Tuesday, February 18, 2020

A Carcass

Hey everyone, Tanner here. In class last Friday, we discussed how our version of A Carcass was translated with "special attention to imagery". This sparked a thought in my mind. Is it better to have something translated literally or translated with intention? I'm of the mindset that something should be translated with intention in mind, but one could easily make the argument that something could be lost and the intention could be muddled if it isn't translated literally.

Tell me your thoughts.
Posted by at

2 comments:

Bharat Solanky said...

Translation should fulfill a little bit of both. Although it depends on the type of work itself, I think poetry should be translated in a way that captures the original meaning, maintains as much of the poet's intention as possible, and most importantly flows well. Last year, our Latin class focused on translating the "Aeneid", and Dr. Ramos would instruct us to translate both literally and figuratively. I think that really helped in making the work both instructive and fun.

February 19, 2020 at 9:49 AM
Anonymous said...

I think that it is most important to convey meaning rather than literal translation. Language is simply a method by which we communicate our thoughts; therefore, a translation should focus on communicating the thoughts of the author rather than having a direct translation. Additionally, idioms and various other quirks of language can be completely lost in a literal translation, so it is imperative that literature be translated with intent in mind rather than the literal words of the author.

February 22, 2020 at 10:39 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)