It was interesting to read Seidensticker's claim that a translator's job is all about making choices. I agree that prioritizing rhythm at the sacrifice of something else like explaining the meaning of a proper name can be a constant struggle when translating text from such different cultures. Especially with the grammar structure being completely the opposite with Japanese and English, it is challenging to maintain the rhythm while conveying proper meaning.
Another point in the text that I found interesting and has also been a common topic in our other readings is the fact that the translation should not be better than the original. While translators can point out mistakes the author made, it is not their responsibility to polish the text, rather their job is to simply convey the original intention and tone into another language. I think ambiguity is a factor that makes literary work interesting because it allows readers to interpret it in their own ways. With Seidensticker's example of Kawabata's The Izu Dancer translation, although leaving out the subject of the sentence might not have been intentional, it adds an extra layer of ambiguity that allows readers to ponder on the story. Seidensticker's translation added the subject, which not only was wrong, but also diminishes the room for reader's interpretation.
I also agree with the point that a lot of decisions in translations are intuitive. In my daily life, I often struggle with explaining why certain phrases work better than others in certain cases. It's simply the natural flow or tone, less about concrete rules and principles of translation. For that reason, I think it's a great learning opportunity to read what the thought processes are for professional translators in order to expand my own vocabulary and build on my intuition.
No comments:
Post a Comment