Upon reviewing the English translation of the first page from Hikayat Faqir, which is the only page that has translation, it becomes clear that the translation struggles to capture the rich nuances and depth of the original Malay text. The hurried translation process has resulted in the omission of important textual subtleties that are vital to fully appreciating the Malay narrative.

From the get-go, the translation seems to strip the text of its natural rhythm and poetic repetition, features that embellish the original Malay script. Elements such as the rhythmic and repetitive phrases, like ‘dan lagi’, which accentuate the aspects or events narrated, are sadly lost in translation. The English version opts for simplified phrases that fail to convey the original text’s poetic essence.

Furthermore, the English version suffers from potential misinterpretations of certain words, which while not incorrect, do not encapsulate the deeper essence of the original phrases. For instance, ‘masyhur’ suggests being renowned, a notion that extends beyond just being famous. The word ‘murah’ embodies generosity or kind-heartedness, not simply being liberal. Moreover, descriptions of festivities are translated quite literally, failing to vividly convey the joyous celebrations portrayed in the Malay narrative.

Notably, the translation overlooks a crucial sub-clause that illustrates the actions of the faqir, specifically whils he ‘datang duduk minum kanjah’ or ‘came to sit and drink kanjah’. Although the translator noted the English equivalent, ganjah, in the manuscript margin, it lacks contextual explanation, leaving a gap in the narrative and raising questions about ganjah’s role and significance in the story. This missing detail might have offered a deeper insight in the faqir’s character or a significant cultural aspect, thus adding to the storyline.

And evident flaw is the omission of the recurring preposition/adverb/conjunction ‘hatta’, which in the Malay text serves to connect sentences and events, fostering a seamless and interconnected narrative. Its absence in the translation results in a fragmented text, devoid of the smooth flow and cohesive progression seen in the original.

This discrepancy is not just a result of linguistic barriers but is also deeply rooted in the socio-historical circumstances of the British colonial era during which it was acquired. The manuscript, housed in the British Library, reflects a time of territorial and cultural conquests, acquired by the Scottish poet and scholar John Leyden around 1811. Leyden, profoundly interested in Oriental languages, fostered a strong alliance with Thomas Stamford Raffles during his time in Penang between 1805 and 1806. This collaboration facilitated the creation of a significant collection of Malay manuscripts, mirroring the power dynamics of that time.

Examining this manuscript reveals the tumultuous zeitgeist of its creation period. Its rushed translation mirrors the colonial setting, offering just a superficial glimpse into the Malay narrative. This approach hints at a lack of genuine engagement and respect for the native literature and culture, reminiscent of the colonial era’s sentiment.

Thus, when scrutinizing the English translation against this larger backdrop, the faults cannot be separated from the broader implication of British colonialism, which is marred by power imbalances and cultural negligence, palpably represented in the translation.

References:

https://blogs.bl.uk/asian-and-african/2017/01/malay-literary-manuscripts-in-the-john-leyden-collection.html

https://www.bl.uk/manuscripts/FullDisplay.aspx?ref=MSS_Malay_B_10

Brown, I.M. 1955. John Leyden (1775-1811): his life and works. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh

Notably, the first page of this manuscript is heavily annotated in pencil with an interlinear English translation. This translation presents a confounding complexity. It is not a faithful translation of the original text, and words are frequently misplaced in different lines. In addition, rather than providing a word-for-word interlinear translation, it fails to capture the essence and details of the narrative.

To shed further light on this issue, below is the transliteration of the first page of Hikayat Faqir, followed by its English translation.

Transliteration of the First Page:

   Billahi 'ala. Ini hikayat pasal yang pertama-tama yang amat

   masyhur dan lagi terlalu amat banyak dan lagi memberi manfaat yang mendengarnya.

   Adalah suatu raja bernama Sulthan Abduljalil nama negerinya Zamin Ambar.

   Hatta baginda itu terlalu amat besar kerajaannya dan beberapa buah negeri ta'luk

5       karenanya. Hatta baginda itu serta dengan adil lagi dengan murahnya. Syahdan,

   hatta baginda itu pun sehari-hari pergi bermain-main di luar negeri yang tiada berhenti.

   lagi diiringkan oleh segala raja-raja menteri hulubalang ra'yat sekalian demikian sehari-hari

   makan dan minum yang tiada khalnya lagi. Hatta kepada suatu hari baginda keluar

   negeri bermain itu maka baginda pun berjumpa dengan suatu kebun bunga-bungaan

10     dan bagai-bagai jenis poko'-poko' di dalam kebun itu. Hatta baginda pun turunlah

   dari atas kudanya  lalu berjalan ke dalam kebun itu. Tatkala itu faqir yang empunya

   kebun datang duduk minum kanjah(?) maka faqir itu pun kedengaran

   suatu suara. Demikian bunyinya. Hatta faqir aku datanglah. Maka faqir itu pun

   heranlah dirinya. Siapa juga yang berteriakkan aku ini. Hatta …

The English Translation:

              Billahi a’la the beginning of this story, this first chapter of which is very

              Famous and good and will do good to all who hear it

              There was a rajah named Sultan Abdul Jelil & his country

              Zamin Ambar. This prince was great in his sovereignty and many

5            Countries were under his government & he was upright & liberal

              This Prince was good to go from his country daily to amuse himself

              & he was attended by his ministers, hoeloebalangs & people

              & their eating and drinking was never finished

              One day the prince went out from his county when where he

10          Fell in with a garden (caboon) in which were flowers & various

              plants & trees - on which he alighted from his horse &

              entered the compound; the fakir to whom

              the garden belonged heard a voice saying, hey,

              fakir, you, come here, on which the fakir thought within himself, or said

              to conjecture who it was who called to him

The reason behind this inadequately done interlinear translation remains a subject of speculation and leaves us pondering the motivations and intentions of the translator. While the exact reason behind this enigma remains speculative, several factors could have contributed to this puzzling situation.

One possible factor is time constraints. Translating a manuscript, like Hikayat Faqir, requires a significant investment of time and effort. The translator may have been restricted by limited time availability, potentially due to other commitments or pressing deadlines, resulting in a rushed and incomplete translation.

Limited resources may have also played a role. Translating a text from one language to another necessitates access to dictionaries, reference materials, and linguistic expertise. If the translator lacked sufficient resources, such as comprehensive dictionaries or access to language experts, it would have been challenging to produce a precise and thorough translation.

Linguistic difficulties could have further complicated the translation process. Malay literature often contains intricate language structures, cultural references, and idiomatic expressions that can pose challenges for translators. If the translator faced difficulties in comprehending or conveying these nuances, it could have resulted in an inaccurate translation.

Another possibility is that the translator's intention was not to provide a meticulous, word-for-word interlinear translation. Instead, their goal may have been to offer a general overview of the story, focusing on conveying the broader narrative rather than preserving every detail. This intention, while understandable in certain contexts, could contribute to the imprecise nature of the translation.

In the absence of concrete information about the translator's circumstances and intentions, we can only conjecture on the reasons behind the inadequate translation. The case of Hikayat Faqir serves as a reminder of the intricacies involved in translating prose works from the past as we navigate the intricate world of translation and explore the wide reaches of Malay literature.

Acknowledgements:

I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to Rahmat Sopian and Genie Yoo. Their invaluable assistance and expertise in reading the translated page have been instrumental in shedding light on its contents. A more in-depth analysis on the translation may soon follow.

References:

https://blogs.bl.uk/asian-and-african/2017/01/malay-literary-manuscripts-in-the-john-leyden-collection.html

https://www.bl.uk/manuscripts/FullDisplay.aspx?ref=MSS_Malay_B_10

Brown, I.M. 1955. John Leyden (1775-1811): his life and works. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh

Please find the continuation of the article in the following link:

Lost in Translation- Part 2

At home, I could clearly recall that we never actually used the term ‘interlinear’ because neither my father nor I were unaware that it had an ‘interlinear’ translation or that the layout was known as such. Simply put, we referred to it as Tarjamah Quran per kata (Quran word by word) or Ayat Suci Lenyepaneun (The Holy Verses to Live by). What’s more, interlinearity was a concept that was foreign to us or rather too sophisticated to use. And, frankly, I didn't find out about the concept and the debates surrounding it until well after I had already left home. Now that I think about it, I realized that home is actually where interlinearity began and, to borrow God's own words from Surah Qaf, had always been ‘nearer to [me] than [my] jugular vein.’ I was introduced to the interlinear tradition at a very young age when my father, who had just begun his career as a mubaligh in my kampung, shelved the first print of the holy Quran in thirty volumes (juz’) as the holy verses for us to live by.

The Ayat Suci Lenyepaneun (1989) is contemporary and typeset, so it does not require the Herculean effort that one should or would employ when reading, say, Zechendoff’s interlinear Latin translation of the Quran or Snouck Hurgronje’s collective volume from the 1900s where its Malay interlinear translation is occasionally hardly discernible. Having said that, Ayat Suci Lenyepaneun stands out because it questions the way Sundanese language conceptualizes linguistic politeness, which clearly has a variety of ramifications for all aspects of society. The Ayat Suci Lenyepaneun uses lancaran mode, which is an unrefined form of Sundanese in a low vernacular stylistics. Accordingly, this makes God (sound) more approachable in contrast to, for example, the lyrically oriented Indonesian translation of the holy Quran.

For instance, God is quoted saying the following: ‘And We have created man and know what his soul whispers to him, and We are closer to him than [his] jugular vein.’ This verse explains that nothing is vague or hidden from God. He sees and hears everything that man does, and knows every thought that passes through man’s mind, whether good or evil.

Fig 2. Ayat Suci Lenyepaneun, Surah Qaf 50:16 Juz’ 26, p. 211

In the Ayat Suci Lenyepaneun, the use of the (perfective) verbs or predicates (geus ngayuga, nyaho, deukeut), as well as a first-person pronoun (Kami), a second person pronoun (maneh), and nouns (manusa, urat beuheung), all indicate that the enunciator of the verse, i.e. Allah, maintains an intimate, democratic relationship with the addressee or the reader, or at least with me. Instead of using a more refined tos nyiptakeun, terang, caket as predicates, Kuring and anjeun as pronouns, jalmi and urat tengek as nouns in the verse, God convenes in everyday, egalitarian language and is unconcerned with using certain speech level to establish His authority and position higher in the relationship’s hierarchical structure. In fact, according to Sundanese most prominent scholar Ajip Rosidi, the refined Sundanese language was an invention, imposed primarily by pretentious, feudal Sundanese aristocrats who clung to social hierarchy for their own benefit.

Tying in to this textual issue, some tafsir scholars interpret Allah's statement that ‘We are closer to him than his jugular vein’ to suggest that His angels are nearer to a person than their jugular vein, while others translate it as ‘Our knowledge’, both to avoid the sense of incarnation and indwelling. The Sundanese translation, on the other hand, faithfully renders the meaning and backs up the assertion made by the renowned tafsir scholar Ibn Kathir that these two creeds are false in the view of the vast majority of Muslims. In short, it is as it is written; it is as it is interlineally translated in the Ayat Suci Lenyepaneun, by which I used to live.

Wallahualam bi shawab.

وَاللّٰهُ اَعْلَمُ بِالصَّواب

References

Anderson, E. A. ‘Speech Levels: The Case of Sundanese,’ Pragmatics, 3: 2. 1957: 107-36.

Hasim, Moh. E. Ayat Suci Lenyepaneun (Bandung: Pustaka Jaya, 1989)

Rohmana, J. A. Allah sebagai Aing (Bandung: Ushuluddin, 2021)

Wessing, R. “Language levels in Sundanese,” Man 9, 1974: 5-22.