books on translation wanted
Wayne Citrin
aspects of translation, particularly the problem of conveying the
author's style in a translation. Any recommendations? Thanks.
Wayne Citrin
(ucbvax!citrin)
Dan Rose
>I'm looking for a good book or books on the philosophical and/or literary
>aspects of translation, particularly the problem of conveying the
>author's style in a translation. Any recommendations? Thanks.
Douglas R. Hofstadter (of _Godel,_Escher,_Bach_ fame) has talked
and written about this. In GEB, he includes translations of
Lewis Carroll's "Jabberwocky" into French and German and discusses
this. (How do you translate a "nonsense" poem into another
language, while preserving the connotations of the words?)
Later, he has talked about the difficulties in translating GEB
into other languages. In one instance, translators botched
an acrostic dialogue -- the first letters of each line were
supposed to spell something, but the translator missed this.
I believe he mentions some of this in his collection of Scientific
American essays, _Metamagical_Themas_. He also is interested
in such things as translations between languages which have no
distinction between gender and those which do, etc.
--
Dan (not Broadway Danny) Rose
rose@UCSD
Cary Timar
>in such things as translations between languages which have no
>distinction between gender and those which do, etc.
How do we count English? According to anglophones, English does not
distinguish genders, unlike French, German, Spanish, Latin, and all
those other languages they teach in school. On the other hand, immigrants
whose native languages do not distinguish "he" from "she" (e.g. Hungarian)
would probably say that English does have gender distinctions (this is why
some say "I met John. She is ...") It is likely that some language has
weaker gender distinctions than Hungarian (which distinguishes "he/she"
from "it"). Possibly, there are also languages with more complex gender
rules (not the same as more genders) than Latin or German.
I don't think that gender distinctions are a yes/no characteristic of
languages. The question is when and how a language distinguishes gender.
--
-- Cary Timar
Andy Behrens
who is interested in the art of translation. Of all the books I own,
it is the one I most enjoy rereading.
Proetz has found translations of (or, in a few cases, has himself
translated) passages from Chaucer, Blake, Coleridge, e.e. cummings, and
a few dozen others. The translations are followed by short essays.
Sometimes Proetz talks about the merits and faults of the translation
and points out details that especially delighted him; sometimes he
discusses the history of the work; sometimes he just lets the
translation stand on its own merit.
I had a hard time choosing a single passage that would give the flavor
of the book. The translation of Pig and Pepper (from Alice's Adventures
in Wonderland) is close to perfect, puns and all, and it's a shame to
leave out
In Xanadu liess Kubla Khan
Der Lust ger"aumigen Dom erstehen,
Wo Alph, das heilige Wasser, rann
Durch H"ohlen ohne Mass und Plan
Zu sonnenloser See....
Maybe you should just buy the book and read it yourself.
The Astonishment of Words:
An Experiment in the Comparison of Languages
Victor Proetz
University of Texas Press (Austin, 1971)
ISBN 0-292-70116-0
Andy Behrens
{astrovax,ihnp4,linus,harvard,decvax}!dartvax!burlcoat!andyb
andyb%burl...@dartmouth.CSNET
andyb%burl...@dartmouth.EDU
andyb%burlcoat%dart...@csnet-relay.ARPA
RFD 1 Box 116, Union Village, Vt. 05043
Rob Bernardo
>I don't think that gender distinctions are a yes/no characteristic of
>languages. The question is when and how a language distinguishes gender.
We must keep in mind that "gender" can be used in two different senses.
1. In one sense, gender is a property of the object being referred
to. With the exception of referring to ships and boats as "she", this is
the only gender English has. "he/him/his" is used for male animate objects,
and "she/her/hers" is used for female animate objects. This means that
gender is not really a grammatical feature of the language, but only shows
up in the *semantics* of third person pronouns (at least only there in
English). This is a semantic issue just as much as having separate words
for female parent and male parent, or having separate words for people
of different ages (baby, child, boy/girl, man/woman).
2. In the other sense, gender is a property of a (noun) *word*, and
not *necessarily* reflecting the biological gender of the referent.
A great example occurs in Russian, where there is the *grammatically*
"feminine" word sobaka meaning "hound" and the *grammatically* "masculine"
word pyos meaning "dog". One is called "feminine" because it takes
the set of endings that other "feminine" nouns take, and because
a adjective that modifies this nound must have the feminine endings.
The other is called masculine for the opposite reason.
--
Rob Bernardo, San Ramon, CA "Whenever I get the urge to work,
(415) 823-2417 I log in and read the netnews
{pyramid|ihnp4|dual}!ptsfa!rob until the feeling passes."
Dan Rose
>>in such things as translations between languages which have no
>>distinction between gender and those which do, etc.
>
>How do we count English? According to anglophones, English does not
>distinguish genders, unlike French, German, Spanish, Latin, and all
>those other languages they teach in school. On the other hand, immigrants
>whose native languages do not distinguish "he" from "she" (e.g. Hungarian)
>would probably say that English does have gender distinctions (this is why
>some say "I met John. She is ...") It is likely that some language has
>weaker gender distinctions than Hungarian (which distinguishes "he/she"
>from "it"). Possibly, there are also languages with more complex gender
>rules (not the same as more genders) than Latin or German.
There are lots of issues; I meant to include them all. For example,
in French there is no separate word for "siblings" -- you just use the
same word as "brothers"; similarly in Spanish for "parents", you use
"fathers". [Of course, in context a Spanish speaker wouldn't translate
it that way.]
Native German speakers I've known insist on calling my female dogs
"he," since the word "Hund" (sp?) is masculine.
I think Hofstadter mentions some language where there is no distinction
between the pronouns "he" and "she" (as if we used "it" in every case),
and speculates on whether this would lead to less sexism in writing.
I am reminded of a friend who took a Psychology class in which the authors
of their text wrote "The subject did such-and-such. Her response was
as follows." One student actually complained that the authors were
changing gender in mid-sentence -- obviously "the subject" refers to
a male. :-)
m.juliar
Try "On Translation" edited by Reuben A. Brower, Harvard U. Press, 1959.
It has essays by 17 translators, including Achilles Fang (I just had to
mention that name). It is probably a good collection because Vladimir
Nabokov's essay about his translation of Alexandr Pushkin's (sic)
"Eugene Onegin" is included. Its title is "The Servile Path."
I think the book is out of print. It should be in good libraries or
available through second-hand bookstores.
Michael Juliar
deb...@megaron.uucp
> between the pronouns "he" and "she" (as if we used "it" in every case),
> and speculates on whether this would lead to less sexism in writing.
I can name several (Asian) Indian languages -- among them Bengali, my
mother tongue -- which have only one third person pronoun, roughly
equivalent to "it".
This may or may not lead to less sexism in *writing*, it certainly
doesn't change the fact that these societies are extremely sexist.
This makes me feel that the whole "Sexism in Language" debate is
pretty meaningless (yes, Sapir-Whorf notwithstanding).
---
Saumya Debray
University of Arizona, Tucson
deb...@arizona.edu
{allegra, cmcl2, ihnp4}!arizona!debray
k...@hcrvax.uucp
>I can name several (Asian) Indian languages -- among them Bengali, my
>mother tongue -- which have only one third person pronoun, roughly
>equivalent to "it".
>
>This may or may not lead to less sexism in *writing*, it certainly
>doesn't change the fact that these societies are extremely sexist.
>This makes me feel that the whole "Sexism in Language" debate is
>pretty meaningless (yes, Sapir-Whorf notwithstanding).
This is the logical equivalent of: "I didn't go swimming in January,
and I caught pneumonia anyway. I think that all this nonsense about
hypothermia and pneumonia is pretty meaningless." --:)
What it boils down to is: "Every little bit counts." (Even the silly
things.)
As a sort of illustration, consider the term Mrs. In Dryden's day,
any lady worthy of respect (through age, social standing, talent)
was referred to as Mrs., and Miss was almost a diminutive. See the
(dreadful) poem "To the Memory of Mrs. Anne Killigrew, Poetess".
Now, the only way to gain this term of respect is to get married.
In the same vein, don't try calling a 60 year old German spinster Fraulein.
Ken
--
- Ken Scott
[decvax,ihnp4]!utzoo!hcr!ken
For, I said to myself, what is the universe? Big.
And what am I? Little. I therefore might as well be
at home, where my wife loves me.
- Henderson, The Rain King