Printable View
What is lost in the translation to english in such works as Faust, Madame Bovary, Crime and Punishment and Anna Karenina?
All these books are on my reading list, however none have the native language of English. Would I be gaining anything by reading these works in English, or do the translations not compare?
I haven't read any of them, but I have read a number of German and French works. I think that mainly dialogues do not work translated in English.
The lyrical structure of German, is well translated, can work very well in descriptions, but when people start talking I find it goes in such an odd way! Also the other way round: Jane Eyre in German... As soon as Jane starts talking to Rochester :lol:, forget it... Brontë's descriptions though I find are possibly as good or better even in German. Faust has an additional problem in that it is written in verses. Either you take a translation that does not rime, or you take one that does. If you take on that does not, then you can have a very strange reading experience, devoid of any rhythm whatsoever. If you take a riming one, then you might have certain bits of trext badly translated due to rhythm requirements and rime... It is hard...
French I find very difficult to do, although if the translator does not try to anglicise too much, then it can work as the structures and vocabularies of both languages are much the same...
Mainly French humour if difficult to translate to English. Mainly it is just the intonation you are used to as a French speaker that you hear inside your head and that makes you laugh. Or the melodrama might get to you... It is what you do not have in English, at least not in the same way. Although, if the translator is good, he/she could bring that across... Intonation would translate into a particular word rather than nothing but experience of the reader in the original French. Descriptions I don't find have the same feel as English have, but that is probably because they are different in what they focus on... I don't know why, it just is. I find French very dry, like their acting. One has to add to it in his own imagination, like in a French film the music/silence makes up the greatest amount of emotion. You can just not do that in English, because an English sentence has adverbs to express feelings with. .
I am learning Russian and people talk in such a direct, almost rude way if translated literally. I am not nearly far enough to read Anne Karenina, but I'll start on children's books soon ;). Although I have read some stories of Pushkin, translated by I find a very good translator who had studied the whole work of that man, I would prefer to read him in Russian, because I think it offers a different feel.
Although I think English is still the most versatile language to translate into if well done.
I hope I didn't confuse you more ;).
Yep, just try to imagine Shakespeare in Dutch and it’ll give you an idea of some of the inevitable pitfalls of translated literature. In fact, that’s probably why so many people here would happily prefer to take a year or two to learn, for example, some Russian before attempting that big book about Karenin’s wife. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982
I've read all of those mentioned in translation. In fact I have read at least four translations of Crime & Punishment, including the Garnett one. I tend to prefer more modern translations than older ones (especialy with Dostoyevsky). It is always a difficult question as translation is more of an art form than anything else. Languages change over time & so does semiotic signification. E.V. Rieu's translation of the Iliad supposedly launched Penguin paperbacks. I have always found it a little heavy going. On the other hand the Lattimore translation seems full of energy & I have always loved it. Not being fluent in Ancient Greek it is difficult to be completely objective.Quote:
Originally Posted by Travis_R
Grammatically English is one of the simplest languages in the world, unfortunately English has more words than almost any other language & twice as many as some. This means English has more nuances in describing or expressing concepts. This can be very confusing to non-English speakers though.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982
Remember that Elizabethan/Jacobean English is alien to most native English speakers as well. Shakespeare also uses some dialect words peculiar to the English Midlands. I was born not far from where Shakespeare originally lived & can recognise many of these.Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame X
Furthermore many English Midland & Mercian pronunciations would be different to modern Received Pronunciation. Most of the vowels would be flatter & words such as 'bath' & 'path' would be pronounced with the same 'a' as in 'cat' or 'bat'. The diphthong 'ea' would have been pronounced to rhyme with 'hay'. So the words 'sea', 'pea', 'meat' & 'beat' would have sounded like 'say', 'pay', 'mate', & 'bait'. This is still quite common in Black Country dialects & I have heard it quite a bit in some parts of the Midlands.
It has often been said that some of the sonnets don't always rhyme that well. If you know how Shakespeare would have sounded like speaking you can hear the rhymes.
I find the Maude translations of Tolstoy work well for me, including the dialogues. Tolstoy praised these translations, and no modern translator can say that! I find Pevear & V rather stilted. I just borrowed their translation of Tolstoy's shorter works from the library and compared them directly to Maude. I *much* prefer Maude.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982
Red-head - which modern translation of C&P do you prefer? There are several, and they are quite different...
I've tried a handful of translations of the Iliad and they are *all* heavy going. I managed, at least, to get through Rieu. There's a lot to be said for plain prose! Just to be Mr Pedantic for the moment, it was Rieu's translation of the *Odyssey* that launched Penguin. That's also worth reading, and is much easier going than the Iliad. If you want something Greek that isn't plodding, try Ted Hughes' translation of the Oresteia by Aeschylus. Remarkable! (You should do the hard slog through Homer first though...)
:lol: I once went to Shakespeare's The Tempest by one of the leading amateur companies in Belgium (pretty good)... Insufferable! I'd much rather struggle and call a few people who know the word I am looking for than read him in Dutch... That said I start to get him better the more older English I read. The same for Chaucer, who is absolutely hilarious! You can just hear Austen in that, and yet they are so many years/centuries apart!Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame X
@Red-Headed: That's what I meant. Obviously I used a word that was rather ambiguous ;).
I have a beautiful hardback edition (Guild Publishing) of Maude's War & Peace in mint condition that I picked up for a couple of quid in a second-hand shop a few years ago. It is printed on India paper complete with all of the sketch maps. I think it isn't bad as a translation but I preferred the translation by Rosemary Edmonds.Quote:
Originally Posted by mal4mac
I like the David Magarshack & David McDuff translations the best.Quote:
Originally Posted by mal4mac
Yes, sorry, you are quite correct about the Odyssey & Penguin books. I have read a few translations of that, the only one I still own is Walter Shrewings (Oxford World Classics). I do recommend the Lattimore Iliad though. I have both seen & read Hughes' Oedipus Rex.Quote:
Originally Posted by mal4mac
This made me giggle a little, that's how North Americans would pronounce it anyway. It took me a moment to register what you were trying to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Red-Headed
Chaucer is difficult for modern English speakers because of the huge change in English between about 1400 & the turn of the 16th century. Many subjunctives & inflectives disappeared along with many of Chaucer's antiquated 3rd person present indicatives like 'he fyndeth'. Strangely he uses modern dialect forms like 'he fyndes' (he finds) for some of his characters to portray regional dialect. It is interesting that what was an odd dialect to Chaucer is now more or less standard English.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982
Easily done in English! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982
I think there is always something lost in translations but I prefer reading them than not to read the books at all. I read in (besides my language) English and Danish and I'm studying German for the sole purpose to read the way the books were written(wish I was better at it though)... don't think I'll go for Russian though. but I agree that Maude is very good for Tolstoy...
Yes, there was an anticipatory vowel modification shift around the time of Chancery English. Most English north of the Watford Gap (including myself) still use the flatter vowel sounds of Old English. The American accent had its origins in the East Midlands & West Country dialects according to Webster's Dictionary. I tend to agree with them. North of the Mercian area the Frisian descended English is heavily influenced by Danish. Some Danish words are still used in dialect like 'bairn' for child. Black Country & other Midlands dialects are the oldest dialects in the country & are the closest to Anglo-Saxon.Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
As a translator-to-be, I have to defend translations :D
A translation is always an adaptation, the translator's interpretation of the original text. Because no two languages are the same, vocabularies don't match completely, each word has different connotations and so on, something is always lost.
Still I think that you get much more out of a good translation than you get from the original if you're language skills aren't that good. For example, my English is so good that I can feel a book in English almost the same as a native speaker (the differences would be mostly because of a different cultural background, but that would affect reading a translation too), whereas my Swedish isn't quite on that level. I can read a book in Swedish and understand it, but I'll always miss something because I'm not familiar enough with all the nuances of the language and all the connotations of the words.
Are Garnett's translations any good? My War and Peace is translated by her and I was wondering how she compares.