4 ms·
The author of the website has mentioned that > I am slowly replacing the Cotton/Hazlitt translation with a contemporary one and adding new notes So I would as
by octed 2y ago
The author of the website has mentioned that
> I am slowly replacing the Cotton/Hazlitt translation with a contemporary one and adding new notes
So I would assume that the essay you're talking about is from the earlier Cotton translation and has still not been replaced.
This is the first time I've seen AI being used to "modernize" old texts, and it works wonderfully in this case; though a bit of the old-timey charm is lost imo. I used to read a translation that I'd found in my university library which I enjoyed a lot. Very readable but still retained the "feel" of a 16th century book. I don't recall the translator unfortunately.
- RobPfeifer 2y agoTotally right. The art and science of translation is an age-old debate and where AI isn’t super well suited. We’re not at a point where it ends up more than a summary but the point is the proper “translation” of the tone, subtle intent and idiosyncrasies of the author. That said, most human translators take license (e.g. The Bible) and how do we counterweight against their flaws, so there’s not a great answer here. Except I hope the guy works through it and does a good job cause the original is a bit of a slog!
- mkoubaa 2y agoOld timey charm is overrated. I want to get to the point. The use of AI here is really cool and I hope to see it applied to other older tomes
- octed 2y agoUnfortunately I still have a soft spot for beautiful writing. The "point" often sticks better when it is expressed eloquently. Having to think a little bit to get to the point also helps with absorbing it, at least in my experience.
- mkoubaa 2y agoWell nobody is saying to incinerate the originals