Literary translation

[Eric]

Learn a language, then do some.

Far too much abstract talk on this thread about translation, an art that one has never tried but likes to discuss in intellectual terms.

[RamonaQ]

The more I translate, the more in need of a mentor I am!

[Eric]

An interesting thing is word order.

What always horrifies me about literary translation is how many banal mistakes you can make. I either pick them up myself later, or the checker or editor does. I presume that those people who translate five poems rarely make many mistakes, but when you have a deadline and 80,000 words to translate, you can, for instance, hop over a whole paragraph when two paragraphs start with the same word or phrase. Or you can mistake a word for one that looks similar and fits the context. Or you leave out a "not", so that the sentence means the opposite of what it should. Such mistakes are generated by haste.

But if I cannot find a word in my dictionaries, I simply write ??? by the word and ask a native-speaker of the source language. This happens when people use dialect or a rare word. I have plenty of synonym dictionaries, thesauri and similar, but there are words that slip the net.

So there's more to translating than merely looking up the word in the dictionary and bunging it down.

[RamonaQ]

My greatest problem when rushing it is speed-reading the longer words, and then mixing them up for something similar. One recent example was when I translated "conserved food" as "conservative food". Then later on I spent some time wondering what kind of food could that be...

Instead of using ??? where there's a word I don't know, I often just write the word in the original language, and mark it with a comment. So in the comment I write my guess or possible solutions.

As far as how I work, when I have enough time, first I translate a large block of text (or chapter), then compare with the original and fix the kinds of mistakes that Eric had just listed in his post, and only when that's all done, do I polish it up and work on making it sound smooth.

[hdw]

The other day I was translating a sentence in Swedish beginning "När det lyses efter en karl som har rymt ...", and without looking anything up, I automatically translated it as "When they are searching for a fellow who has run away ..."; then I started wondering where the passive form "lyses" came from, but when I looked it up I couldn't find the word listed in any form, passive or active, in any dictionary, either my printed ones or the SAOB online. Yet I'm sure, from some recess in my memory, that it means "being searched for". How I know, I don't know. And although I'm not in doubt about the meaning, I would feel happier if I could find it in a dictionary.

Is it connected with "lysa" meaning to light, illuminate? If so, I can't see the semantic connection with searching.

Harry

[Eric]

Peering at my Swedish dictionaries, I get the feeling that "lyses" in this context could mean sticking up a notice with "dead or alive" on it, or at least announcing from the pulpit or elsewhere that this man is an outlaw. That's one of the meanings I found in my copy of the big Östergren dictionary. When the banns are read in church, they "lyses".

As for Tory food...

[hdw]

Peering at my Swedish dictionaries, I get the feeling that "lyses" in this context could mean sticking up a notice with "dead or alive" on it, or at least announcing from the pulpit or elsewhere that this man is an outlaw. That's one of the meanings I found in my copy of the big Östergren dictionary. When the banns are read in church, they "lyses".

As for Tory food...

Thanks, that's useful. Where's Björn when we need him?

In medieval Scotland you could be "put to the horn" for some misdemeanour. That meant that the king's official turned up at the market cross and blew several blasts on his horn, announcing between each blast that you were now to be considered an outlaw, and from then on every man's hand was against you.

Harry

[Eric]

I was given the Östergren many years ago, a 10-volume job. As they never did complete, or only recently completed, the Academy's big dictionary on which they've been working for about a century, the Östergren is the next best thing. Next time I'm in the public library, I can also have a look of there are other volumes describing "lyses". I'd never heard the Scottish expression "put to the horn". An addition to my vocabulary.

[RamonaQ]

Here's a new question. Translation for the purpose of translation into a third language. How often is that done? How does this differ from translation for the purpose of publication? When I translate texts to English knowing that these translations will not be published in English, but instead will be used as a basis for translation into a third language, I have to keep in mind that the target audience is not familiar with American idioms, slang, etc. So my translation is much more literal and faithful to the original text. The ideal situation would be for me as the translator to English to be in contact with the translator for the target language, but that has not happened yet.

[Eric]

RamonaQ's problem of third languages is a tricky one. If you're translating management reports or news articles, I can imagine that it works well. The problem for literature is that the translator from Language A into Language B may introduce errors or idioms. The when the article goes from Language B to Language C, these misunderstandings are compounded. Where style is vital, you may end up in Language C with a relatively anodyne version, when compared with the original. Because as RamonaQ rightly points out, you cannot afford to use too idiomatically American expressions, as even Brits or Aussies might not understand. (For instance, it took me years to understand what a "raincheck" is, and I keep forgetting even now.)

Sure, it is a good idea for the translator into the "go-between language" to be in touch with both the author and the ultimate target-language translator.

[Eric]

Pretty obviously, the more literary translation you do, the more you realise that it is not only different from legal, commercial and technical translation, but that it is also an art and, indeed, a skill.

As I have mentioned quite frequently, the most important language (assuming you're translating for publication, not for further translation as RamonaQ mentions) is the target language, usually your mother tongue. You have to develop it, especially in the direction of things similar to those you are translating.

So recently, as I have been translating postmodern novels, with jumps in style, I've had to look at various things. But I don't, for instance, immerse myself in the many new waves of British and American slang, as these can be out of fashion within a decade. You have to strike a balance between neutrality - so that the maximum number of readers internationally can understand the text - and couleur locale - because the text comes from somewhere, not just from a mythical Transatlantic Realm.

While translating into a transparent English, you have to smuggle in things that hint at, or suggest, the country and culture in which the novel or story is set. This is quite a balancing act.

[Eric]

One question about literary translation is: where do its borders run? In other words, what is literary translation and what is something else?

So, is the biography of a writer literary translation, or not? If you translate a critical book about someone's poetry oeuvre, is that literary translation?

If you remember, Winston Churchill, who guided Britain through the Second World War, won his Nobel Prize not as the Peace Prize, or for other social or political things, but for the literary value of his war memoirs, published in six volumes.

And an adjacent field is academic translation. When translating a book about art, or history, or religion, or sociology, or other humanities subjects tangential to the arts, the question again arises: is translating humanities texts the same as translating literary texts?

[Bubba]

I don't really know what is literary translation and what isn't, and I'm not sure I want to rack my brains thinking about it, either. But the Italians have the most useful expression traduzioni editoriali, all translations done for publishing houses.

[Eric]

I don't rack my brains about such matters either. But in a continuum, it is interesting to know where most people's cut-off point is. For instance, a biography of a writer is mostly about their life, but a translator who has actually read the books he or she wrote will stand a better chance when it comes to descriptions of textual things.

Translators could propose more to publishing houses, as translators often know more about individual authors than their literary agents, who are in more of a buy-&-sell world than a literary one.

[Loki]

Ok, a question for the experts.
This morning I was reading Il nome della rosa (The Name of the Rose), by Eco. In some of his passages in which he likes to show off his knowledge, he talks about the etymology of some Italian words refferring to animals (dog, lamb, sheep etc.): very interesting. I was wondering, though, how an English translator is supposed or manages to traslate such a passage. I mean, he says that the word for "dog", cane, comes from the Latin canor (song), because of its bark, and that the word for "lamb", agnello, derives from the fact that the lamb agnoscit (knows) its mother among other lambs. Now, all this has a sense for the Italian reader, because the words are obviously similar, but the English translator can either write a footnote to explain the whole fact, giving also the Italian original words, or provide a Germanic etymology for the English words "dog", "lamb", etc., but it wouldn't make much sense since Latin plays an important role in the whole novel. This is what has come to my mind, and they are both probably bad solutions.
Still, I would like to know how you would solve this problem.

[hdw]

Well, the problem has been solved, because The Name of the Rose has been available in English translation for a long time, and I've read it, but I don't have my own copy to check. Maybe someone who has a copy can answer your question.

Harry

[Loki]

Well, yes. But it would be too much to ask someone to check.

[Galatea92]

Ok, a question for the experts. Now, all this has a sense for the Italian reader, because the words are obviously similar, but the English translator can either write a footnote to explain the whole fact, giving also the Italian original words, or provide a Germanic etymology for the English words "dog", "lamb", etc., but it wouldn't make much sense since Latin plays an important role in the whole novel. This is what has come to my mind, and they are both probably bad solutions.
Still, I would like to know how you would solve this problem.

The other alternative is to translate the explanation but leave the Italian words for dog, lamb, etc. in Italian, so that the etymology still makes sense. No footnotes, no pointless attempt to create a parallel English etymology.

[Bjorn]

Given the amount of untranslated Latin in Name of the Rose, not to mention that half the novel is exposition anyway, I doubt it'd be a problem in that particular book.

[Eric]

Galatea's idea is a reasonable compromise. Keep the words in the original, but maybe with footnotes if necessary, but preserve the skein of meaning.

I'm am wrestling with a similar problem in the translation I'm just checking though. The Estonian for "boy" is "poiss". An amateur artist in the novel is nicknamed "Poiss", i.e. "the Boy". However, given the fact that Estonians would pronounce the name of (Joseph) Beuys as "poiss" as well, you do lose some of Beuys associations if you merely name him "the Boy", i.e. without the "s"-sound. Something has to give, something has to be left out. It depends on how important the punnery is for the story as a whole.

For me this is a real-life problem which I have to tackle one way or another.