THE correct Urdu translation of the term ‘sociology’ is nothing but sociology. Similarly, the correct Urdu translation of the term ‘anthropology’ is anthropology.
This I have quoted from Prof Ralph Russell’s autobiographical writing published in the Urdu section of the latest issue of Urdu Studies, which I have already talked about in my previous column. Prof Russell is now engaged in writing his autobiography, which is being serialised in Urdu Studies. Perhaps, it is on his insistence that it is being reproduced in its Urdu original. And perhaps it is because of such compulsions that this English journal has thought it fit to reserve one section of its contents for Urdu writings.
Prof Russell has, in the present instalment, discussed briefly the situation of Urdu in India and in Pakistan. The observations recorded by a foreign scholar who has objectively studied the linguistic situation in the subcontinent are worth noticing. In the case of Pakistan, his view is that as Urdu has been declared the national language of the country, subsequent governments in Pakistan have felt obliged to offer some kind of patronage to it. Muqtadira-i-Qaumi Zaban is, according to him, the typical example of this half-hearted patronage.
Here, he takes a pause and seems intrigued by the queer coinage Muqtadira, which is meant to be the translation of authority. And he asks if this is the kind of Urdu this institution or the rulers of Pakistan intend to introduce in the country. His suspicions appear confirmed from the kind of translations of English terms Muqtadira’s English-Urdu dictionary offers to us. As an instance, he picks out from this dictionary two terms sociology and anthropology, which have been translated as Imraniyat and Bashariyat. These English terms have, in his opinion, already gained currency in Urdu. Why should they be translated in such Persianized and Arabianized terms which lack the quality to gain currency in Urdu. Such attempts, he observes, are not simply ridiculous but also harmful for Urdu.
Prof Russell has traced this bad practice of unfamiliar translations to Dar-ut-tarjuma of the Osmania University of Hyderabad (Deccan). That body held, according to him, the view that Urdu must not embrace words of foreign origin other than those coming from Persian and Arabic. This led to the kind of translations which were replete with odd and unfamiliar expressions and, in many cases, were unintelligible. Far from being taken seriously, these translations provided room for amusement.
Prof Russell has very correctly diagnosed what has gone wrong with our practice of translations. But I doubt if his diagnosis will make any difference. Urdu translators, in general, with a few exceptions, are directly or indirectly under the influence of what Dar-ut-tarjuma has offered to us.
The other piece of writing which attracted my attention is a column by Ahmed Bashir. Urdu Studies has rightly selected this column to include it in its Urdu section as it speaks of a significant linguistic development in Pakistan under the stress of prevalent fundamentalistic thinking. It is about the rapid transformation of Khuda Hafiz into Allah Hafiz for no apparent reason.
The columnist finds every Pakistani he comes across saying Allah Hafiz instead of Khuda Hafiz, which till yesterday was in common use. And he is left wondering if it is indicative of an anti-Iranian trend or is expressive of anti-Persian attitude, or has something to do with a hostility to Urdu’s idiomatic expression. It may be a mix of all these trends, and yet it is more than that.
In his time, Maulana Ghulam Ahmad Pervaiz was very fond of using the term Ajamiyat in a derogatory way. In his hands, this term came to mean something anti-Islamic, a term indicative of Iranian influence under which Islamic concepts lost their purity. It gave birth to a rejectionist attitude towards Persian terms for Islamic concepts and rituals. In Ziaul Haq’s time, this trend won official approval. In fact, it was during this period that the idiomatic expression Khuda Hafiz underwent an amendment. Khuda was replaced by Allah. Recently, a Maulvi talking in a TV programme was heard saying that the true Islamic concept of one God is couched in the name of Allah, not in Khuda. But Ahmad Bashir tells us in his column that the term Allah has its origins in the pre-Islamic linguistic tradition of Arabic. Its root is Ilah.
As for Khuda, this sacred name has undergone a long process at the hands of Muslim poets, thinkers and religious scholars, assimilating the devotional feelings and thoughts we associate with Allah. It has gained a status equivalent to that of Allah, finding the same position in Muslim thought and the collective imagination of Muslim people.
THE correct Urdu translation of the term ‘sociology’ is nothing but sociology. Similarly, the correct Urdu translation of the term ‘anthropology’ is anthropology.
