Reviewing a Translation: A Practical Problem in Literary Criticism

Abstract

In writing a review of a translation, a new dimension of commentary aside from that of an ordinary book review is necessary: commentary on the performance of the translator. In general, book review commentary ought to be kept to a minimum. An informative judgment must be made on the quality of the translation, keeping in mind what means the translator had at his disposal. The general success of the work might be assessed by comparing it to a previous translation by someone else. The translator's handling of standard translation difficulties is also a good indication of his performance. Traditional reviews in North America are subject to two main kinds of error: (1) wrong emphasis--the reviewer writes at length about the original, but offers no commentary on the way in which it has been translated; and (2) fundamental wrongheadedness--the review is made on the basis that satisfactory translations of literary works are impossible. Examples of these problems are taken from translation reviews which have appeared in the Yearbook of comparative and general literature.