LIT004: Translation, Censorship, and Decolonization in Central Asian Literature

Abstract. This article is the first attempt to analyze the representation of the image of the “Russian world” from the perspective of decolonial discourse. The research material consists of Articles 1, 27, and 28 of the Book of Edification based on Tugrul’s manuscript (known respectively as Words 3, 2, and 25), in which 15 phraseological units are identified within the framework of this concept. The study analyzes the translated versions by Viktor Shklovsky, Klara Serikbaeva and Rollan Seisenbaev, Satimzhan Sanbaev and Yerbol Zhumagul, after which the author's translation based on Tugrul’s manuscript is proposed, which differs significantly from common interpretations. A comparative approach allows us to clarify the content of key concepts such as the Russian language, Russian education, and Russian authority, as well as to reveal their true meaning in the context of the author’s position.

It is shown that Abai's appeal to the topic of studying Russian literacy was conditioned by his awareness of the inevitability of large-scale historical changes. The nomadic civilization was losing its significance, the traditional institutions of Kazakh power were being destroyed, and the Kazakh Khanate finally found itself in colonial dependence on the Russian Empire. In these circumstances, Abay’s edification can be seen as an attempt to encourage his contemporaries to comprehend the new historical reality and the need to adapt to a changing world. Thus, the analysis based on Tugrul’s manuscript, which was introduced into scientific circulation relatively recently, has allowed us to take a fresh look at Abay’s original worldview.

Keywords: Abai, Nomadic Civilization, Kazakh Literature, Decolonization, National Consciousness

Rewriting on the Soviet Periphery: Translation and Ideological Control in Two ''Kazakh Keeshes''

Gulshat Tussupova (National Bureau of Translations)

Send message to Author

Abstract

This article examines two Kazakh translations of Jack London’s The Story of Keesh, one produced in 1927 and another in 1937, to explore how translation functioned simultaneously as a nation-building project and as an ideological instrument in early Soviet Kazakhstan. Using theoretical perspectives from Lefevere’s concept of translation as rewriting, polysystem theory, postcolonial studies, and censorship research, the analysis combines paratexts with close comparison of Russian intermediary versions.

The 1927 rendering domesticated London’s tale by recasting the protagonist in the idiom of the Kazakh batyr (heroic) epic, supplementing the text with pedagogical prefaces and scientific explanations, and privileging idiomatic Kazakh syntax to advance cultural modernisation. The 1937 retranslation, by contrast, employed Russified lexis and syntax, inserted Soviet institutional terminology, and aligned the narrative with socialist-realist didacticism.

Taken together, these competing rewritings illustrate how patronage, ideology, and poetics shaped translation practices on the Soviet periphery and suggest broader comparative insights into retranslation across non-Russian republics.

Reading in the Name of God: Censorship and the First Kazakh Educator

Nuraiym Kossybak (Nazarbayev University)

Send message to Author

Abstract

I present an analysis of the poem "Soz basy", more commonly known as "Kel, balalar, oqylyq" by Kazakh educator Ybyrai Altynsarin written in 1879. This poem encourages children to study in the name of one God and presents awareness of God as the purpose of education. I argue that Altynsarin's motivation as an educator was rooted in his religion rather than a secular ideal of education. I conduct the close reading of the original text and compare multiple Soviet and Kazakhstani editions published across Arabic, Latin and Cyrillic scripts. The poem has survived three states: Russian Empire, Soviet Union and Kazakhstan, whose state ideologies affected its reception. The Soviet revisions of this poem either removed direct mention of God and kept Quranic metaphors or removed all religious allusions. Removing religious references separated the poem not only from its religious origin, but also from the Islamic knowledge ecosystem it belonged to. Current school editions in Kazakhstan continue to omit the religious framing of the original. This shows that the post-independence circulation of literary works is not faithful to the original work and is filtered through Kazakhstan's secular nationalist ideology.