Poetry in Translation
It was really interesting to read about what kinds of challenges that translators face when translating poetry. The author argues that poetry is translatable, which I'm not sure if I can agree with. Even if poetry was translated, I feel like it wouldn't be able to get close enough to the original since poetry incorporates a lot of words, grammar structure, etc. that are unique to the language. I agree with Pulvers' statements that tone and voice are especially important when translating poetry. His idea that translating a poem would be a process of absorbing the poem and reinterpreting it in the context of a different language and culture is interesting but I don't think that it would be the same poem if it was translated in that way, I would see it as more of the same messages/ideas conveyed in a different way by a different person. I did like Pulvers' translation of Ame ni mo makezu, especially how he considered the rhythm of the poetry.
Through a Glass Darkly: Is Translating Poetry Possible?
I enjoyed seeing different ways that translators translated the same poem side by side. I liked how Sesar's translation of Takuboku highlighted the small details and sound effects with the use of onomatopoeia and rhythm. And I also enjoyed the visual element of how Kafu used collapsing lines in his translation of Verlaine. Keene's translation of Akiko's poem shows how a small word change could make a big impact in the poem's meaning by using the word "hoarded". I'm not sure if I like the haiku translations. Maybe it's because the number of syllables in general or the number of syllables in each phrase isn't the same, but it doesn't have the same flow and it's not as nice to read in my opinion. Overall, I think both the readings emphasized the importance of creativity especially for translating poems, since it's really different from a regular text.
No comments:
Post a Comment