Doug writes:
>I've done examinations
>of good translations and believe that they tend to capture not only the music
>but also what I call the voicing patterns --
This may be true of Zukofsky's version of Catullus, which I've just been
reading, but in that particular instance, it produces a very convoluted
English. Yet I've been told that the original is very plain-speaking.
Sisson on the other hand has produced a very readable Catullus
which sounds nothing like Zukofsky's. Which is right?
It seems that Sisson's is more useful for those with no Latin (like me)
while Z's might be for those who do know Latin and are interested
in how the sounds (but not the sense?) can be reproduced in English.
It's a rare skill that can capture both.
Alison writes:
>German has always seemed
>to me more "transparent" to English than French or Italian,
I've also found Sisson's Divine Comedy to be the most readable version
(the only one I've managed all the way through), and judging by efforts
from Binyon to Dale, it seems impossible to put it into terza rima in
English.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|