Ka unuhi a me ka ho‘okē: A Critique of Translation in a Language Revitalization Context

Abstract

In 2002, an agreement was reached with the Honolulu StarBulletin, one of two daily newspapers published in Honolulu at the time (The two have since merged to become the Honolulu StarAdvertiser.), which provided for the weekly publication of a column written in the Hawaiian language. There was only one stipulation: a short “synopsis” written in English would accompany each article. It was also agreed, after lengthy negotiations, that outside of this synopsis, no translation would be provided to the general public. The column, entitled Kauakūkalahale, is still running today, although the initial no-translation agreement has recently been renegotiated.

This chapter deals with the theoretical, political, and educational issues that underpin the decision not to provide English translations to the public, despite numerous requests. In particular, and in spite of wider pedestrian beliefs to the contrary, it is argued that translation is counterproductive to the goals of language revitalization and, if provided, would effectively support the continued subordination of Hawaiian to English. The fact that English dominates the linguistic interactions of the inhabitants of Hawaiʻi, as well as Hawaiʻi’s linguistic landscape (This term refers to the “visibility and salience of languages on public and commercial signs in a given territory or region” (Landry and Bourhis 1997, p 23)), and that the subconscious inclination of second language learners is to understand the world in terms of a habitual linguistic template provided by English (Benjamin Lee Whorf recognized the existence of “habitual everyday concepts wherein speakers take (i.e., appropriate) language patterns as guides to the nature of reality.” See Lucy 1992, p 46.), suggests that the revitalization of Hawaiian is heavily dependent on a continued connection to English. Grammatical structures and the lexical corpus have been deeply infiltrated as well, albeit with minimal resistance, and the ongoing conflation of the two languages with respect to worldview, even if it rises to the level of consciousness, goes largely unaddressed. The authors feel that translation supports the continued domination of English and hampers the efforts to retain the independence and uniqueness of Hawaiian linguistic expression.

This title is borrowed from an early Kauakūkalahale article in which a case was made in opposition to the translation of traditional Hawaiian language publications into English (Wong 2003). The Hawaiian phrase reflects that position.