[Lexicog] When Semantics Doesn't Matter

[Fritz Goerling]

Bill,

 

See my answer to David Frank of today. There I tried to show how you are
right

with your statement that a translation can be superior to the original (when
it

comes to the criterion of comprehension, clarity). Let me to come to my
example

of the translation of Kant, not only into English but into other languages.

I believe that translation is *possible.* There are hard nuts to crack in
translation, but

as such translation IS possible.

Now the question is for me rather whether it is necessary. I think it would
be possible

to translate Kant for the Australian aborigines, but is it necessary? And if
it were done,

maybe I, as a German, might finally understand Kant . ;-)

 

Fritz

I don't see why, in principle, a translation cannot be superior to
the original text. Not only is it possible that the translator is
a better writer than the original author, it is also conceivable that
the language into which he or she translates will be better suited
to the topic than the language of the original. Although in theory
anything that can be expressed in one language can be expressed in
another, it is certainly not the case that it is always possible to
do so compactly. Some languages have elaborate terminology for certain
things that other languages lack, or make fine distinctions as a matter
of routine (or indeed, obligatorily), due, e.g., to their morphology,
that can only be expressed in another language by means of elaborate
circumlocution.

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lexicography/attachments/20070702/e1c50a7d/attachment.htm>