Translation of classical Indian texts into English was started by orientalist scholars like William Jones with a definite agenda to give the western reader a feel of the Indian mystique. The choice of texts and the strategies employed were in accordance with this agenda. This paper starts off from translation studies in Postcolonial/Globalized Era. The main body of the paper looks at postcolonial translation as a part of globalization, an attempt to give global dimensions to local/regional texts. It details the changes that a literary work undergoes in the process of being translated, specially when the target language is the language of the erstwhile colonizer and the target readership the so-called first world. The factors that influence the translator and can become problematic are taken up in detail. The first and foremost is the choice of the text in the source language and the reasons behind it. Fidelity to the source language text is taken up along with the strategies that the translator employs in translating what is strictly local/regional like folk songs, folk traditions, etc. Condensation or deleting what seems irrelevant in the source language text is another problem area. The paper quotes from translations or opinions on some of these issues expressed by translators. The paper concludes with apprehensions that postcolonial translation can destroy the local/regional authenticity.

To take a look at the term `translation' and its Hindi/Bangla counterpart Anuvad or Rupantar before starting a paper on postcolonial translation would be in order. Translation has been defined by a number of critics. I quote F L Lucas, as his definition seems the most representative of the western way of thinking. According to Lucas, the aim of translation is "to try to compensate the intelligent reader for his ignorance of the language concerned, and to give him, however imperfectly, the impression he would be likely to get, if he read the original fluently himself" (1951, p. 25). Translated texts, therefore, are accorded a second rate place and the act of translation itself is far from creative.

In the multilingual Indian context the terms Anuvad or Rupantar attach no such stigma to the act of translation or the translated text. Anuvad literally means what comes later and Rupantar means change of form. These differences must be kept in mind as one looks at the way translation has evolved and carved a niche for itself in literature in recent years, especially in a multilingual country like India. Creative activity similar to adaptation, which involves rendering classical texts like The Gita, The Ramayana and The Mahabharata into languages easily understood by the people, has been quite popular in India for a long time now. Thus translation, in its broadest sense, has been a common literary practice in this country for a long time now, may be for centuries. This is in keeping with our multilingual and multicultural set up which allowed translation to evolve freely as a creative activity rather than being tied down by theories.

English Studies Journal, Translation, Translation Studies, Postcolonial Era, Globalized Era, Postcolonial Translation, The Gita, The Ramayana, The Mahabharata, Shakuntala, Gitagovinda, Gora, Kalidasa, Jayadeva, Rabindranath Tagore.