|
 |
Stephen Mitchel - Translations | ||
Tags: Polyglot | Translation | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Polyglots |  | |
| sumabeast Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 6929 days ago 212 posts - 220 votes  Speaks: English*, Arabic (Written) | Message 1 of 7 29 March 2006 at 12:05pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Stephen Mitchel who is a writer and translator of many of the worlds most sacred writings has claimed to have translated many old and ancient spiritual texts, among them:
Hebrew Bibile Bhagavad Ghita Chinese Tao text Gilgamesh Epoch (not sure what language that was translated from) along with some German spiritual works, and Latin My question or problem with this claim is that to learn such diverse languages well enough is a tremendous task in and of itself. Now on top of that are we to believe that one man has learned well enough to translate the world's most ancient and literarily eloquent and complex sacred writings? We're talking here ancient Hebrew, Sanskrit, ancient Chinese, and I believe the Gilgamesh was written in another mid-eastern, near-eastern language possibley ancient Persian, or Babylonian. I'm sorry but I simply cannot accept that this can be done by a single individual. After over a decade of Arabic studies, I still at times struggle with Arabic prose, poetry and literature. Your thoughts or comments? 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| lady_skywalker Triglot Senior Member Netherlands aspiringpolyglotblog Joined 6893 days ago 909 posts - 942 votes Speaks: Spanish, English*, Mandarin Studies: Japanese, French, Dutch, Italian | Message 2 of 7 29 March 2006 at 12:16pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Some people are naturally gifted with languages (or are simply geniuses). There's a mention of a few such people on Wikipedia and many of them were polyglot translators.
Also, one thing to bear in mind is that perhaps this man couldn't *speak* the languages he worked in. It is possible to have a fluent reading knowledge yet not be able to carry a conversation. In previous centuries it was not unheard of for people to be able to learn a dozen languages (usually including Ancient Greek and Latin) and be all to read these with ease. That's just my two cents. Not very scientific but just based on what I have read over the years. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Cthulhu Tetraglot Senior Member Canada Joined 7226 days ago 139 posts - 235 votes Speaks: French*, English, Mandarin, Russian | Message 3 of 7 29 March 2006 at 2:03pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Another important thing to keep in mind is that a lot of his "translations" aren't really translations at all, and don't pretend to be; just because someone is publishing the "definitive version" of a work doesn't mean he's translated it. I've read his version of the Gilgamesh epic, and while it is quite good it isn't a translation. Mitchel makes it quite clear that his book is an adaptation from other people's translations, not based directly on the original source material. He's a good writer, and I'm sure he's done some actual translation work, probably a lot of it, but he's not *that* erudite.
Also, you don't really need to even be able to fluently read a book in order to translate it. It certainly helps, but only possessing a rudimentary knowledge of the source language has never stopped people before. Dictionaries, reference books, and the fact that your target audience hasn't read the book in the original either all work together to allow some literary translators to get around the minor detail that they don't know what they're doing. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| seldnar Senior Member United States Joined 7135 days ago 189 posts - 287 votes Speaks: English* Studies: Mandarin, French, Greek | Message 4 of 7 30 March 2006 at 3:16am | IP Logged | ||
|
Cthulhu is right about Mitchell. For some (all?) of his works, he informs the reader that he doesn't know the language but read all the translations he could get his hands on and then "felt" his way to his "translation."
There is also an extremely popular American "translator" of Rumi who does the same thing. He said in an interview that he doesn't read Persian but he reads the other translations and "feels" what the essence is. Mention of either of these guys makes my Chinese linguistics professor apoplectic. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
 Hencke Tetraglot Moderator Spain Joined 6897 days ago 2340 posts - 2444 votes Speaks: Swedish*, Finnish, EnglishC2, Spanish Studies: Mandarin Personal Language Map | Message 5 of 7 30 March 2006 at 4:55am | IP Logged | ||
I'm sure it happens all the time, yes. But those kind of efforts hardly even deserve the name "translation". Without a fairly comprehensive knowledge of the source language you'll be bound to trip up on so many gotchas that the end result is patchy and inaccurate at best, and nonsensical and confusing at worst. I hear literal translations of English idiomatic expressions into Spanish all the time eg. on television, such as "al final del día" for "at the end of the day". If the translator is not familiar with that expression in the source language the listeners will just be left bewildered as to why a certain something is referred to as happening "in the evening" for no apparent reason. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| patuco Diglot Moderator Gibraltar Joined 7018 days ago 3795 posts - 4268 votes Speaks: Spanish, English* Personal Language Map | Message 6 of 7 30 March 2006 at 5:11am | IP Logged | ||
I agree. Editing material which has already been translated does not really require much skill in the foreign language. 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| sumabeast Diglot Senior Member United States Joined 6929 days ago 212 posts - 220 votes Speaks: English*, Arabic (Written) | Message 7 of 7 30 March 2006 at 11:28am | IP Logged | ||
OK but a reediting or rewriting of an earlier translation from the original source language cannot rightly be called a translation IMO. Then how do you ensure that you're not mearly repeating someone else's errors. Secondly rudemantary knowledge of a language will inevitably lead to gross misunderstandings and mistranslations, even more so when we're talking about the ancient sacred texts and high literary style that Mitchel is working with. "Feeling your way around the meaning" as some of you have said, is totally unacceptable and shocking that this goes on amongs reputable writers and book publishers. Edited by sumabeast on 30 March 2006 at 11:30am 1 person has voted this message useful |
If you wish to post a reply to this topic you must first login. If you are not already registered you must first register
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
