Where does an author exist?

[aliengirl]

Where do you think an author belongs and exists? A few days ago I met a professor who believes that an author exists in his/her own language. He said that it is impossible to master another language and hence it is not possible to express one self as one would like to. A person can express him/her self only in his/her mother tongue.

I wonder whether it is possible to fully master one's mother tongue/first language. Also there have been exceptional writers who expressed themselves very well in their second or third language.

What do you think lit-net authors?

[Steven Hunley]

Where do you think an author belongs and exists? A few days ago I met a professor who believes that an author exists in his/her own language. He said that it is impossible to master another language and hence it is not possible to express one self as one would like to. A person can express him/her self only in his/her mother tongue.

I wonder whether it is possible to fully master one's mother tongue/first language. Also there have been exceptional writers who expressed themselves very well in their second or third language.

What do you think lit-net authors?

I'm surprised someone who was a professor actually made such a blanket statement. He's obviously never read Joseph Conrad. Conrad was Polish, spoke Polish as his mother tongue, learned French, and by the time he was 40 or so, had mastered the English language, and I mean MASTERED it. Some people are good with languages.

Of course. he may be good in Polish too, I concede that.

[Maximilianus]

I believe the level of mastery of any language depends on how wildly the language runs in your veins, plus some other factors that often lie beyond our control, such as cognitive issues that may present a strong impediment for some people, no matter if it is their mother tongue or a second language, or in general, anything they may try to learn.

You can find native speakers of any language suffering from serious linguistic issues, whereas at the same time you can find people who don't have a language as a mother tongue, yet they master it better than many of its natives. It all depends on the shaping of our cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and strictly related to health, on how well our cognitive functions operate. Added to that is the fact that when you learn any language consciously, you become more fully aware of its features, which would often represent a riddle to people unaccustomed to language learning (their mother tongue included).

On the best possible scenario, provided our cognitive system is healthy enough, I think authors will belong and exist in the language (or languages) of their choosing.

[Maximilianus]

Besides, the general theory around language learning states that everyone is prepared to learn languages. Otherwise, we would have never learned the silly phrases our moms and dads used to teach us our mother tongues :)

[JCamilo]

Steven pointed that is obviously that several authors master different languages than his mother language. Conrad as he mentioned, Beckett is another, Nabokov, all the guys like Dante or Milton that are awesome in latim beside english or italian, every good translator that do learn more than one language...

[hillwalker]

I was brought up speaking and reading Welsh and have written several pieces in Welsh - one of which was published in an Arts magazine when I was still at school.

I obviously consider English as my main language now, and again I've had work published in English, although when I'm back amongst family I can switch to thinking in Welsh quite easily. So I think your professor is speaking tosh.

H

[Steven Hunley]

Steven pointed that is obviously that several authors master different languages than his mother language. Conrad as he mentioned, Beckett is another, Nabokov, all the guys like Dante or Milton that are awesome in latim beside english or italian, every good translator that do learn more than one language...

This brings up a good point. I was reading and writing about Guy De Maupassant the other day, and wrote a short called Me and Guy or Guy and Me, it's here somewhere. Going over his work, back and forth between pages on the internet, I thought for a second I was doing different passages of The Necklace.

Then I noticed that certain details were the same! Then I noticed it was the very same passage, but a different translation! OOPS!

So then I decided never to trust a translation. They give you the gist of the meanings, but never the subtlety of the original language, it seemed.

I noticed that you last commenters are from primarily Spanish speaking countries so I suppose you can speak Spanish, and that English is your second language.

When you read something that's been translated, do you who are conversant with both languages find it (to use a cliché) 'suffers in the translation'?


I suppose it would be the best case scenario when the original author did the translating himself, could that be?

[cafolini]

I wouldn't even attempt to discuss these so=called issues because they have no bearing. You see a master when he/she appears and nowhere else. What do I need more than that for?
And I agree with H. What the proffesor had to say was BS.

[JCamilo]

This brings up a good point. I was reading and writing about Guy De Maupassant the other day, and wrote a short called Me and Guy or Guy and Me, it's here somewhere. Going over his work, back and forth between pages on the internet, I thought for a second I was doing different passages of The Necklace.

Then I noticed that certain details were the same! Then I noticed it was the very same passage, but a different translation! OOPS!

So then I decided never to trust a translation. They give you the gist of the meanings, but never the subtlety of the original language, it seemed.

I noticed that you last commenters are from primarily Spanish speaking countries so I suppose you can speak Spanish, and that English is your second language.

When you read something that's been translated, do you who are conversant with both languages find it (to use a cliché) 'suffers in the translation'?


I suppose it would be the best case scenario when the original author did the translating himself, could that be?

Portuguese speaking country to be precise, but all depends the translation. Sometimes, if familiar enough with the text, I will see what was done with the text. Sometimes, it is possible to see it even if you are unfamiliar with the language. But the main point, some of best and more influential works of human history are translations. From Homer, to the bible, 1001 nights or even Baudelaire's versions of Poe. There is times when the translation will add something special, or lose to add something else. I think we are lucky that we can have so many good versions of so many works

I do know, maybe an author that is proficient in both languages choose one language over another for a reason and the translation would be a hard work as he do not really have anything to add or change to that text, so self-translations can be hard. I feel myself a bit like this, some stuff in english or portuguese are just not the same.

[cafolini]

Water might be wet?

[ralfyman]

Try

https://wiki.brown.edu/confluence/download/attachments/74858352/FoucaultWhatIsAnAuthor.pdf

and similar works.

[cacian]

a writer co-exists but a person exists. The implication that a writer exists because of a book one might as well live in it.


Where do you think an author belongs and exists?

I think a writer belongs to a set of ideals that are redefined as solidified debates to emancipate and hopefully elongate the meanings of lives.

A few days ago I met a professor who believes that an author exists in his/her own language.


He said that it is impossible to master another language and hence it is not possible to express one self as one would like to. A person can express him/her self only in his/her mother tongue.

Mastery is not through language for although it would greatly help it is through ideas. One creates a word and another a meaning such is the odyssey of a multilingual writer. He or she multitask with words in a variety of width and length in meanings and therefore he or she is a master of simple to complex then complex to simple. It is a like weaver of argyle type of synergy energy repository and feelings with mutuals. It is game of words to sound roads.


I wonder whether it is possible to fully master one's mother tongue/first language.
one has mastery of his or her language for one speaks it evidently. It may not be to the perfection to which one may pertain ascertain but I believe it is mostly down to the oratory and spoken dignatories. One may this nay and the other way but there is no fixed rules to fixed dilemmas only fixed reeling from a word to another, spelling/mispelling a part of it and thus nourished is the deal.

Also there have been exceptional writers who expressed themselves very well in their second or third language.
If writing was down to expressive exactness we will all be stamping words and singing books. Operas do just that glorify the sayings/words for fear of it/them swaying from those who nay weigh it.

[cacian]

Besides, the general theory around language learning states that everyone is prepared to learn languages. Otherwise, we would have never learned the silly phrases our moms and dads used to teach us our mother tongues :)

I would say man equals language and in any language. The quicker we conquer sound ie language in its varieties and forms and tolerate fractions of it/them and the quicker we conquer rank of the intellectual stand that is.
By intellectual I mean differences of pinions and audiences to any porter or stance.

[osho]

In fact I too come from a different language community. I have started learning it after completion of my high school. I do not speak in English and I use it only on the Internet. Now I have tirelessly been trying to attune my English in line with the ones spoken and written in English speaking countries. Now English is spoken in many countries as mother tongues, not in my country. Even in India it is spoken widely and most use it bilingually- that means parents use English along side their local vernaculars. That is why some of them are really good at both English and their mother tongues. That is why India is accredited with great writers writing in English today and some of them are shining even in the west.

In my case I enjoy communicating to people across languages and cross –cultures. Of course there are barriers, and the strong iron gate I have to enter through is grammar. It does not come naturally since I cannot naturalize or internalize it the way you guys and girls do easily and mellifluently .

I am indeed inspired by Conrad but his was a different situation and he was a great voyager and could interact with voyagers from across other nations.

I do not care and I do not dream of being a Conrad and I have smaller dreams and I am an internet writer and remain satisfied with the commendations and comments from the Net I am on.

[cacian]

I do not care and I do not dream of being a Conrad and I have smaller dreams and I am an internet writer and remain satisfied with the commendations and comments from the Net I am on
osho you say you are an ''internet writer'' do you mean you only write using the intermet?

[osho]

osho you say you are an ''internet writer'' do you mean you only write using the intermet?

In fact I am only writing on the internet and I do not publish anywhere in English. Of course I do write massively in my vernacular but as regards English I have to confine myself only to the net. I do not write for other purposes.

[hillwalker]

I met a professor who believes that an author exists in his/her own language. He said that it is impossible to master another language and hence it is not possible to express one self as one would like to. A person can express him/her self only in his/her mother tongue.


A writer co-exists but a person exists. Implication a writer exist because of a book one might as well live in it.
I think a writer belongs to a set of ideals that are redefined as solidified debates to emancipate and hopefully elongate the meanings of lives.
Mastery is not through language for although it would greatly helps it is through ideas. One creates a word and another a meaning such is the odyssey of a multilingual writer. He or she multitask with words in a variety of width and length in meanings and therefore he or she is a master of simple to complex then complex to simple. It is a like weaver of argyle type of synergy energy repository and feelings with mutuals. It is game of words to sound roads.
One has mastery of his or her language for one speaks evidently. It may not be to the perfection to which one may pertain ascertain but I believe it is mostly down to the oratory and spoken dignatories. One may this nay and the other way but there is no fixed rules to fixed dilemmas only fixed reeling from a word to another ,spelling a part of if. And so by this it let it nourish the dealing.
If writing was down to the expressions only we will all be singing books. Operas are do just that glorify the sayings for fear of it swaying from those who nay weigh it.
I would say man equals language any language. The quicker we conquer sound ie language and the quicker we conquer rank of the intellectual stand that is.

Oh - the irony.

H

[aliengirl]

Thank you all for such sincere responses. I was really disturbed by his blanket statement. When I discussed this issue with a few students they all agreed with him, probably because he happens to be a prof.


I'm surprised someone who was a professor actually made such a blanket statement. He's obviously never read Joseph Conrad. Conrad was Polish, spoke Polish as his mother tongue, learned French, and by the time he was 40 or so, had mastered the English language, and I mean MASTERED it. Some people are good with languages.

Of course. he may be good in Polish too, I concede that.

Conrad's name popped in my mind as soon as he said this. Also the famous poet Muhammad Iqbal wrote in Urdu as well as in Persian. He is regarded as a master in both languages.

I should have given you a little background information but I avoided it to influence your opinions. I'm from India and English is my third language. I can speak and write Urdu and Hindi besides English. The professor I mentioned is the head of the English department of our local university. His statement was in the context of poetry. He gave examples of several poets including Eliot who tried to write in other languages and then came back to their mother tongue. He said that Hindi is the best medium for an Indian poet because it incorporates his/her cultural vista.

Of course I disagree with him. There are several Indian authors and poets who are writing in English and have won international acclaim. Rushdie, Arundhati Roy, Kiran Desai, Nissim Ezikel, Aga Shahid Ali, Tabish Khair…to name a few.


I was brought up speaking and reading Welsh and have written several pieces in Welsh - one of which was published in an Arts magazine when I was still at school.

I obviously consider English as my main language now, and again I've had work published in English, although when I'm back amongst family I can switch to thinking in Welsh quite easily. So I think your professor is speaking tosh.

H

So do I. Strictly speaking he is not my professor. I'm glad he joined the department after I left. :)

No one would doubt that English is not your main language hillwalker.

You've reminded me of a very interesting point. I discussed this issue with several persons here. Most of the people believe that we can't think in English as it is not our first language. I've consciously tried to analyze my own thinking procedure. I found that I can think in English while responding to English comments. No internal mental translation is involved. I can easily switch back to my first language too.

[aliengirl]

I believe the level of mastery of any language depends on how wildly the language runs in your veins, plus some other factors that often lie beyond our control, such as cognitive issues that may present a strong impediment for some people, no matter if it is their mother tongue or a second language, or in general, anything they may try to learn.

...
On the best possible scenario, provided our cognitive system is healthy enough, I think authors will belong and exist in the language (or languages) of their choosing.

I agree. :) Perhaps I should have explained that we were talking about people who are good with both their first and second language. The professor still said that no matter how expert a person is in the second language he'll exist in his MT. You know, this rankled a bit because I believe I exist in more than one language.



Steven pointed that is obviously that several authors master different languages than his mother language. Conrad as he mentioned, Beckett is another, Nabokov, all the guys like Dante or Milton that are awesome in latim beside english or italian, every good translator that do learn more than one language...

Thanks for pointing out Beckett, Nabokov, Dante and Milton.

[qimissung]

If you can think in another language, Aliengirl, it means you are fluent in that language. I wonder what on earth this professor thinks that word means. It is certainly not an easy task to become fluent in another language, and obviously not that many writers are able to do justice to it (in comparison with the population at large), but just those authors already mentioned show that it can be done.

[aliengirl]

In fact I too come from a different language community. I have started learning it after completion of my high school. I do not speak in English and I use it only on the Internet.
...
In my case I enjoy communicating to people across languages and cross –cultures. Of course there are barriers, and the strong iron gate I have to enter through is grammar. It does not come naturally since I cannot naturalize or internalize it the way you guys and girls do easily and mellifluently .
...

I do not care and I do not dream of being a Conrad and I have smaller dreams and I am an internet writer and remain satisfied with the commendations and comments from the Net I am on.

Maybe you should worry less about grammar and start speaking English. Speaking is an important part of learning a language.
I don't understand what you mean by 'naturalize or internalize' but I know that if you are willing to learn a language and consciously strive to improve it there is nothing which can stop you. It is good that you've chosen to communicate in English on the internet.

And yes, it won't harm you to dream BIG. Dreams transform into thoughts and thoughts result in action. :)

[aliengirl]

Qimiss - The original discussion with the professor was about poetry and poets. We were talking about the possibilities of expressing our 'selves' (and therefore existing) in language(s). Thank you for your input. :)

[Adolescent09]

I'm surprised someone who was a professor actually made such a blanket statement. He's obviously never read Joseph Conrad. Conrad was Polish, spoke Polish as his mother tongue, learned French, and by the time he was 40 or so, had mastered the English language, and I mean MASTERED it. Some people are good with languages.

Of course. he may be good in Polish too, I concede that.

Um... no. I love your short stories, Hunley, and in my honest opinion you are easily my second favorite short story writer on LitNet ('Petrarch's Love' is my first) but neither you nor she has 'mastered' your language, let alone your craft.

1) Languages are constantly taking on new meaning; EVEN dead ones like Latin. Your brain would have to work at the speed of light to keep up with all of the active research going on in different languages/dialects.

2) Joseph Conrad dissed Dostoevsky, which IMO, is blasphemy. His writing might be stylistically and grammatically sublime or whatever nonsense quota people use to assess "good writing", but it bored me beyond death. If, he could manage to keep me awake past pg. 10 when Tolstoy has kept me going well past pg. 1100, Hugo past pg. 1400, Cervantes past pg. 1000, and Dumas past pg. 1050... that is when he has the right to spew his elitist gibberish about Dostoevsky.

3) New words are cropping up all the time and it is a very daunting task keeping track of them all.

4) I guess 3) and 1) are pretty much the same but, whateva!!!

Can somebody 'master' 99.9999999999999999% percent of a language? Maybe
But 100% 'mastered'? Doubt it.

Either that or I am taking you far too literally.

[Adolescent09]

a writer co-exists but a person exists. The implication that a writer exists because of a book one might as well live in it.



I think a writer belongs to a set of ideals that are redefined as solidified debates to emancipate and hopefully elongate the meanings of lives.




Mastery is not through language for although it would greatly helps it is through ideas. One creates a word and another a meaning such is the odyssey of a multilingual writer. He or she multitask with words in a variety of width and length in meanings and therefore he or she is a master of simple to complex then complex to simple. It is a like weaver of argyle type of synergy energy repository and feelings with mutuals. It is game of words to sound roads.


one has mastery of his or her language for one speaks evidently. It may not be to the perfection to which one may pertain ascertain but I believe it is mostly down to the oratory and spoken dignatories. One may this nay and the other way but there is no fixed rules to fixed dilemmas only fixed reeling from a word to another ,spelling/mispelling a part of it and thus the nourished is the deal.

If writing was down to expressive exactness we will all be stamping words and singing books. Operas are do just that glorify the sayings/words for fear of it swaying from those who nay weigh it.

Where would I find my source of humor if you weren't here, Cacian?

[Steven Hunley]

I agree with Adolescent, I am no where near a master of either my language or craft, but I am hard at learning both. I didn't know that about Conrad, but suspect he was upset because Dostoyevsky was Russian and the Russians took over Poland when he was younger. To you who can speak and write in more than one language, my hat is off to you, it's quite an accomplishment.

My idea was that since words in any language have denotative and connotative meanings, only the original authors would know which exact translations would be best. I agree, mastery is most likely impossible, given the nature of language, how it changes and the regional variations in meanings. Second best ain't so bad considering how good many here are!

[aliengirl]

Can somebody 'master' 99.9999999999999999% percent of a language? Maybe
But 100% 'mastered'? Doubt it.

Either that or I am taking you far too literally.

Is it necessary to master a language completely to express oneself? Not even native speakers know all the words of a well-developed old language. I think it is an achievement to be able to put into the second language one's ideas and feelings as exactly as possible. Luckily there are many who have done this. The issue is not about being a master, it is about self-expression.

Dostoevsky is one of my favorite writers but he never wrote in English. Conrad may have disliked Dostoevsky for some reasons but it can't take away the fact that he wrote novels in his third language that are included in English courses all over the world.

[aliengirl]

My idea was that since words in any language have denotative and connotative meanings, only the original authors would know which exact translations would be best. I agree, mastery is most likely impossible, given the nature of language, how it changes and the regional variations in meanings. Second best ain't so bad considering how good many here are!

You're right that the original authors would be the best translators of their works, ideally. Certain words and cultural phrases/idioms are difficult (almost impossible) to translate if there is a great cultural difference between the languages.
I can't recall any other name except Rabindra Nath Tagore who translated his collection of poems, Gitanjali, from Bangla to English. Unfortunately I don't know Bangla and hence can't judge how well he fared.

I've read translations of many English stories/books into my first language. The quality of translations vary a great deal. There was an excellent translation of Anderson's The Ugly Duckling, so good that it retained the sounds of onomatopoeic words. Some translations are so poor that you won't even recognize the original source.

[aliengirl]

.......

[cafolini]

You're right that the original authors would be the best translators of their works, ideally. Certain words and cultural phrases/idioms are difficult (almost impossible) to translate if there is a great cultural difference between the languages.
I can't recall any other name except Rabindra Nath Tagore who translated his collection of poems, Gitanjali, from Bangla to English. Unfortunately I don't know Bangla and hence can't judge how well he fared.

I've read translations of many English stories/books into my first language. The quality of translations vary a great deal. There was an excellent translation of Anderson's The Ugly Duckling, so good that it retained the sounds of onomatopoeic words. Some translations are so poor that you won't even recognize the original source.

I'm glad you are here to take care of these so-called issues in a sensical way. One very important thing is indeed the impossibility of translation of idiomatic passages. Another is the fact that translators are artists different but equivalent to the writers. A good translation is a work of art. Good points.

[JCamilo]

I agree with Adolescent, I am no where near a master of either my language or craft, but I am hard at learning both. I didn't know that about Conrad, but suspect he was upset because Dostoyevsky was Russian and the Russians took over Poland when he was younger. To you who can speak and write in more than one language, my hat is off to you, it's quite an accomplishment.

Maybe, but maybe not just it. Dostoievisky sometimes is a very bad writer, that is why. A bit what happens with Poe, his need to make money with the texts, his target audience, etc. didnt made him go for a stylistic kind of writing like Chekhov or Tolstoy (both with strong criticism towards Dostoievisky too) and Conrad, whose model was Flaubert, felt the same way. Conrad was not a big fan of sentimentalism, so even Tolstoy's more sentimental work was attacked by Conrad. With that, must mention Conrad also disliked the christianism of their works.

[Steven Hunley]

I'm glad you are here to take care of these so-called issues in a sensical way. One very important thing is indeed the impossibility of translation of idiomatic passages. Another is the fact that translators are artists different but equivalent to the writers. A good translation is a work of art. Good points.

Me too, this subject has really been examined in detail and many significant point brought up. I taught ESL for a year in at Compton High School, and the hardest part was idiomatic expressions, which are used everyday, and have no chance of being translated word for word. I'm so pleased with the depth of which this subject was examined.

[Adolescent09]

Is it necessary to master a language completely to express oneself? Not even native speakers know all the words of a well-developed old language. I think it is an achievement to be able to put into the second language one's ideas and feelings as exactly as possible. Luckily there are many who have done this. The issue is not about being a master, it is about self-expression.

Dostoevsky is one of my favorite writers but he never wrote in English. Conrad may have disliked Dostoevsky for some reasons but it can't take away the fact that he wrote novels in his third language that are included in English courses all over the world.

Hypothetically speaking, we don't need language at all to express ourselves. Allow me to resort to the ageless cliche: "A picture means a thousand words". This suggests that the facial/body expressions of humans and the artwork of humans (just to name two) both have the potential to convey the self-expression of one's feelings and thoughts. (Simple ex.: frown face=sad, smile=happy)

Babies are known for genuine self-expression since typically, their physical gestures convey precisely how they feel (Simple ex. above)
In fact, the argument can be made that language dilutes the authenticity of self-expression, since every person's vocabulary is limited to some extent and many words have different connotations to different people and between translations.

You seem to have embedded a very good definition of 'mastery' in your response: 'to [put into] language one's ideas and feelings as exactly as possible'. Insofar as the mastery of any language is concerned, I agree that there is an infinitely approximate limit to which any person can achieve rhetorical/oratorical greatness.

(P.S.: if you saw a dehydrated squirrel, would you take it to the vet? I see one right outside my house but I am afraid of being bitten :D)

[Adolescent09]

Maybe, but maybe not just it. Dostoievisky sometimes is a very bad writer, that is why. A bit what happens with Poe, his need to make money with the texts, his target audience, etc. didnt made him go for a stylistic kind of writing like Chekhov or Tolstoy (both with strong criticism towards Dostoievisky too) and Conrad, whose model was Flaubert, felt the same way. Conrad was not a big fan of sentimentalism, so even Tolstoy's more sentimental work was attacked by Conrad. With that, must mention Conrad also disliked the christianism of their works.

Tolstoy and especially Poe are berated by some for being 'too stylistically' accurate. So much so that their writing comes off as constrained and 'preachy'. I personally prefer Dostoevsky to Tolstoy :\.

[aliengirl]

I'm glad you are here to take care of these so-called issues in a sensical way. One very important thing is indeed the impossibility of translation of idiomatic passages. Another is the fact that translators are artists different but equivalent to the writers. A good translation is a work of art. Good points.


Me too, this subject has really been examined in detail and many significant point brought up. I taught ESL for a year in at Compton High School, and the hardest part was idiomatic expressions, which are used everyday, and have no chance of being translated word for word. I'm so pleased with the depth of which this subject was examined.

Geez...I forgot I was supposed to run away after posting the question. :eek2: :leaving:

Glad you both don't mind my coming back. :D I've worked a little in the area of translation and intend to get back to it again. Translations are no doubt labors of love.

[aliengirl]

Hypothetically speaking, we don't need language at all to express ourselves. Allow me to resort to the ageless cliche: "A picture means a thousand words".
...
(P.S.: if you saw a dehydrated squirrel, would you take it to the vet? I see one right outside my house but I am afraid of being bitten :D)

Ah, the wonderful labyrinths of an adolescent mind! ;) You've taken the discussions to a realm I don't aspire to. At least not now.

P.S. - The next time you see a dehydrated animal/bird pick it up with a towel. It would protect both of you. Before running to the vet you may give him some water/ORS with a dropper.

[qimissung]

:lol: As well as being knowledgeable about language, you are kind to animals, aliengirl. Good to know.

I've also taught ESL and having students compose in English can be a really powerful tool in learning the language and becoming confident in using it.

[aliengirl]

Thank you for your kind words qimiss. :)