4 ms·

That, and I want the translated work to reflect the original vision of the author as much as possible. I don't want cultural references changed for my country,

by bigstrat2003 2y ago

That, and I want the translated work to reflect the original vision of the author as much as possible. I don't want cultural references changed for my country, nor do I want things changed because my country might find them offensive when the original audience didn't. In my opinion, the best compliment you can give a translation is to say that it fades into the background and lets the original shine through.

retrac 2y ago
But what is the original vision of the author? It may not be possible to fully to fully capture without compromise. For example, many people in this thread are insistent they want a "phrase by phrase" translation. But what if the author wrote the book in a colloquial spoken style, that is specifically supposed to come across as neutral contemporary language? If you translate the work into English in a stilted style that carefully preserves the structure of the original even when it produces unnaturalistic English, you have lost a key aspect of the original vision of the work. It won't hit the reader the same way.
lubujackson 2y ago
Strongly disagree. Translation is like taking a 3D object and trying to convey it in 2D. You can be overly descriptive and accurate but lose all sense of flow. You can try to capture the flow of things but then lose the precision of meaning. Or you can approximate both to make the translation as strong as possible on both front, then get slammed from both sides. Sometimes translators can highlight a less considered aspect of the work, like when you hear a great cover song that makes you appreciate the original that much more. I understand the ideal of the perfectly translated thing, by definitionally it can't exist. I suggest going to a library and read the first page of 5+ translations (let's say, Don Quixote) and you will have a pretty clear sense of what the original text must have conveyed as well as several conflicting voices, some of which you will hate and others you may even appreciate. But you can never hear the original through a translation so it might as well be one that is interesting in its own right.
watwut 2y ago
If original vision involved the language in which the book is written to be natural to natives, then weird turn of phrase in the translation is not accurate. It does not let the original shine, it makes the original appear odd.

retrac 2y ago

But what is the original vision of the author? It may not be possible to fully to fully capture without compromise. For example, many people in this thread are insistent they want a "phrase by phrase" translation. But what if the author wrote the book in a colloquial spoken style, that is specifically supposed to come across as neutral contemporary language? If you translate the work into English in a stilted style that carefully preserves the structure of the original even when it produces unnaturalistic English, you have lost a key aspect of the original vision of the work. It won't hit the reader the same way.

lubujackson 2y ago

Strongly disagree. Translation is like taking a 3D object and trying to convey it in 2D. You can be overly descriptive and accurate but lose all sense of flow. You can try to capture the flow of things but then lose the precision of meaning. Or you can approximate both to make the translation as strong as possible on both front, then get slammed from both sides. Sometimes translators can highlight a less considered aspect of the work, like when you hear a great cover song that makes you appreciate the original that much more. I understand the ideal of the perfectly translated thing, by definitionally it can't exist. I suggest going to a library and read the first page of 5+ translations (let's say, Don Quixote) and you will have a pretty clear sense of what the original text must have conveyed as well as several conflicting voices, some of which you will hate and others you may even appreciate. But you can never hear the original through a translation so it might as well be one that is interesting in its own right.

watwut 2y ago

If original vision involved the language in which the book is written to be natural to natives, then weird turn of phrase in the translation is not accurate. It does not let the original shine, it makes the original appear odd.