Exceptional translators who translate into English

[CognitiveArtist]

Considering that the experience of a non-English book or author often hinges upon translation I was wondering how many exceptional translators there are, which reliably frame the experience of a particular language.
Two translators of this kind which have really helped me enjoy other languages are William Weaver (for Italian) and Robert Fagles (for Ancient Greek). Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky are a pair of Russian translators whose translations I haven't read, but I understand them to be the best assistants to English readers who want to appreciate Russian works.


I'm only a monoglot, so it would be nice to hear from people capable in the translated languages that have been read. Thanks :)

[jgweed]

Constance Garnett for Doestoevski
Lowe-Porter for Mann
Kaufman for Nietzsche
Barnes for Sartre

[KyleBennett]

Yeah this is an interesting question! I'm currently reading Anna Karenin translated by Rosemary Edmonds. Does this translation perfectly reflect the same experience of reading that it gives in Russian? I am as well a Monoglot, but my girlfriend is a polyglot, speaking both Swedish and English, and she often points out errors in translation between the two langauges both in feeling and in meaning.

However please don't tell me that Edmonds' Karenin is a bad translation- i've already read 769 pages, and am nearly finished. :-P

[johann cruyff]

Constance Garnett for Doestoevski
Lowe-Porter for Mann
Kaufman for Nietzsche
Barnes for Sartre

I was under the impression that Constance Garnett's translation of The Brothers Karamazov was considered to be one of the worst?

[Dori]

I was under the impression that Constance Garnett's translation of The Brothers Karamazov was considered to be one of the worst?

See this thread: http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31955&highlight=Constance+Garnett

[Nightshade]

I was actually just thinking about this as I'm currently reading Sophie's world and there is definitely something off in the translation, I just cant pin it down and its annoying me. like the inevitable question is the language deliberately so simple because Sophie is 14, or is it an after affect of translation. and the 'there is no need to carry coals to Newcastle" is that a Norwegian saying? or did the translator pull it out of a hat?

[Dori]

I was rushed in my last reply (I had to keep it secret from my microcomputer applications teacher's watchful eye ;) ). Personally, I think Charles E. Wilbur (I think that's the name) translated Les Miserables pretty well, or at least I thought the product was exceptional. He's the only other translator that I could think of, with the exception of Garnett.


I was under the impression that Constance Garnett's translation of The Brothers Karamazov was considered to be one of the worst?

To elaborate on this point: though I haven't read TBK fully, I did at least read the chapter entitled "The Grand Inquisitor." And though I haven't read other translations, I thought it was excellent. See the link in my above post for more info.

[Erichtho]

I was actually just thinking about this as I'm currently reading Sophie's world and there is definitely something off in the translation, I just cant pin it down and its annoying me. like the inevitable question is the language deliberately so simple because Sophie is 14, or is it an after affect of translation. and the 'there is no need to carry coals to Newcastle" is that a Norwegian saying? or did the translator pull it out of a hat?

The "there is no need to carry coals to Newcastle" is an English saying, but as it is with many sayings probably only regionally spread. It simply describes a pointless action and is definitely not a mistake of the translator.
And Jostein Gaarder always writes very simple, since his writings are aimed at an audience mainly consisting of young adults.

[John Goodman]

Robin Buss for French, although he has a relatively limited library.

[johann cruyff]

See this thread: http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31955&highlight=Constance+Garnett

I already knew about that thread,though I haven't visited it in a while.;) Anyway,I only said I was under the impression that this translation was considered bad in comparison to others based on what I heard from other people,not just in this forum. I didn't read it,I read the book translated to Bosnian,btw.

[CognitiveArtist]

I read (although didn't complete) Lowe-Porter's translation of Mann's Magic Mountain, and I wasn't enamored with the text. I can't exclude the possibility that I just didn't take to Mann, but whilst reading I felt a suspicion that a more majestic narrative lay behind the specific words which were translated before me. Is Lowe-Porter 'the' Mann authority? The exceptional renderer of his works? I'm now aware of John E. Woods, who is an acclaimed contemporary translator of Mann. I wonder whether I should of obtained the newer translation instead of Lowe-Porter's translation.

Also, are Larissa Volokhonsky and Richard Pevear standout Russian translators? I have a paranoia that if I just pursue the newest translations I'll overlook older, more respecting translations :)

*sigh* there is a discomfort knowing you're removed or distanced from the literature you read

[Inderjit Sanghe]

Constance Garnett's translations were frequently derided and ridiculed by Nabokov, whose Russian and English are far better than Garnett's.
I don't speak, read or write Russian so I couldn't really comment.

[Dori]

Constance Garnett's translations were frequently derided and ridiculed by Nabokov, whose Russian and English are far better than Garnett's.
I don't speak, read or write Russian so I couldn't really comment.

Everyone has their opinions . . .

[patrickbeverley]

I'm currently reading Constance Garnett's War and Peace, which I bought even though I already own the more widely-regarded L. and A. Maude translation, because I prefer Garnett. That said, I must confess to occasionally double-checking a paragraph with the Maude translation, because clarity is not Garnett's main concern, and she confuses at times.

Ralph Manheim, who translates German—English, is very good. Somebody (I forget who) commented, "So many of my favourite books are translated by Ralph Manheim that I am beginning to suspect Ralph Manheim is actually my favourite writer". His translation of Gunter Grass's The Tin Drum is particularly worth a look.

On a side note, does anyone have a particular favourite translation of Dante's Divine Comedy? (I'm with H. W. Longfellow.)

[JBI]

Anyone know a good Goethe translator, for his poems and Faust Parts 1 and 2? The copies I have seem either trying to keep metre too desperately, or trying to keep diction as close to the original.

[slobone]

The place where most translators get in wrong is not in comprehending the original work, but in rendering it in English. I frankly would rather read a translator who writes excellent English, but may make an occasional mistake or take some liberties with the original.

I grew up on Constance Garnett, and I actually think she writes pretty well. Anything Nabokov says about other writers I take with a grain of salt -- his own translation of Eugene Onegin was universally panned.

I tried reading Pevear and Volokhonsky -- Brothers Karamazov -- but I couldn't get very far. They may be more accurate, but they don't seem to have an English style that makes reading an enjoyable experience. Maybe that's the way Dostoevsky wrote in Russian, but life is too short. I read for pleasure.

[Trekker114]

slobone,
I had a similar experience with the Pevear/Volkhonsky translation. I wanted to read it because it seems to be the most highly acclaimed, but I just couldn't get very far. I ended up trying the MacAndrew translation, and I enjoyed the whole thing very much. I might give Peaver/Volkhonsky another chance if I decide to read it again in the future.

[Inderjit Sanghe]

C. K. Scott Moncrieff translated Proust beautifully from the French.

I have heard (again, I do not speak French) that Moncrieff did make Proust's language more complicated than it actually was-that he often included synoynyms just for the sake of it and that he in many ways made a bit of a botch of translating Proust's idiosyncratic French into English. I have read parts of the new translation of In Search of Lost Time and I have got to say that although they may be more literal, they certainly are not as poetic or as beautifully written as Moncrieff's version, but then again most literal translators would argue that this is a bad thing; and I would be inclined to agree with them.


I grew up on Constance Garnett, and I actually think she writes pretty well. Anything Nabokov says about other writers I take with a grain of salt -- his own translation of Eugene Onegin was universally panned.

So what if Nabokov's translation was panned? Most of Nabokov's novels were panned by mediocre critics or writers. I would trust Nabokov more than any other writer or translator of the 20th century when it comes to translating Russian into English. I guess that he disliked Garnett for the same reason that you like her-that she ignored the specific style of each writer, or she was clumsy/inattentive when it came to translating writers, and that for her it was important that the books were readable in English, rather than reflecting the style of the original. Each to his own, I guess.

[Zeruiah]

Anyone know a good Goethe translator, for his poems and Faust Parts 1 and 2? The copies I have seem either trying to keep metre too desperately, or trying to keep diction as close to the original.

Walter Kaufmann does a nice job for all of part 1 and selected pieces of part 2. His translation is not literal in the least bit, but it captures the style and meaning of the original; it would be best to use his translation for pleasurable reading rather than scholarly study.

I don't think it's possible to have a translation of Faust that will satisfy anyone completely. If you want to read Faust in the most complete way, you should get to learning some German! ;)

Ich Deutsch lerne (ein bisschen).

[JBI]

Nah, Nabokov's tastes seem idiosyncratic. His dislike of any sort of prosody seems to hamper his judgment. For prose, yes I would trust him, but for verse... There are other authorities one must consider.

[patrickbeverley]

Poetry translations are an interesting case in point, as with the considerations of sound and structure they open up a whole lot more scope for disagreement between translators.

Here, for example, is the same Baudelaire quatrain in French, and in three English versions:

Du temps que la Nature en sa verve puissante
Concevait chaque jour des enfants monstrueux,
J'eusse aimé vivre auprès d'une jeune géante,
Comme aux pieds d'une reine un chat voluptueux.

Of old when Nature, in her verve defiant,
Conceived each day some birth of monstrous mien,
I would have lived near some young female giant
Like a voluptuous cat beside a queen. -- Roy Campbell

From the time when Nature in her furious fancy
Conceived each day monstrosities obscene,
I had loved to live near a young Giantess of Necromancy,
Like a voluptuous cat before the knees of a Queen. -- Arthur Symons

In those times when Nature in powerful zest
Conceived each day monstrous children,
I would have loved to live near a young giantess,
A voluptuous cat at the feet of a queen. -- Geoffrey Wagner

Personally I like the more literal Wagner version to the other two.

[stlukesguild]

One quatrain is of very little use for measuring achievement or comparing translations. Personally, I have found Richard Howard's translation of Les Fleurs du mal to be the strongest complete translation I have read... although I do enjoy some of what I have read by Norman Shapiro (who is best known for his translations of La Fontaine), and truly admire the New Directions edition in which the editors selected what they felt were the best translations of each poem: translators include: Roy Campbell, Anthony Hecht, C.F. MacIntyre, Richard Wilbur, and F.P. Sturm (a turn of the 20th century writer who made some marvelous translations). Certainly, one can argue for the most "literal" translation... but then why not simply get the most literal prose "translation" (if such could be called a "translation") and forget the fact that what one is attempting to bring to life in a new language is poetry... music?

[patrickbeverley]

One quatrain is of very little use for measuring achievement or comparing translations.
I just wanted to give an example; I'm sure people can research in greater depth if they want to.

I used to prefer poetic translations that imitated the form of the original (such as Dorothy L. Sayers's translation of Dante) but recently I have tended to find that translations into free verse come across far more mature and natural-sounding, while still preserving the separation into lines that is, I think, the most important feature to be preserved in poetry to differentiate it from prose. Fleursdumal.org contains multiple translations of all the poems in Baudelaire's great collection, if anyone would care to read further.

For my part, I maintain that, even considering matters of prosody, this

For a long time I dwelt under vast porticos
Which the ocean suns lit with a thousand colors

(William Aggeler's literal translation for the first two lines of La vie anterieur) is a better translation than this (Roy Campbell's versified translation), though less poetic-sounding

I've lived beneath huge portals where marine
Suns coloured, with a myriad fires, the waves

for this

J'ai longtemps habité sous de vastes portiques
Que les soleils marins teignaient de mille feux

[EricP]

Can anyone recommend a good translation of Pushkin's poetry? I've heard that his poetry doesn't translate well.

[stlukesguild]

Dante Gabriel Rossetti was born during a period in which making translations of poetry was a means of developing one's own abilities as a poet (and it certainly seems to have worked for him). His book, The Early Italian Poets, is a marvelous collection of translations of Dante, Cavalcanti, and others. In the foreward, Rossetti laid out his own theory regarding translation, stating

"The only true motive for putting poetry into a fresh language must be to endow a fresh nation, as much as possible, with one more possession of beauty. Poetry not being an exact science, literality of rendering is altogether secondary to this chief aim. I say literality- not fidelity, which is by no means the same thing..."

As my own purpose for reading is largely for aesthetic pleasure, I expect that any translation I would wish to read is an aesthetically pleasing work of art in and of itself. Translations can ere in many ways. Some translators attempt to maintain the rhythm and the rhyme and end up producing something that sounds stilted or even comic in English. Others abandon such seeking out the greatest freedom in interpretation (ie. Robert Lowell's Imitations). Still others push for the greatest veracity or literality to the original words/meaning... often at the expense of losing any of the music or "poetry" of the original. Personally, I don't think there is a single manner that is inherently better than another. Shelley and Rossetti and Richard Wilbur (quite the formalist) showed themselves to be quite masterful at translating poetry and maintaining the formal structure of rhyme and rhythm. On the other hand, many of what I would consider to be the best translations of poetry make little effort at maintaining the rhyme. Actually, I quite admire a good number of Roy Campbell's translations (Baudelaire, San Juan de la Cruz, Spanish theater, etc...) which have a certain muscularity... and a poetic musicality.

[EricP]

As a Russian, I can tell you Pushkin translates beautifully.

The Charles Johnston translation preserves the meter best, I think, but I also like the Nabokov and James Falen translations.

Thanks! I'll have to pick up one of those translations. I read a collection of Pushkin's prose works while I was in the Peace Corps (The village I lived in was formerly called Pushkino while Azerbaijan was still a part of the Soviet Union). Anyway, the introduction to the book (I can't remember who it was written by or even the exact title of the collection) stated that Pushkin's poetry was never done justice in English translation. Thanks for dispelling that claim! :D