Translation is a complex process and exact translation is impossible as sameness

cannot exist between two languages. Edward Sapir states that each language represents a
separate reality. So, in the process of interlingual translation, meaning can be lost. In the field
of literary translation, more problems are faced in the translation of poetry than any other
literary mode. While translating poetry, meaning is often lost because of the problems of
equivalence and untranslatability. Diversity of images, metaphors and idioms are used in
poetry and the translator has to reproduce them in the Target language, which is a toilsome
work. Evaluating a translated poetry is also toilsome as translating a poetry. Jibanananda Das
ÒAvU eQi Av‡Mi GKw`bÓ deals with the suicide of a man and the poet tries to find out the
reasons behind it. This poem has beautiful poetic words and images. Clinton B. Seely tries his
best to translate this poem and its peotic words and images. But in some it is difficult to
create an equivalence. Seely has used "word for word" method in translation. Though
meaning is not lost, he fails to create the accurate effect of the poetry.

In the translation of Clinton B. Seely, the original title ÒAvU eQi Av‡Mi GKw`bÓ is
translated as "A Day Eight Years Ago". Here, the translation has used word for word
technique but the original sense is retained. The original poem has twelve stanzas in total and
the translated poem also has the same number of stanzas. The pattern and the meter of the
original are not maintained in the translated poem. Even the punctuation marks of the original
are not maintained in the translation. In many places, the rigidity of lines is not maintained
too.

The very first stanza is translated by word for word method but the sense is retained.
The first two lines, Ò‡kvbv †Mj jvkKvUv N‡i/wb‡q †M‡Q Zv‡i;Ó are translated as "It was
heard/They took him to the morgue" which retains the meaning. The third line ÒKvj iv‡Z
dvêy‡bi iv‡Zi Auvav‡iÓ is translated as "Last night in the February dark." "Spring" or "Fall"
may have been more convincing here than "February". In the forth line, the original poem's
ÒcÂgxi Puv`Ó is translated by Seely as "the crescent moon, five days toward full". Tytler
suggests that a translator's duty is to clarify obscurities in the original, even where this entails
omission or addition. Here, the translator has used seven words to translate the original two
words but by doing so, he has not maintained fidelity but has clarified the meaning. The last
line Ògwievi nÕ‡jv Zvi mva;Ó is beautifully translated as "He'd had the urge to die." and by
doing so the sense of this stanza is well retained. Though the structures of the lines are not
well maintained.

The second stanza is also translated with the help of word for word method and in
some lines, the sense of the original is lost. In some cases, it sounds "uncouth" as Cicero has
stated and Horace has denounced these translators as "slavish translator" who translate word
for word and prevent themselves from extricating their ownselves. The first line of the
translated poem is "A wife had laid beside him- a child, too". If the translator had used "the
wife" and "the child" then it would have been better. The original poem's Ò‡R¨vr¯œvq- Zey
†m †`wLj/‡Kvb f‚Z?Ó is translated as "Then what ghost did he see?" which shows the
freedom that the translator has taken. In the forth line, ÒA_ev nqwb Nyg eûKwjÓ is
translated as "Or may be he hadn't slept for days" But "years" than "days" would have been
better for the sense. In that same line, the original poet has used 'euphemism' to state the
death of the man in an agreeble way, ÒjvkKvUv N‡i ï‡q Nygvq GeviÓ. And this line is
translated as "Now, lying in the morgue, he sleeps.", which maintains the sense of the
original. In the sixth line a death "metaphor", "plague rat" is used in the translation. The last
three lines of the second stanza are translated by sense for sense technique. And the last line,
"Never again will he wake" is poetically translated by using a poetic device, "inversion".

The third stanza is a beautiful, poetical piece of art. The first four lines are translated
poetically by Seely but there remains some questions of fidelity. Ò‡Kvbw`b RvwM‡e bv
Avi/Rvwbevi Mvp †e`bvi/Aweivg-Aweivg fvi/mwn‡e bv Avi-Ó, these lines are translated as
"Never again will you wake/Never again will you know/The unremitting, unrelenting
grievous/pain of waking. "In the first two lines "he" rather than "you" would have been better
for the sense. In the third line, Jibanananda Das has used "palilogy", ÒAweivg-Aweivg fviÓ
for the sake of emphasis. But in the translation fidelity is not maintained as Seely has
translated it as "The unremitting, unrelenting grievous". The effect of the original is lost here,
as the emphasis is not done. The last four lines are done by word for word method and thus
loses the poetic beauty of the original. In the original poem, a "simile", ÒD‡Ui MÖxevi gZÓ
is used in the last line, but Seely has put it in the fifth line and made the simile a "metaphor",
"its camel's neck". In this case, Seely has translated the "Simile" word for word and made it
sound "uncouth".
 The forth stanza starts with ÒZeyI †Zv †cuPv Rv‡MÓ and is translated as "But the
owl is awake. "Still the owl awakes" sounds better and retains the sense than that of Seelys.
The next and last two lines are translated by word for word technique which loses the poetic
beauty but the sense is somehow retained.

The fifth stanza is done by both word for word and sense for sense technique. In the
original, Jibanananda Das has used the rhetorical device '' transfer epithet '' in the second line,
Ò Pviw`‡K gkvwii ÿgvnxb weiæ×ZvÓ. It is translated well but the translator has used an
unnecessary word`` my'' as he states '' my mosquito net''. the last line is translated by sense
for sense method and thus maintains the sense.

The sixth stanza is also done by word for word method. In the second line,
Jibanananda Das has used '' personification'', ''Nwbó AvKvk , and it is translated as ''An
intimate sky'' which maintains the effect created by the original . In the eighth line , there is
used a word. ÒAk¦ÌÕÕ which cannot be translated and thus question of untranslatability
arises. Here, the translator leaves the word as it is as '' ashvatha'' and introduces something
new in the target language. So, ''foreignization'' technique is used here. The last lines Ò †h
Rxeb dwo‡Oi, †`v‡q‡ji gvby‡li mv‡_ Zvi nqbv‡Kv †`Lv/ GB †R‡b|ÕÕare translated as ''
knowing that the grasshopper's life , or the dowel birds never meets with / that of man. '' This
is a work of a ''slavish translator'' as Horace has stated. Here, Seely has translated word for
word and thus the sense is totally lost. The tusk of translator is ''Judicious interaction'' of the
source writing but by remaining too fidel, Seely doesnot justify .the tusk of the translator.

The seventh stanza begins with the use of ''pathetic fallacy''. Ò Ak¦‡Ìi kvLv K‡iwb
wK cÖwZev`ÕÕ. and it is translated as '' the ashvattha limb, /Did it not protest?''. The
translator has taken freedom and not maintained fidelity here as rigidity of line is not
maintained. Seely has made the original's one line into two lines.'' Foreingnization'' technique
is used here too for the word ÒAk¦ÌÕÕ. Ò†RvbvwKi wfo G‡m †mvbvwj dz‡ji
w¯œ»/Suv‡K/K‡iwb wK gvLvgvwL?ÕÕ there lines are translated as '' Did not the fireflies
in a cordial throng/ Appear before you? '' Here, Seely has omitted the phrase Ò †mvbvwj
dz‡ji w¯œ» Svu‡KÕÕ which is wrong as Levy, the great Czech translation scholar insists
that any contracting or omitting of difficult expressions in translating is '' immoral''.
Ò‡mvbvwj dz‡ji w¯œ» Svu‡KÕÕcan be translated as ''the flock of charming, golden
fireflies''. By omitting this phrase, the sense is lost. In the fifth line another '' pathetic
phallicy'' is used, Ò eywo Puv` ‡M‡Q eywS †e‡bvR‡j †f‡m?ÕÕ which is translated as ''old
lady moon has sunk in the flood, has she?''. In the last line of the seventh stanza, Seely has
used a special vocabulary '' raucous'' but Matthew Arnold has stated that there is no need of
using special or archaic vocabulary or language in translation.

The eighth stanza is a beautiful, poetic piece of art and Seely has translated this stanza
poetically by maintaining the sense of the poem. This stanza is done by both word for word
and sense for sense technique. theis rigidity of lines is also maintained in this stanza unlike
some other stanzas. the first two lines,Ò Rxe‡bi GB ¯^v` -myevm h‡ei NªvY †ng‡šÍi
we‡K‡ji -/‡Zvgvi Amn¨ †eva n‡jv; '' are translated as '' this taste of life -the scent of ripe
grains in an autumn afternoon-/You could not tolerate. ''which maintains the sense of the
original. The last three lines are also translated beautifully and successful at maintaining the
sense. This three lines are done rather by sense for sense techniques.

The ninth stanza starts with Ò‡kv‡bvÕÕ, which is translated to ''listen''. this stanza is
done by word for word techinque. In the seventh line, the original poet has used ''aliteration'',
gay -Avi gb‡bi gayÕÕ which is translated as And honey. The mind's honey'', which is the
outcome of word for word translation. Here, the sense is tatally lost and the effect of
''aliteration'' is lost too. Òmg‡qi DØZ©‡b D‡V G‡m ea~ /gay -Avi gb‡bi gay/ w`‡q‡Q
Rvwb‡Z;ÕÕ. There lines are translated as ''From time's churnings emerged a wife/And
honey, the mind's honey /she let him know''. Here, the translator has made it more obscure
and meaning is lost. However, the last five lines in the translation, have retained the sense
well.

The tenth stanza starts with Ò Rvwb-Zey Rvwb ÕÕ, which is translated ''I know, yet I
know,''. In the second line, the translated has used unnecessary article ''a'' in ''A woman's
heart'', ''a child'', '' a home''. The third line is Ò A_© bq, KxwZ© bq, ¯^”QjZv bq-ÕÕis
translated to "Not wealth nor fame nor creature comforts-''. Here, Seely has unnecessarily
added '' creature'' in that line. Dr. Jhonson in his Life of Pope discusses the question of
additions to a text through translation. He comments that if elegance is gained, surely it is
desirable, provided nothing is taken away. But here elegance is not gained with the addition
of the word ''creature''. In the eighth line of the original, Jibananada Das has used both
''alliterating '' and ''palilogy''. ÒK¬všÍ-K¬všÍ K‡iÕÕ but Seely has translated it to ''Fatigue,
exhausts us'' Here, fidelity is not maintained. With the use of ''palilogy'', ÒK¬všÍÕÕis used
twice for the emphasis but in the translation , the emphasis is not maintained . And thus, the
sense is lost a bit. The effect of ''aliteration'' in the original, is also missing in the translating.

The eleventh stanza starts with ÒZey †ivR iv‡Z Avwg †P‡q †`wL, Avnv,Ó which is
translated to '' But every night I look and sea, yes,''. The equivalence of ÒAvnvÕÕ is difficult
to find and ''Yes'' does not do justice fully with the sense of it. It would have been better if
the translator had let ÒAvnvÕÕ be as it is and translated it as '' aha''. In the second line ,
again there is a reference of ÒAk¦ÌÕÕ, which is translated to ''ashvattha'' using the technique
of ''foreignization''. The opening of the third line is gendered biased with is part of politics in
translation as stated by Gayatri Spivak. Spivak sees '' language as a clue to the working of
gendered agency'' as she thinks a feminist translator should only think about the ''working of
gendered agency''. The originals Ò †PvL cvëv‡q KqÕÕ is translated as '' Blink her eyes and
say''. Bangla language is not gendered biased in this case but English language is.

The twelfth and the last stanza is also done by word for word method but the sense is
retained. Ò†n cÖMvp wcZvgnxÕÕ is translated as '' oh profound grandmother'' . In the
second line ÒKvjx‡`‡nÕÕ is translated as '' whirlpool'' which retains the sense of confusion
and terror. The last line, Ò Avgiv `yÕR‡b wg‡j k~b¨ K‡i P‡j hv‡ev Rxe‡bi cÖPzi fvovi|ÕÕ
is translated as ''Then we two together shall empty life's full store''. The translated line does
not convey the meaning properly. There is no mention of Ò P‡j hv‡evÕÕ in the translation
which is '' immoral '' according to Czech scholar Levy. The last line can be translated as '' we
two together will leave the world by emptying life's full store'', which conveys the meaning of
the original.

In the end, it can be said that Seely has used word for word translation with is
''Metaphrase'' according to Dryden. Dryden also states that a translator should be line a ''
painter'', His translation should resemble the original. Here, Seely has acted like a ''painter''
and his translate poem resembles the original poem of Jibananada Das. This translation can
be called a success as it has maintained the '' fire'' of the original poem according to
Alexander Pope. Poetry translation is a toilsome tusk but Seely has reached in the level of
''silence." ''Silence'' is the ''spicy emptiness'' between ''logic'' and rhetoric'' where according to
spivak, the meaning can be found. Seely's translation has also reached Steiner's last stage o
translation, ''restitution''. With the help of the translation, the original poem has become
''autonomously virtuous''. Fidelity is not fully maintained as the translator has taken freedom
n many cases. Seely has tried his best to reproduce the sense, images, and rhetoric of the
original poem but has failed in some cases, But the'' invariant core'' of the original poem as
Popovic calls it, is well retained in the translated poem.