MCLC: Sandalwood Death review (13)

[lklein]

I'd like to add on to Nicky's point by saying that you don’t have to know the language of the original to comment intelligently on the translation. In fact, the "accuracy" of the translation is usually one of the least interesting things about it.

A translation is an interpretation and a performance. If you keep that in mind, you can offer a discussion of a translation's strengths and weaknesses in light of your own interpretation of the original for a popular or general interest publication, but you can also do so if you are unable to access the original. In fact, I believe that addressing translation intelligently and accessibly, and in such a way as to avoid the impression that all conversations about translation must regress into a list of quibbles over "howlers," is all the more important for general interest publications. I think it's the general public, more than scholars, who will benefit from a deeper and broader understanding of translation, though if scholars are not there to help provide that understanding it will be tough going for everyone.

Lucas



-----Original Message-----
From: mclc-bounces at lists.service.ohio-state.edu [mailto:mclc-bounces at lists.service.ohio-state.edu] On Behalf Of Denton, Kirk
Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2014 10:33 PM
To: mclc at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
Subject: MCLC: Sandalwood Death review (13)

MCLC LIST
From: Nicky Harman <n.harmanic at gmail.com>
Subject: Sandalwood Death review (13)
***********************************************************

Jeff’s latest contribution to this debate is extremely illuminating. I have a couple of comments in response. I’ll keep them brief:

1. Yes indeed, there should be more reviewing of Chinese-to-English translations written by non-Chinese-speakers who can evaluate the translation as a piece of literature. Personally I find it a continual frustration that Chinese fiction is often reviewed as a comment on what’s happening in China and not as an independent piece of writing, a part of ‘world literature’. And the more famous those reviewers the better. I’d be delighted if a work I had translated was reviewed by Margaret Atwood.

2. These reviewers don’t have to comment on the accuracy/quality of the translation. However, both the fact that it is a translation and the identity of the translator should be made clear, either by them or in the heading to the review. I’m not sure that I can see how mentioning the translator by name is a potential distraction.

Nicky


_______________________________________________
MCLC mailing list
MCLC at lists.service.ohio-state.edu
https://lists.service.ohio-state.edu/mailman/listinfo/mclc