I never thought about how much a translation could affect the writer's image/message to the audience afterwards. Hearing how different readers have different perspectives of Murakami based on the different translations they read, really made me curious of what the best way to translate a work it, since it has such a big impact on their career and message.
Hearing how a translation from a different age, a different time, from a translator of a different background could bring out the most from a work through their translator puzzled me. Part of me wants the author to work side by side with the translators, since its their work, but I also know that--often times-- an author does not know how their personality/writing style translates in other languages.
I think half of the issue is that the audience needs to be aware that there is bound to be differences between a translation and the original work. It's a translators job to try and best encapsulate the authors original intentions, but it's also the reader job to explore the different translations, and even do their own research if they want to try to fully understand one's work.
Lesser's final statement about how the prison of language is only temporary, once the perfect translator appears is believable, yet still over the horizon in my mind. I feel like the reason AI has yet to understand translation, is because the essence of translation lies in interpetation, which is build on understanding how humans think AND feel. AI doesn't train based on human feelings at the moment, I think, but if it were to, I wonder if AI could find the solution to translation in the same way humans fine tune ways to communicate to computers via code.
Personally, I want humans to be able to figure out how to "perfectly" translate, because it shows we understand each other beyond language, which--to me--is a very beautiful thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment