I admit to these days only to liking translations with the original attached.
There was a nice article in the Guardian the other week about
translators cleaning up the syntax and punctuation in the target
language, rather than translating the original syntax, punctuation etc
- part of missing the original complexity.
Roger
On 09/05/06, MJ Walker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 1) a) Of course - b) that's exactly why I speak of imitations &
> per/versions.
> 2) But what is anything *put* into language a translation of? To me, a
> poem is a creation, a construct, an artefact. Who's worrying? What I was
> polemically digging at was the spread of watery "translations" coming to
> replace, in their pseudo-poetic way, the original complexity. I am
> thinking especially of all the awful translations of Rilke I have seen.
> 3) I never said it wasn't.
> 4) I like Robert Kelly's translation of Shelley.
>
> Martin
>
> Pierre Joris wrote:
>
> > 1) a) of course, poetry is untranslatable. and b) that's exactly why
> > we have to translate it.
--
http://www.badstep.net/
http://www.cb1poetry.org.uk/
"All I Want For Christmas Is A Dukla-Prague Away Kit"
Half-Man Half-Biscuit
|