsable for the
heterolingual text as the responsable for the translated text, by the manner in which
languages are placed into relation to one another. Between the respect for “the other
as other” and an ethnocentric attitude, it is necessary to envision a whole range of
relations to alterity. In the context of the debate on national identity and the claim to
cultural diversities, it seems imperative to recall the critical function of literature and
comparatist methodology. The future of comparative literature as a discipline is not all
that is at stake : there is the matter of ethical vigilance which far exceeds the framing
of Nation-States. The analysis is founded on four source texts and their French,
English, German and Spanish translations : The Voice by Gabriel Okara, Sozaboy by
Ken Saro-Wiwa, Juan sin Tierra by Juan Goytisolo and Die Niemandsrose by Paul Celan. |
|---|