?

Log in

No account? Create an account
[Reading the] modern(ism)/post-modern(ism)'s Journal
Sunday, June 13th, 2004

Date:2004-06-13 00:41
Subject:Translations; the differences
Security:Public
Mood: doo be doo

My First Vintage International version of the text is actually a revised version of Moncrieff's original translation. The original, apparently titled the "abominable" edition by Samuel Beckett, who was a prominent critic of Proust, was "imperfect." I think mandarinsun mentioned it in reply to my last post- it was too "flowery".

So I thought I'd mention the translation of my text (revised in '89) is compiled and revised by Terence Kilmartin, who revises Moncrieff's translation, and compiles it with translations of the Pleiade edition that wasn't available to Moncrieff at the time of translation. But the idioms, according to Kilmartin, supposedly flow better now than when Moncrieff had his own way with the text. And it really does flow incredibly well.

What are the differences of the other translations, though? Mandarinsun asked me for more information about my translation, but I forgot there would be more than one when I bought the book (silly me)... so... are there going to be any major problems when we start discussing this book?

That's the trouble with linguistics. The word is not the thing- meaning translations open up this incredibly ambiguous world called "what the translator thinks it should be." Blah.

(1witticism)




browse days
my journal