Will translation see the light at the end?

Shin June-bong
The author is an editorial writer of the JoongAng Ilbo.

Thirty-something literary scholar Bae Se-jin who had studied political philosophy in France recently contributed an article titled “Researchers in Korean social science cannot be bred without translated transcripts” to the Kyosu Shinmun (Professors’ News).

Bae has been devoted to translating French modern philosophy texts into Korean since he completed his doctoral thesis two years ago. Some people know his name more as a translator than a scholar or researcher. He endured sneers from his academic peers for exhausting his energy on translating other people’s writings when he should be doing his own work at the peak of his creative age.

He took up translation with the self-serving motive of proving his comprehension of a text and earning inspiration for his own writing. But he could not stop translating when he discovered how poorly foreign books were being translated. Academic research is difficult without reliable translations. Yet nobody wants to do it. That’s why he must go on translating, Bae explained.

Upon reading the article on the Professors’ News, one publisher wrote on social media that nothing has changed since Do-ol raised the issue 40 years ago. Do-ol is the pen name of philosopher Kim Yong-ok. In his 1985 book discussing traditional Asian studies, he wrote, “All literary activities without references from translated materials can only be a castle in the air. No matter how well a thesis is written, the reasoning ideas in the paper cannot be accumulated if it does not cite translations of classical literature.” He wanted to “correct” the fixated disregard for translation in Korea’s academic community. Four decades later today, translated works still remains neglected in academic circles.

Translating labor became more overtly shunned from the late 1990s, when professors had to receive performance reviews by university authorities to correct their complacency. Professors received preferential points in recruitment and promotion if their publications are recognized in the Science Citation Index (SCI). Research in humanities also came under tighter scrutiny to draw government subsidies through the Brain Korea and Humanities Korea programs. But the award guideline was purely based on the quantity. In other words, how many theses professors wrote mattered more than how well a thesis was written. Under such an environment, professors devoted to translation cannot persuade their peers or school authorities to reflect the value of the quality of translations or the academic significance of their original texts when their schools judge their academic performance.

Academic community has tried to make some amends. National and public universities reportedly offer better treatment on translation works than before. Some departments of a certain private university also take translation works into consideration for their performance review on professors, although the credentials cannot help applicants to be hired as professors. The valuation also differs by university and department.

More worryingly, we have come to overlook what we lose from the disregard for translation. Many have become immune to the neglect that has been fixated from years. As there is no academic reward for translation work, only a few professors — like the instructor of political philosophy — present valuable texts to broader readers purely out of their personal passion.

Chung Eun-gwi, a professor of English literature at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, last year published the full 13 sets of poetry books of American poet Louise Glück who had won the 2020 Nobel Prize in Literature. The English literature professor devoted five hours a day after waking up at 4 in the morning to complete the translation project between her lectures and thesis commitments. “In monetary value, I have done the work for less than the minimum wage,” she said.

Should we leave the translation discount as it is today? Lee Duck-hwan, a professor emeritus at Sogang University, said, “Though it may take time, we must shift to qualitative evaluation of academic works, not quantitative one, over the long term,” I cannot agree more.