How do you cope with the fact that translations are not the intended direct form of the work?
How can you read work not in it's native form? How can a japanese person and an american individual read a russian novel translated in their own language and for all of them to be considered to have "read the book"? Obviously actual literature isn't just about the plot points. And it isn't just about the meaning behind the words and sentences, but how they express and literally how they sound aswell. This get's especially absurd with poetry, where every single syllable is absolutely essential to the work. I understand how translations (subtitles) can work with a medium like film because the meaning and emotion is mainly in the visuals and the audio, but in literature there isn't anything else but the words expressing it all.
So isn't this the biggest flaw of literature? Shouldn't we all first learn Ancient Greek, Koine Greek, Latin, French, Russian, German, English and only then to start dwelling into literature?
>Shouldn't we all first learn Ancient Greek, Koine Greek, Latin, French, Russian, German, English and only then to start dwelling into literature? Life isn't as long as you think retard. No one has the time to learn those languages.
Daniel Rivera
>How do you cope with the fact that translations are not the intended direct form of the work?
There's not much that you can do about it so don't get too upset. Maybe if you're lucky you'll be born as a Russian or Japanese person and then you can experience these languages first hand.
Jordan Taylor
I'm sure if you value your time so much you wouldn't be posting here.
Jordan Martin
That makes two of us.
Kayden Adams
>intended direct form >muh intention Why should I give a fuck about that? If we're being fussy, anyone who reads Homer instead of listening to a blind itinerant poet recite the Iliad around a campfire from memory is not experiencing the intended direct firm
Joshua Torres
It's not about the intention behind the words, but the intention of the form. It doesn't matter what the intention of a composer is behind his work, but if you would literally rearrange the chords and notes by some "translator" you literally get different work there.
Chase Barnes
Good translators are as rare and as important as good authors. Did it already happen to you to thkin: "oh shit I thought that was a translation, but apparently it was written in [my language]?!" - then you realize it was actually translated? Happened to me several times. Not often. But the difference between a bad translation and a very good one is absolutely obvious. And it is so significant that everybody should admit the following: translations are worth reading. Only pseuds disagree. Also... I wish there were threads about good translators. Some are very famous for a legit reason.
Blake Hill
And by reading a text of 'Homer' instead of letting our blind friend improvise as he feels we aren't getting the real experience or meaning. Authenticity is bullshit. Chasing a 'true', 'perfect' text which contains some real authentic meaning is a fools errand. Your music analogy doesn't work, as pieces are constantly mixed up and changed, and there is no 'true' version. What tempo should we play Bach? With which instruments? When Hendrix added an extra chord to 'All Along the Watchtower' was that 'wrong'? And now when Dylan plays it with that extra chord is he playing it wrong?
Brayden Taylor
>yf The original author most likely lacked the literary ability to put the pure vision on paper anyway. A good translation would not be much more of a bastardization.
Making your own versions/interpretations are ofcourse not "wrong", but they are different and meant to be different from it's original form. But when you read a certain novel let's say you are not expecting to read different versions or interpretations of the work.
Everything that you listed out is important, while you're presenting is as irrelevant. The tempo and the way in which one decides to play Bach is literally the interpretation of that musician of the work, it's not that it's irrelevant or the same no matter how you play it.
Dylan Kelly
Why not just pick the language you are most interested in and most likely to use
Who said it was irrelevant? There point is there is no true authentic version of AATW from which all others are derivations. Each version exists in its own right and is its own thing. There isn't an official version you have to listen to to be able to say you have heard the song. Likewise with novels.
Thomas Mitchell
People are literally fighting not only to get the exact original arrangement of a song, but even the exact sound mixing of every element as it was made and rendered in the studio, dismissing later remaster interpretations as false.
And this is just sound mixing we're talking about, let alone changing entire chord progressions. It only works with interpretations, not when presented as the work from the original artist. You wouldn't change the brush stroke of Van Gogh
Adam Collins
A 3 year modern languages/comparative literature/linguistics degree will get you half of them, a 3 year classics degree will get you the other half, all the while shitposting on mongolian sites in your free time. Life isn't as short as you think.
Camden Russell
>People are literally fighting Nerds are fighting, nobody else need care. Don't know about Van Gogh, but how much of the Last Supper is actually Da Vinci? Maybe 10% at this stage. I'm good enough at Latin to read a lot of the classics, I don't think it makes much of a difference to read 'Gaul is divided into three parts' or 'Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres'. Read it in English and save the effort
Zachary Lewis
>I don't think it makes much of a difference to read 'Gaul is divided into three parts' or 'Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres'. Read it in English and save the effort Now take any sentence that is not presented as a factual statement, any that gives any emotion or meaning at all. Poetry especially
Cameron Williams
Yeah, it's dumb to read poetry in translation but novels and philosophy don't really lose much translated.
Jeremiah Fisher
You pick an example.
Benjamin Thomas
Not that user, but literally anything from the Bible, even statements. People have been debating the meaning of the original Classical Hebrew for centuries. Is it 'God manifested in the flesh' or 'God appeared in the flesh'? Appear and manifest carry different implications behind them, so naturally it's extremely important to find the right translation
Nicholas Bailey
I read books in original knowing russian and english.
Isaiah Bennett
Your problem is autism, my friend.
Cameron Russell
If you're talking about novels like this one then it does
>Most of the book's spirit is however lost in translation, as the Portuguese original is written in a register that is both archaic and colloquial, as well as full of the author's remakable neologisms, which makes the aesthetics of the book a challenging task to transpose to other languages.
Ancient Hebrew only had a few thousand words and about a quarter were synonyms for God. The first appearance of the word in Genesis is a verb: Berashith, translated as 'In the beginning' means just 'beginningness' so a fair translation of Genesis would start with "Beginningness, Godding took place.'
Elohim is a feminine and plural word.
David Scott
But why should we privilege one of those interpretations over any others? Other than being written first, what makes the original Hebrew more important or better than the KJV? Or to avoid getting bogged down in biblical shitposting, why should I value the Cervantes over the Smollett version of Don Quixote? If you say if I haven't read Cervantes I haven't read DQ, I could say straight back to you that if you haven't read Smollett you haven't read DQ.
Mason James
Brainlet, he means that in the original hebrew the word carries both meanings and this can't be carried to the English version, you have to choose. This is how different language works. This happens all over the place when you have to translate something.
Bentley Brooks
>But why should we privilege one of those interpretations over any others The argument is that you should "privilege" the original expression over the interpretations. Sure you can like and even prefer a specific interpretation more than the original, but to pretend it's the same is absurd
Ayden Phillips
I also used to let my desire to experience media ‘the right way’ remove my enjoyment and drive to consume. At the end of the day it’s a stupid sentiment, in line with the autists at Yea Forums who go to absurd lengths to avoid ‘spoilers.’ You’re more than likely never going to devote the time required to read these works in the original language at the level required to understand nuance like you desire, so the question you need to ask yourself is, would I rather experience these works with a slight loss of fidelity from the original, or never experience them at all?
Benjamin Phillips
I don’t have enough time to learn 5-10 languages to a native-level proficiency, I’ll just end up translating stuff into English in my head at a lower level than the translator. I do still study Latin and German for fun, but I don’t stress over not knowing every Yea Forums language.
The way to cope is to read multiple translations of the same work, so I can, over time, draw closer to the exact meaning
Evan Butler
This. Worrying about not being able to read the original language is dumb. Pick a well-reviewed translation and start reading.
