Those of you whose native language is English: have you read many books that have been translated into English? How good would you say are the translations? Are they usually in natural-sounding English, or is it easy for you to recognize that the text has been translated from a foreign language? Just curious.
I've never read a book that was translated from another language into English where the English was poor or questionable, no. But perfect English does not mean the translation is a good translation. Look up Constance Garnett. To this day, her translations of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky are the cause of many a Russian eyeroll. Her grasp of Russian was academic and lacked understanding of the more subtle nuances of idiomatic Russian, and she simply omitted anything she didn't understand in the original Russian. To this day, most people who read Tolstoy and Dostoevsky in English are reading her translations and any native Russian will tell you, "If you read Constance Garnet, then you know nothing of Tolstoy and Dostoevsky."
They're often always interpretations - and we have versions. ... I've told the story before - but if you look at the crit section on Amazon.fr - for Papillon, Henri Charriere - the one star reviews are all 'zis paisant convicte always repeating the merde, encoulez-vous, it is the cheap memoir of a gangster pig-dog thug.' Whereas the English translation is by Patrick O'Brian, one of the'greatest' writers of the 20c, and it's a very exciting book. arseface
I've once or twice tried to read a book in two languages, just to check if the translation picks all the little language quirks, you know. And I was amazed to find out that sometimes the translator would skip whole passages, maybe because they were too difficult for them, or because they just opted to retell the paragraph rather than translate it closely. It was fun. I've also seen translations of the same book (the so called classics) that differ wildly when done by different translators, but hey, the Bible started that one first and there's nothing new under the sun .
What a great question! I think it depends largely on the purpose of the translation. For some works, a precise, word-for-word translation, with full respect for the nuances of the phrases, will get a reader closer to the understanding of the original than a more slip-shod translation. But for other works, particularly poetry, a more free-hand approach is necessary in order to translate the flavor of the work as well as its meaning. In these cases, a translator who is also a gifted poet can put you in the moment the way a more pedantic translator cannot. To illustrate this point, compare Seamus Heaney's "Beowulf" with just about any previous translation. Or John Ciardi's translation of Dante's Divine Comedy. One could argue that the two poets I've mentioned have created their own literary works, which will never replace the originals. I have no objection to that argument. But if you wanted to approximate the emotional impact of the original works, that is all the justification those poets need. This rumination leads to another one. When a piece of music is transposed from one instrumentation to another, or one key to another, that's a similar translation. There's a wonderful version of the Nutcracker Suite played entirely by guitars. It doesn't attempt to transcribe the suite note for note, but it succeeds in conveying the suite's essence. Or, if you're a piano buff, there's a piano transcription of George Gershwin's Rhapsody in Blue that's out now. It is dramatically different from the orchestral version, and one person who played it on his radio show got an outraged phone call from somebody who said that the transcriber should be shot, and the pianist barred forever from future performances. He had to explain to the caller that the transcriber was Gershwin himself. And the pianist? George Gershwin. (It's on the CD Gershwin plays Gershwin: The Piano Rolls.)
As an English to Spanish (non professional) Translator I must say It's quite difficult to be 100% accurate because obvious idiomatic/cultural reasons. In cases where the word-to-word algorithm just doesn't fit, I have to visualize the scene and write that part of (or even all) the sentence the best way I can. I think I can make a reasonable 85-90%. (you may check my translations HERE)
I'm a Finn. I read in Finnish and in English. Original is always better. When translation is really good, it is almost a new book. There is a connection between language, words and thinking. In Finnish we have very common word "ystävä". It means very close friend. In english... No... There just is not any word that means the same. Or... What about as common thing as weather? Lumi, lumisade, tuisku, jalkarätti, nuoska, viti, hankiainen, hanki, pyry, ajolumi, jasa, hiutale, härmä, kuura, huurre, höyty, hile, kinos, kohva, kuurankukka, nietos, loska, suojalumi, pakkaslumi, polanne, puuteri, puuterilumi, riite, räntä, tykkylumi, tykky, hyhmä... (and 20 more) = snow or to snow. If I say that.. "Räntäsade muuttui jalkaräteiksi. Hankiaiskinokset peittyivät suojalumen alle ja kuurankukat sulivat ikkunoista." ...then what would the translation be? ( @KaTrian? ) Would it make sense and sound good? In Finland we love this comic strip, because it is so true. https://www.riemurasia.net/kuva/Koira-sanan-erimuodot/139787
It's going to depend. I've only read a handful of translations into English, and another handful into Norwegian. Unfortunately I can't think of a single case where I've read the original also, but I will say that I enjoyed all of them, and in many cases would be none the wiser if I didn't know them for translation. Actually, I just recalled that I've read the first handful of pages of Moby Dick in both languages. The translation I have is actually pretty amazing. I'd go so far as to say the first page is actually stronger than its English counterpart. That being said, I always go for the original if possible. Translated books always come my way by accident, but I don't kick them out of bed. I came across something quite recently that I think is apt for this thread. I heard it in William Gibson's Distrust That Particular Flavor, but I don't think it originated with him. I'm paraphrasing, but it goes roughly as follows: "There is something in a good translation that cannot be captured in the original."
I'm reading Heinrich Gerlach's 'Breakout At Stalingrad.' And I also have many very very literary books in my waiting list. It is actually one of the top boy books of the moment, I believe, actually. Sometimes the translator does veer toward the top end of the 20c. Very distressing. I will finish it, I don't like Nazis saying 'motherfucker,' and such, it is not authentic fighting partisans.
Gibson is an insightful fellow. Was him that taught me that Science Fiction is never, ever about the future. It's always about the moment in which the writer is writing the story. The spaceships and aliens are just dressup. To hear that from the father of cyberpunk was illuminating.
Well, I've not read Terry Prachett in Czech, but all my Czech friends tell me the translation is so good they prefer to read it in Czech, even though they speak fluent English and could easily read the books in the original English. They say the Czech translator knew how to tap into Czech humour, and translated things accordingly. It's just my theory, but I'm guessing there would be little literal or strict translations in the Czech Prachett books - it sounds like the translator clearly made it his own and adapted it into his culture and a Czech's sense of humour with it. Considering how cultural humour is, this was probably a smart move. But it definitely also sounds like it was really more than "just" a translation - or is this how good translations should be? @Wreybies ?
Many schools of thought, as one would expect. When it comes to the translation of literature, the kind of translation you are mentioning is, in my opinion, the best translation, so long as it was done in partnership with the original writer, so that he or she knows what's happening with the work. It should convey what the author meant to convey, and that isn't necessarily a fixed point. The target culture should most certainly be taken into account, should be used, in the sense that the most should be made of how the piece will engage with that culture and language. I think I told you that I've done a couple of scanlations of bara manga, yes? That was a strange set of commissions. The target audience for that kind of work is an audience that is deeply invested in the culture of origin. They don't want you to change the tiniest thing, no matter how many translator's notes you have to squeeze into the margins. That's what they want and that's what they got, but to me, that's a poor translation. I feel like I've missed a step and ignored the target culture, though again, the target audience for that work will say that they are a culture unto themselves and they want all the yummy little, highly esoteric Japanese cultural cues.
Nope, don't think you mentioned bara manga to me before. What is it? I guess if your interest is in learning Japanese, maybe such a literal translation could be good. But it sounds tiresome to read... This reminds me of my Doraemon comics that I read in Chinese. Occasionally there would be a translator's note and I never understood them, since I was just a kid. I guess apart from translator's notes, there isn't much you can do to the manga, since the pictures are as they are? Like, how would you get around it and make it make sense, without need of a note when there are pictures involved?
Bara manga is manga written by and for gay dudes. It is NOT yaoi. Yaoi is fluffy and full of feels and lots of angst and rarely is there sex. The guys often look rather androgynous. Bara is masculine and often goes right for the sex with little in the way of a preamble and the guys are never drawn in that androgynous fashion. It depends. If the narrative flow is dependent on some visual item that can't be worked around, then you have to find out what it is, name it correctly, but it wasn't enough to just name the thing. The story mentioned stomach ache pills and this tummy wrap thingy, and that's pretty much what I translated, but nnOOOoooo... What's the exact name of the pills in Japanese, Mr. Translator Man? And that belly wrap thingy has a name too. Give it to us! Explain it to us! Look, there's room here on the bottom left of the page. TELL US MORE!!! *fans fapping furiously in the corner* I was asked to do a third one. I said no.
So you were translating from the Japanese into English? I didn't know you knew Japanese!? Not surprised you said no though - the fans sound anal haha. Another reason why it's so good to know another language - you're at nobody's mercy should you want to access entertainment that you love that happens to be in a different language! What does an androgynous manga male character look like? I'm guessing Light from Deathnote is considered masculine? I'm used to reading the stuff for girls, whatever that's called. Like, I'm used to guys looking a bit like this:
Here's the quick and dirty... And the content is very different. Yaoi is all about dragging things out for endless episodes and installments where the love interests do a Ross & Ratchel forever and ever and ever and ever... Bara is more like: "I'm bored." "I'm horny." "Let's go bone." "Can we got to the dojo and spar first?" "We can do both at the same time." "Best. Day. Ever!" And, like anything, there's a ton of stuff that's hard to pin down. Like Antique Bakery. The drawing style in that manga isn't really yaoi or bara. It's more the typical, classic look you see in manga outside of either yaoi or bara. The guys are tall, elegant, but they're neither strongly feminized nor masculinized. *shrug*
- Haseks way to build comical characters has a lot same as Pratchett does. - Both write a main plot and comical episodes inside it. - Both use "innocent but not only innocent" -characters in comical way. - Both make fun of the way that some people seek money, power... - Both make satire that hits power structures. - Both show powerful people via they lack, flaws, faults... - Both take absolute true to the marginal where it's lunacy becomes visible. - Both write about society via fantasy. - And so on... Many humorists - like Joseph Heller - have had Good Soldier Svejk as their inspiration. (Now it of course sounds a bit racist as almost everything that is 100 years old. Mark Twain, Astrid Lindgren... So maybe we should just pile old books in the streets, burn them and signal how virtuous we are. Or... maybe not.) https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osudy_dobrého_vojáka_Švejka_za_světové_války
Tough one. I’ll have a gander at it. “Sleet wrapped around his feet like soaked socks. Snow, glazed hard on the surface, drowned under wet, laden snow falling from the sky. Fern frost melted from the windows.” Took some liberties there.
Yeah... You did. I was using the term "jalkarätti" as a petname for those huge interconnected wet flakes that are somewhere between snow and sleet. ("Sataa jalkarättejä" - you know.) Non-Finns can have a look to original and translation. Cuont the words. How many words it takes to say something in Finnish compared to saying it in English.
What I remember from the translation classes at uni, we were definitely encouraged to understand the source material. No word-for-word translations when dealing with a literary work. You'd often end up translating an idea laced with sentence structures and word choices natural to the the target language. Sometimes you can express one idea in fewer words in another language, sometimes it takes longer. Sometimes it's impossible. I absolutely love the Finnish translations of Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings. They are innovative, funny, and fit the magical worlds of both novels seamlessly. And while I don't know Russian, I was so charmed by Mirra Ginsburg's translation of Zamyatin's We that even if I was told there's a "better" translation out there, closer to the original, I don't know... I mean, Ginsburg's English captivated me, so even if there was someone else who got the nuances of the Russian original better, if their English didn't have the voice and flow of D-503, it wouldn't be the same. It wouldn't be the We I read and fell in love with. I think it's interesting how often translations are more or less adaptations of the original.
I agree on all points. In the world of linguistics, it's understood that when it comes to natural, organic human languages, if a human mind can think it and write it in one language, then it can be expressed in any other language. As you state, it may take more words, maybe fewer, and sometimes the academic idea will come across, but not necessarily the artistry with which it was written. To invoke my perennial go-to example, you would need to first understand what makes Samuel R. Delany's use of unusual phrasing unusual in English, and not just unusual, but sublimely beautiful, before you could attempt to find an analogous mode of depiction in Spanish, in Russian, in any other language. If a translator fails to do that, then half the colors would be washed away from any rendition that could possibly result.
