What are you reading

[bekah]

Poetry is probably the hardest literary form to translate because 
poetry is based entirely on style and style just can't really be 
translated.

Bekah


At 7:00 PM +0300 10/15/06, Ya Sam wrote:
>It cuts both ways actually. Without translators such thing as world 
>literature is impossible of course. So lucky are we when we come 
>across good translations. On the other hand, we are very unlucky to 
>read atrocious ones. I also have something to quote, by Robert Burns 
>(my hero :)
>
>On Elphinstone's Translation Of Martial's Epigrams
>
>1787
>
>O Thou whom Poetry abhors,
>Whom Prose has turned out of doors,
>Heard'st thou yon groan?-proceed no further,
>'Twas laurel'd Martial calling murther.
>
>http://www.robertburns.org/works/162.shtml
>
>
>
>
>>From: bekah <bekah0176 at sbcglobal.net>
>>To: "Ya Sam" <takoitov at hotmail.com>, ottosell at googlemail.com
>>CC: pynchon-l at waste.org
>>Subject: Re: What are you reading
>>Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2006 08:15:02 -0700
>>
>>But without translators I would never be able to read Pamuk who 
>>writes in Turkish or Imre Kertész or Saramago or  many others.   I 
>>love international fiction but I'm no linguist so  I would not even 
>>be able to read Marquez Garcia without translation.    I would not 
>>know Tolstoy or Mahfouz or Camus or Pasternak or Hesse or Grass or 
>>Mann or Undset or dozens of other internationally acclaimed 
>>authors. Yes,  much of the style is lost,  but, if the translator 
>>is worth his stuff,   the ideas remain and one of the most 
>>important reasons I read is for ideas - with me it's probably more 
>>important than style or plot or other elements of literature. 
>>What good is a stylist without ideas?
>>
>>There are special awards for translators now,  and John Carey (my 
>>hero) gave a wonderful speech at the last Mann Booker International 
>>award ceremony in which he gave praise to  translators. 
>><http://www.canongate.net/News/John-Careys-Presentation-Speech>
>>
>>
>>This brings me to the subject of translators. We should like, as 
>>judges, to pay tribute to translators, without whose labours the 
>>International Prize could not have happened. Translators, it seems 
>>to us, bring nations and races together far more effectively than 
>>statesmen or politicians, who often do the opposite. Translators 
>>are heroes, working against impossible odds. For in truth there is 
>>no such thing as an accurate translation - no such thing as a 
>>linguistic equivalent in one language for a word in another. 
>>Languages are closed systems, separate planets with their own 
>>atmospheres of thought and feeling. Even loan words from another 
>>language become something different when they are transplanted into 
>>their new climate. Brain scientists now tell us that the language 
>>we use modifies our neural pathways, so that an English speaker's 
>>brain organisation, for example, is different from that of someone 
>>who speaks, say, Italian or Japanese. So translators are trying to 
>>join up differently organised brains. Of course, translators must 
>>strive to hide these problems. They are benign deceivers. They must 
>>make us feel that what we are reading is not a translation at all, 
>>but the author's work. The judges are delighted that the rules of 
>>the Man Booker International Prize have now been modified to 
>>include a special award for the winning author's translator.
>>
>>It is a sign of the disrespect in which translators have 
>>customarily been held, and a sign too of the parochialism of the 
>>British literary scene, that foreign literature in translation is 
>>so neglected. As Alberto Manguel pointed out in an article in the 
>>Spectator, if you speak Spanish or French or Italian or German, or 
>>any of a dozen other languages, and walk into your local bookstore, 
>>you will find translations of a fair sampling of most of the 
>>important books written around the world. You will find what is 
>>being imagined in China, what stories are being told in Korea, how 
>>the novel is being reinvented in Spain and the Scandinavian 
>>countries. But if you live in England you will find no such 
>>abundance. When we checked through our original list of 120 
>>contestants, we found that we had to disqualify writer after 
>>writer, not on grounds of quality or stature, but because they were 
>>not generally available in English translation. Frequently they had 
>>been translated back in the 80s or 90s, but the publisher had 
>>allowed the translations to go out of print. So we were unable to 
>>consider, for example, Peter Handke or Michel Tournier or Christoph 
>>Ransmayr or Antonio Lobo Antunes or Rachid Boudjedra or Fernando 
>>Vallejo - and so on. No doubt publishers have difficulties of their 
>>own to struggle with. But to an outsider the British publishing 
>>industry can seem like a conspiracy intent on depriving 
>>English-speaking readers of the majority of the good books written 
>>in languages other than their own. Alberto Manguel is surely right 
>>to point out that the same laxity, fifty or sixty years ago, would 
>>have meant, for the English reader, no Kafka, no Camus, no Calvino, 
>>no Borges. The judges hope that the advent of the Man Booker 
>>International Prize will encourage British publishers to reverse 
>>this trend. No other single outcome could, in our view, matter more.
>>
>>Bekah
>>Blessed are the translators for they shall know style.
>>
>>At 4:59 PM +0300 10/14/06, Ya Sam wrote:
>>>That is why I prefer to read in the original and will keep trying 
>>>to get the reading knowledge of as many languages as possible. A 
>>>bad translator can butcher the text and disfigure it beyond 
>>>recognition. LD is a very dense text, rich in vocabulary and 
>>>cerainly requires an expert translator. There is a good article on 
>>>translation by Norfolk himself in which he says the following:
>>>
>>>"A writer-in-translation is as isolated as a general in his bunker 
>>>trying simultaneously to direct a war on twenty or more fronts. 
>>>The dispatches come through (or fail to) but, reduced as they are 
>>>to their bare essentials, it is hard to know how the conflict as a 
>>>whole is going."
>>>
>>>http://www.barcelonareview.com/20/e_ln.htm
>>>
>>>
>>>>From: Otto <ottosell at googlemail.com>
>>>>To: "Ya Sam" <takoitov at hotmail.com>
>>>>CC: pynchon-l at waste.org
>>>>Subject: Re: What are you reading
>>>>Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 15:34:27 +0200
>>>>
>>>>Critical review about the flawed (?) German translation of Norfolk's book:
>>>>
>>>>Stetige Bumser im Rücken
>>>>Die Qualität einer Übersetzung läßt sich durchaus beurteilen
>>>>Von Dieter E. Zimmer (Nabokov specialist)
>>>>DIE ZEIT/Feuilleton,
>>>>Nr.6, 5.Februar 1993, S.56
>>>>http://tinyurl.com/ynaywt
>>>>
>>>>Eleven literary translators had written an open letter to the
>>>>publisher. Their demand was to the destroy the books and that there
>>>>should be a new translation. The publisher answered by threatening to
>>>>sue them.
>>>>
>>>>"At the mention of pork the place erupts."
>>>>"Bei der Nennung des Schweins explodiert der Platz."
>>>>
>>>>-- but you simply cannot say that in German, and "center of gravity"
>>>>isn't "Mittelpunkt des Schwergewichtes".
>>>>
>>>>Nevertheless, there's a 60-pages "Journal of the Translator" at the
>>>>end of the book which is quite helpful for the historical background
>>>>of the novel.
>>>>
>>>>Otto
>>>>
>>>>2006/10/10, Ya Sam <takoitov at hotmail.com>:
>>>>>  >"Barbarus hic ego sum
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Exactly what I feel while reading this book. Norfolk did his 
>>>>>homework well.
>>>>>Very informative as well, i.e. I didn't know that the Romans had 
>>>>>the goddess
>>>>>of sewers.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>_________________________________________________________________
>>>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's 
>>>FREE! 
>>>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's 
>FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/