2. 1950s/1960s initiated the era for literalist translations: Nabokov's Pushkin, Richmond Lattimore's Homer, Straussians
-
-
Replying to @HeerJeet
3. By literalist translations I mean translations that try to mimic diction & syntax of original, even at the cost of awkwardness in English
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
4. Robert Alter's various translations of the Hebrew Bible should be included in this tradition.
3 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
5. Prior to the literalist trend of 1950s, translations were often freestyle, not just loose but often adding & subtracting from text.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
6. Why the trend towards literalism, starting in Cold War era? Connected with the growth of scholarship & formalist valorization of text.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
7. But there was also a politics and philosophy behind literalism, a conservative desire for fixed text.
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
8. With Nabokov, crafting English translation that was as close to syntax & diction of Russian as possible was path to lost past.
3 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @HeerJeet
9. With the Straussians as well, conservative impulse guided translations: if Great Books encoded secret wisdom translations had to be exact
1 reply 1 retweet 0 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
10. Straussian translations are often closer to encryption (tranliteral decoding of words) than to translation.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @HeerJeet
@HeerJeet Have you read Goldhammer's review of Mansfield's Tocqueville translation? http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~agoldham/articles/Mansfield.htm …1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
@mike_digs That's the inspiration for this twitter essay!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.