|
 |
English Translations of Shakespeare. | ||
Share with:
| ||
 Language Learning Forum : Specific Languages |  | |
| Dario8015 Diglot Newbie United Kingdom Joined 6001 days ago 37 posts - 43 votes Speaks: English*, Italian Studies: Russian, Swedish | Message 9 of 33 28 May 2009 at 12:34pm | IP Logged | ||
|
If you 'translate' Shakespeare's language into modern English, it ceases to be Shakespeare - recasting the original simply panders to laziness, and all of the beauty of the original is lost. Shakespeare isn't that difficult - it just takes a modicum of effort - and I'm surprised to hear some members of a language forum advocating the bastardisation of Shakespeare in this way.
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Meadowmeal Pentaglot Groupie Netherlands Joined 5711 days ago 43 posts - 57 votes  Speaks: Dutch*, French, English, German, Polish Studies: Romanian | Message 10 of 33 28 May 2009 at 1:05pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Do you consider translations of S's work into a foreign language as bastardisations as well? Also if it's translated in a language that's very close to English, e.g. Scots ( I don't know if this is done, but it's the closest language I can think of)? If not, why would a translation into modern English be? And why do you assume that translation necessarily equals loss of beauty? I may be a bit sensitive on this point, being a translator myself, but I think good literary translations can be as beautiful and valuable as the original. I even think that the distance imposed by old/foreign language can make it hard to experience the work in the same way the contemporaries of the author did, and thus distracts from the intended literary effect.
Moreover, if an old building is mondernised, the original situation is distroyed, but if a classic literary work is translated, the original remains available for those who are willing to make the effort. One can always read both. Personally I enjoy reading orginal literature together with translations in other languages, especially poetry. Edited by Meadowmeal on 28 May 2009 at 1:12pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Dario8015 Diglot Newbie United Kingdom Joined 6001 days ago 37 posts - 43 votes Speaks: English*, Italian Studies: Russian, Swedish | Message 11 of 33 28 May 2009 at 2:52pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Yes I do - no translation can come close to the orignal, no matter how skilled the translator may be - especially in the case of poetry - but translating from an original language into a foreign language seems to me to be somewhat different from 'transposing' Shakespeare's orignal idiom into modern English just to make things 'easier' for those who can't be bothered to experience the plays as they were written - it's just intellectual laziness.
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| sonsenfrancais Groupie United Kingdom sonsenfrancais. Joined 5979 days ago 75 posts - 85 votes Speaks: FrenchC2 | Message 12 of 33 28 May 2009 at 2:55pm | IP Logged | ||
|
I agree that you can't 'translate' Shakespeare into 'modern English'. Unless the translator is as great a poet as Shakespeare himself was....
But that doesn't mean the bastardization won't work on the stage. I am always amazed by how well these plays work in French - where the translation is necessarily prose, and modern French vocabulary. I saw the French dubbed version of 'Shakespeare in love' recently - super. Of course the bard's vocabulary is sometimes closer to French than English. When Hamlet says 'Who would fardels bear, to grunt and strain under a weary life' the French will recognise 'fardeau' as their word for a burden Likewise 'Nymph, in thus orisons be all my sins remembered...' 'oraison' in modern French is a prayer. Foreign translations are a necessity, but, yes, the English should make the effort to understand their (and everybody else's) greatest playwright And what about Chaucer ? That's English too.... 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| Dario8015 Diglot Newbie United Kingdom Joined 6001 days ago 37 posts - 43 votes Speaks: English*, Italian Studies: Russian, Swedish | Message 13 of 33 28 May 2009 at 3:06pm | IP Logged | ||
|
I was going to mention Chaucer because he's another example - there are many translations of his works into modern English and I've read 'The Canterbury Tales' in both the orignal Middle English and Modern English - well, I think you can guess my opinion - the translations make it more 'accessible' - but it's not 'Chaucer'
1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| eoinda Tetraglot Senior Member Sweden Joined 5948 days ago 101 posts - 113 votes Speaks: Swedish*, English, Spanish, Mandarin Studies: French | Message 14 of 33 28 May 2009 at 4:20pm | IP Logged | ||
|
Shakespeare isn't that hard, it's just laziness or stupidity. Edited by eoinda on 28 May 2009 at 4:20pm 1 person has voted this message useful | |||
| EliteTransLingo Bilingual Diglot Newbie United States elitetranslingo.comRegistered users can see my Skype Name Joined 5805 days ago 8 posts - 6 votes Speaks: Arabic (Egyptian)*, English* | Message 15 of 33 28 May 2009 at 5:34pm | IP Logged | ||
I studies the English of the middle ages and the old English, and we used to have poetry and plays in that, I had a hardship in the beginning to figure out this language but after the first semester, it became something normal, actually it was interesting to me. Omar Kandil Edited by patuco on 30 May 2009 at 10:37am 1 person has voted this message useful |
|  | 
Printable version
|
| Copyright 2024 FX Micheloud - All rights reserved No part of this website may be copied by any means without my written authorization. |
