The article tries to establish a starting point for comparative literature.

People were not really aware of the existence of a Comparative literature before the 20th century even if comparativism was practiced but its disciplinary forms were constructed in a post-war postcolonial context. Comparative literature as we know it today appeared within globalization. So Emily apter in her article is essentially interested in the precursors of a globalised literature (when I say a global literature I mean comparative literature, littrature mondiale. She concentrates on the two philologist Erich Auerbach and Leo Spitzer because they give a historical beginning to comparative literature. Auerbach and Spitzer arent only interesting because of their researches in philology but also because of their situation (being in exile and being faced with a multilinguial, multicultural place) article is divided in 4 parts 1- The first part is an introductory note which suggests that Comparative literature has always been global. (even though it was institutionalized, after war, in Europe, it was not an European product but a global one. (a globalization that includes trans-nationalism, exil, imPires, multilingualism, minorities etc all this made the world a small village that maybe can manage a comparative literature.). 2- Comparative literature is not attached to any nation . Unlike other disciplines that are attached to a certain place such as new historicism. (Com L tries to stay independent from any national bound. (it makes sense because the precursors of CL were exiled individuals Leo Spitzer and Erich Auebach,, and antinationalists such as Franco Moretti ) The second part is entitled Spitzer in Istanbul and 1- it is about the contribution of Auerbach and Spitzer to the emergence of CL when they were in Istanbul. Turkey was a refuge for the victims of war in general and Nazism in particular. Istambul was the meeting place for thinkers and researchers coming from different places, with different perspectives and goals. The city was back then a center for questioning the world and how it functions, a place for investigating cultures and languages of the different countries . in the 30ties, when Auerbach and spitzer were exiled . They brought with them European knowledge and once they arrived to Istanbul they were introduced to new theories, new books that they wouldnt have used if they werent in exile. This is important because they give new readings to foreign books, comparing them with their own knowledge and so on. Auerbach suggests that Its the clash between a modern and authentic Turkey and Europrean values (pedagogies et ideologie) that helped construct CompL :on pourrait dire, sans exagration, que cest la rencontre instable de la politique turque de la langue et de lhumanisme philologique europen qui a produit les conditions de linvention de la littrature compare comme discipline globale, au moins ses dbuts (37).) its this encounter of Turkey and of modern european pedagogy that helpled Comparative L to emerge, why. Because For a decade researchers from different places, from different nationalities (jews, germans) visited, emigrated or were exiled to Turkey. At that time Trkey needed foreign thinkers and translators such as Spitzer to introduce Turkey to non Islamic texts and cultures since that country was proceeding to a reform, Turkey sought to become a Secular country far from the dominance of any religion thats why It made use of foreign texts for reform, for fighting racism and closed culture. Comparative country - We find spitze, aurbach or other Turkish philologists writting in different languages and compared their essays to each other. What is important for s here its not that the essays are about philology but that philology was made global, the stdy of languages and civilizations is no longer concentrating on Europe but on the whole world.

- Thus, Istanbul was important for CL in the sense that it helped establish a new literary theory. The third part entitiled GUERRES PHILOLOGIQUES concentrats on philologic wars. Philology was used as a protecting device against Nazis. the changing or alteration of the meaning of words that Nazi proceeded to in order to cleanse german from strange etymon (a word or morpheme from which a later word is derived. ) was a sort of linguistic imperialism: Nazi appropriatd a language and manipulated it to meet their ideology. The problem is that when someone is introduced to that lgge, they arent aware of this alteration of meaning. The role of the philologists of that time was to decode the meanings that the Nazi gave to certain words and to fight nazism. So philology asserted beliefs helf by comparatists. No nation is better than another, and languages should not be altered. The second philological war is a war against PC which attempted to be the continuity of Comp Lit but that was not possible because pc is limited due to its political boundary and its Europeanism. (48) (two elements that Comparative Lit is against. However, eurocentrism is not easy to get over when we find critics such as Edward Said defend Auerbach when he is accused of eurocentrism. (49) Said would have been more convincing if he was more inclined to Spitzers theories instead of Auerbachs because Spizter is against eurocentrism. He knows how to deal with transnational humanism. Also spitzer and said both knew for instance what elements to translate from a clture to another because of exil they were exposed to different cultures and languages(51) - The fourth part entitiled TRANSLATIO GLOBALE deals with the The role of multilingualism in transnational humanism. As we know sometimes there is an untranslability because two different languages belong to 2 different cultures and histories. This loss in translation obligates s to use the expression as it is and use a fotenote to explain it rather than translating it in the target language. Why? First to avoid ambiguity as mch as possible and second, as spitzer proposes to be more faithful to the meaning and stylistics of the untranslated expression (52). Spitzer also suggests that being exposed to what is called tranget linguistic helps getting close to the original language of a text. The reader has to become familiar with the original langage even if he doesnt understand it. He has the chance to see beyond the borders of his nation This approach is not against translation but it is a tool to use for those who are interested in transnational studies. . This lingistic strangeness tranget linguistic should not be rejected. It should not be put aside as other, as insignificant and indecipherable. The reader of a poem etc should see in it a whole world, a language in its reality, a whole linguistic construction that the reader has to get familiar with and to respect instead of shrinking from it. Dont just read words that you dont understand and pass them as if they have never been there. You have to read hem aloud, to hear them, to imagine where they come from, to search fr their meaning. This is transnational studies, comparative studies. (53) - The invention of comparative literature by spitzer in Istanbul made philology gain a new function that of uniting languages that are different and disclose expression that cannot be translated. This untranslatability transfer languages with their cultures and histories beyond their borders. This is how CL functions. It tries to be open to other lgges ad their histories. It tries to get familiar with what it is unfamiliar. It is not closed in itself and rejects diversity or difference.

Key issues: 1- Difficulty in constructing a global literature. Comparative Lit still needs a methodology to organize comparisons between languages etc. (Moretti tried to give a methodology by suggesting a distant reading of text ; lecture distante (page 29) a reading that take into consideration a vaster context of the text. However, this reading may have a negative impact on local literature by diminishing its importance. Spitzer tried to form a multilingual space (etranget linguistic) but can it be a starting point for a methodology. 2- Can comparative lit ever be freed from eurocentrism ? if so, how? is the European humanism stifling development of globalised culture. The problem is that if cl is a product of an after war, a war that was concentrated in Europe (WW and western empires, war against inferiority) will Europe be influencing Comparative literature more than it is wished? 3- to what extent should CL influence different languages and cultures? And what about the individual identities of texts? Wouldnt local literature be lost if we concentrate too much in a global literature? What disliked in this article is that it is fragmented What is good in it is that it does embody what it talks abou insertin strange exressions etc Several critics try to show the connection between globalization and literature. For instance Franco Moretti(28) consideres CL as a large literature because it doesnt stay limited to the boundaries of nationalism but it transcends them. It is a literature that includes several categories, several geographic centers, it is a literature that is also distant because it doesnt require getting too much into details less is more knowing a bit from here and there is sufficient to create a global literature.(we will come back to this later). David Damrosch suggests that global literature is a literature that circulates. its not a literature that clashes with another, but there is a continuity of literature from a place to another thus literature smoothly moves. 2- I can say that Istanbul was in itself a comparative city lol. ( Cest juste la frontire 3- Spitzer (34) worked in a school of philology from which several scholars careers were initiated. they were men and women such as Suheyla Bayrav who were interested in the west east exchange and translation. Spitzer had the obligation to coordinate courses in four languages (when he couldnt speak the languages he used a translator) (41). Spitzers importance lies in the fact that he is a foreigner who influences natives and introduced new theories to them. He was also more of a comparatist than auerbach because, unlike auerbach, he made an effort to learn Trkish and to become a part of the society to understand it better. Auerbach has always ket his distance with other cultures that are non western. He didnt try to break the boundaries and it this is where he fails. Because CL needs to be flexible and fluent between cultures and languages. 4- According to spitzer knowing a lgge serves as a way to understand how its people function, their emotions, their psychology. For instance, Turkish is a languge that is more emotional than logic. Knowing that can help us compare turks with other European citizens. What is also interesting about Turkish is that it is a language that doesnt belong to the roman family of languages but that it still gained importance with with European researchers; the dichotomies west/east is broken to let other languages enter into the scope of philologists. Turkish has been romanised after the reform so that it is no longer related to the ottomans empire. This romanisation helped creating an access to Turkish by a greater range of people tho ti doesnt belong to the roman family of languages. .