Why did Barnes & Noble decide to title their editions of Dante's Divine Comedy as "The Inferno," "The Purgatorio," and "The Paradiso?" It makes them sound like picrel.
>>23976276because that's what they're called
>>23977470The Paradiso is a bit gay, ngl.
In addition to those being all their titles IN ITALIAN, it just sounds nicer if every canticle's title ends with an "o." You can't go from Inferno to Purgatory to Paradise. It's messy.
It should be The HellThe ShadowlandThe Heaven
>>23977524Not OP, but I prefer the English version. I say this as someone who has formally studied several languages.
Mummy I've shat myselfYes wipe it up (Here we leave the poet, condemned for not having known Christ despite Christ not being born.)My bottom is nice and clean
>>23976276Wait weren’t they always called like that in English? I’ve only came across their titles in that form in English. Were they called "Dante’s Paradise" before? Can I rename Gangster’s paradise into "Coolio’s Paradisio"?Sound cool(i)er you
>>23977470>>23978908I think what he's getting at is the mixed form with English article. Like call it L'Inferno, Inferno, or (The) Hell, but not The Inferno.
>>23976276>>23977540More information & literary art is preserved instead of semiotically reduced.We're fortunate "samurai" isn't just generically called "knight".You want aesthetics here even if it's "extra work".
>>23980549Nah I'm good
>>23980549So they should have titled them Il Purgatorio and Il Paradiso, it that's the case.
>>23980725His point was that a balance should be struck between aesthetic preservation and semantic function. "Purgatorio" is close enough to its English equivalent to be understood by the average reader, while still retaining the music of the original language. But to use the Italian article would only add confusion. That said, I agree "The Purgatorio" is ugly
>>23980757>But to use the Italian article would only add confusion.Only if you were incredibly stupid.
>>23980842Just look at this thread. Most of the posters couldn't even comprehend what OP was saying.
>>23980929True.
