That is why there is such an aspect as a misunderstanding or not understanding of the spoken or heard information. As the practice shows, such a thing as a pure translation is impossible. In any case there are some contributing factors such as the existence of opinions or attitudes to what is translated or interpreted by the person who translates, even some ethical or political reasons with the intention to influence the person who is aimed to hear the message, and so forth. So let’s see how the issue of translation is considered by different scientists – Emmanuel Levinas, Karl Marx in the context of the theme of colonialism and translation and whose ideas and statements are supported by Dr. Suh and whose ones are denounced by him.
To begin with it is necessary to admit that both translation theories of Emmanuel Levinas as well as Karl Marx are linked with each other as the first one serves as a basis for the existence of the second one. We will start with Levinas who is well-known by his critics of the tradition of Western philosophical though. According to him “The sociality of language (or dialogue): cannot be reduced to the exchange of ideas between those who share the same ground of understanding and belong to the commonness” (Suh). So the theory of Levinas’s translation is attached with the main theme of ethical and political practice with the concepts of the “self” and the “other”, that is, “the problem of politics comes up because there are multiple others in the world” (Suh). Another important part in realizing of Levinas’s theory of translation is his concepts of the “saying” and the “said” – “The key to connecting Levinas’s ethics to actual politics is understanding the relationship between saying and the said” (Suh). In other words, the “self” and the “other” have almost nothing common between them that’s