some say that poetry is what SHOULD NOT be tranlated into different languages.
well u may find the exact words in other languages to do with the same meaning,
yet the literally translating is not enough for poetry.
the texture does still exist,
but the original glamour created by the poets between words n words
would just easily be gone away.
that's the LOSS we called, when trying to find the defined beauties in poems.
yet it's one of the most important essences in poetry......
WHY SHALL POEMS BE TRANSLATED?
for satisfying more ppl's curiosity about the famous poems?
tragic i think.
after reading Alexander Pushkin's poems in english
> _ <
--
--
＊ꨠ＊〞＊ 蘒＊ ＊ꨠ＊〞＊ 蘒＊ ＊ꨠ＊〞＊ 蘒＊
＊ ＊ ꨠ ╯ꄠ ＊＊〞ꄠ ＊ ＊ ꨠ ╯ꄠ ＊＊ ＊ ꨠ ╯ꄠ ＊＊〞
╧╧╧╧╧═╧═╧╧╧═╧╧╧╧╧╧═╧═╧╧╧═╧╧╧╧═╧═╧╧╧═╧
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 61.59.89.239
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- <
作者: dale (冰城城主) 看板: poetry
標題: Re: [討論] translating or NOT?
時間: Wed Dec 10 14:27:12 2003
※ 引述《cccircle (有沒有人要下象棋?N )》之銘言：
: some say that poetry is what SHOULD NOT be tranlated into different languages.
: well u may find the exact words in other languages to do with the same meaning,
: yet the literally translating is not enough for poetry.
: the texture does still exist,
: but the original glamour created by the poets between words n words
: would just easily be gone away.
I guess you'd agree with Frost's point of view, i.e.,
"Poetry is what gets lost in translation," but is it
not possible that new "glamour" be created through
translation?
Translated poems, by themselves, do carry elements of
creation. While the original soul may be lost, new
spirit may also be made.
There are also poets, like Tagore, who translated
their own poems. What do you think of them?
: that's the LOSS we called, when trying to find the defined beauties in poems.
: yet it's one of the most important essences in poetry......
: WHY SHALL POEMS BE TRANSLATED?
: for satisfying more ppl's curiosity about the famous poems?
Is this reason not good enough for you? :)
: tragic i think.
: after reading Alexander Pushkin's poems in english
: > _ <
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- <
作者: chansaowan (＊笑園漫畫大王＊) 看板: poetry
標題: Re: [討論] translating or NOT?
時間: Thu Dec 11 06:39:11 2003
※ 引述《dale (冰城城主)》之銘言：
: ※ 引述《cccircle (有沒有人要下象棋?N )》之銘言：
: : some say that poetry is what SHOULD NOT be tranlated into different languages.
: : well u may find the exact words in other languages to do with the same meaning,
: : yet the literally translating is not enough for poetry.
: : the texture does still exist,
: : but the original glamour created by the poets between words n words
: : would just easily be gone away.
: I guess you'd agree with Frost's point of view, i.e.,
: "Poetry is what gets lost in translation," but is it
: not possible that new "glamour" be created through
: translation?
: Translated poems, by themselves, do carry elements of
: creation. While the original soul may be lost, new
: spirit may also be made.
: There are also poets, like Tagore, who translated
: their own poems. What do you think of them?
: : that's the LOSS we called, when trying to find the defined beauties in poems.
: : yet it's one of the most important essences in poetry......
: : WHY SHALL POEMS BE TRANSLATED?
: : for satisfying more ppl's curiosity about the famous poems?
: Is this reason not good enough for you? :)
: : tragic i think.
: : after reading Alexander Pushkin's poems in english
agree!:)
so translated works may be classified as another kind of literature.
had it not been translated fables or fairy tales, we wouldn't have known Snow
White or anything. For children or other people who don't know the language,
translated works are likely the only way for them to appreciate those
masterpieces.
So I was thinking the problem is not to translate or not, but HOW to make
translation better (since it still leaves much room for the translators in
Taiwan to improve...).
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- <
作者: julians (興農牛逆轉三連勝) 看板: poetry
標題: Re: [討論] translating or NOT?
時間: Thu Dec 11 09:25:48 2003
※ 引述《dale (冰城城主)》之銘言：
: ※ 引述《cccircle (有沒有人要下象棋?N )》之銘言：
: : some say that poetry is what SHOULD NOT be tranlated into different languages.
: : well u may find the exact words in other languages to do with the same meaning,
: : yet the literally translating is not enough for poetry.
: : the texture does still exist,
: : but the original glamour created by the poets between words n words
: : would just easily be gone away.
: I guess you'd agree with Frost's point of view, i.e.,
: "Poetry is what gets lost in translation," but is it
: not possible that new "glamour" be created through
: translation?
: Translated poems, by themselves, do carry elements of
: creation. While the original soul may be lost, new
: spirit may also be made.
Indeed, this is the most vehement debating ground.
While translation creates, it also covers the original.
Then the problem becomes when we are reading the translated
works, are we reading original or new edition?
If we really want to read something original, should we read
the rendition?
Walter Benjamin proposed that poems are not translatable.
Since translation is in a sense a copy, which marks the loss
of authenticity.
As for myself, I prefer to read the original than the translated.
For though I admit translation is creation, it is a pity that
I just want to read the very original written by the poet to
(try to) get what the poets intend to say in the poems.
: There are also poets, like Tagore, who translated
: their own poems. What do you think of them?
Somehow, that is quite interesting. Beckett translated his own
"Waiting for Godot" from French to English. But in the process
of translation, according to the experience of some professors who
translate their English essays into Chinese, they admit that
when meeting the problem, they will directly make some channges to
make the translation easier. That is, there is still the risk of
loss of authenticity and the problem of simulacrum.
Btw, while Jean Baudrillard might have the same ideas with Benjamin,
Deleuze might agree to the translation for he thinks that
every copy is difference and every difference has its own
distinction
: : that's the LOSS we called, when trying to find the defined beauties in poems.
: : yet it's one of the most important essences in poetry......
: : WHY SHALL POEMS BE TRANSLATED?
: : for satisfying more ppl's curiosity about the famous poems?
: Is this reason not good enough for you? :)
: : tragic i think.
: : after reading Alexander Pushkin's poems in english
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- <
作者: ywin (太嫩了...) 看板: poetry
標題: Re: [討論] translating or NOT?
時間: Mon Dec 15 15:12:30 2003
※ 引述《julians (興農牛逆轉三連勝)》之銘言：
: Somehow, that is quite interesting. Beckett translated his own
: "Waiting for Godot" from French to English. But in the process
: of translation, according to the experience of some professors who
I am quite interested in this "self-translation" phenomenon,
just like the example of Beckett. I wonder where i can get
more information related to this phenomenon. thanx a lot ~~:)
: translate their English essays into Chinese, they admit that
: when meeting the problem, they will directly make some channges to
: make the translation easier. That is, there is still the risk of
: loss of authenticity and the problem of simulacrum.
: Btw, while Jean Baudrillard might have the same ideas with Benjamin,
: Deleuze might agree to the translation for he thinks that
: every copy is difference and every difference has its own
: distinction
: : Is this reason not good enough for you? :)