Is there even a point in reading translations? Can you even say you read a book or an author if you read a translation? I read mostly to learn languages and I've been reading a lot of graded readers and interlinears lately, but otherwise I never really got into reading fiction other than once in a while, except a few years ago where I got into a good flow and read a handful of detective novels within a few months, which admittedly is schlock but at least it helped me get a good flow for the first time. Anyway, I don't really see much of a point in reading translations. I think I'd rather read fables in the original language than read any translations. I also kind of lost interest in reading anything in English overall, whether original or translated, it's such a boring language once you begin to learn other languages. Maybe that's why I feel this way. Once you get a taste for other languages you see no point in reading anything in English except for learning other languages.
At the very least there is more point in reading a translation than there is in making the 48,227th iteration of this thread.
>>25235678To answer that question, first you need to ask what's the point of reading anything.
>>25235678>it's such a boring language once you begin to learn other languages.You feel this way too. What exactly have you read in English that makes it so boring to you compared to, say, French? I don’t know why you need to keep making this thread.
>>25235685Good point. I think for me I'm mostly interested in the language itself, rather than the thing conveyed or pointed to by the language, although that interests me too sometimes, but right now I'm more interested in the former. Most people seem to read almost exclusively for the semantic content, and don't really care about the language itself. People tend to think of language as a window, and only care about what's outside. I kind of think this is like looking at the shadow play in Plato's cave and thinking of it as the real thing. I guess that's why I don't care much for the semantic content and don't care for translations. But what's driving my interest in the language might be a desire to get to a deeper level of insight into what's beyond language.
>>25235699I’m >>25235698 and honestly, there good reasons for preferring not to read in translation. Are you a native English speaker?>a desire to get to a deeper level of insight into what's beyond language.Wittgensteinian.
>>25235712they’re* good reasons, even.
>>25235699>I'm mostly interested in the language itselfThen you should love translation.
>>25235712I would engage with your posts but you have shown a rather dismissive attitude so I don't think I will.
>>25235729Also should have mentioned picrel but drunk and just remembered it.
I haven't read an english language novel in 4 years because my time is taken up by reading in my TLs For me it's just very addictive, it's like grinding in a video game
>>25235734Immature of you; I was saying your claim that the English language is boring is a bit of an insult to all literature written in English, which ironically, is dismissive. Your reasons for reading different languages are fine though, as I said. Never mind anyway.
>>25235729Translation as a process, yes, I find that interesting, contrasting two languages, or reading a translation simply as a way to learn to read the original, as in interlinear gloss or footnotes, or trying to translate myself. The result is usually seeing the poverty of English, especially if we're dealing with something like Attic Greek. But reading a translation without looking at the original and trying to understand the difference between the original and the translation, no.
>>25235678Yeah, reading in translation for me feels as though you’re not actually reading the work of the author, but an interpretation thereof. I haven’t gotten started on Attic Greek but I do want to try and read stuff like Sophocles. I feel so much meaning is lost when you read it in English, which is a vulgar language itself, so I feel translating something written in a formal language to a vulgar language is going to keep some doors locked should we say.
>>25235748>trying to translate myself.lol, perhaps the poverty is yours and not English's. Either way, read the two books I posted.
>>25235759There is also a distinction between grammar and semantics. You definitely lose a lot in grammar when translating a classical language to English, and even when translating German to English. Look at Die Verwandlung for example, highly hypotactic writing, where the translation in English is more paratactic. German is more suited for hypotactic writing than English. English translations tend to break up long complex sentences in German into multiple shorter sentences, and the two versions are not identical in meaning. English is not a language for syntax-lovers. This is an annotated translation of Euclid's Elements. A very large part of the annotations by Thomas Heath is just explaining why he chose a certain phrasing in English and what the original Greek is saying or means.https://archive.org/details/euclid_heath_2nd_ed/1_euclid_heath_2nd_ed/page/n254
>>25235763I don't think I will. Anglophone monolinguals are pathetic.
Do you have this book? I'm thinking of buying it but have hesitated as shipping it to where I live costs more than the book.
>>25235792Neither are monolingual...
>>25235699>I think for me I'm mostly interested in the language itselfGenuine halfwit. You write and think like Billy Madison.
>>25235759>reading in translation for me feels as though you’re not actually reading the work of the author, but an interpretation thereofWaldun-tier profundity
>>25235792Bit of an insular midwit for someone who claims to love language aren’t you, faggot?
>>25235866books 1-5, but has some flaw, bookmarks don't get savedit also has a two-page list ("initial word stock" on pages 288-289) of the most common words in French, which it says make up about 50% of running discourse in French, a nice featurehttps://annas-archive.gl/md5/98ae65df102363389e715697b2832775book 1 onlyhttps://annas-archive.gl/md5/2709fe08d8075fa842eee6fa336ce872if you like this type of book you will also like these in the same seriesGermanhttps://annas-archive.gl/md5/4402dfb824853ccf06d456a09cc8f009Russianhttps://annas-archive.gl/md5/7a912ebc799177f0c56660617ef1971eItalianhttps://annas-archive.gl/md5/c978003645a26b54f7950b316dc17c48Spanishhttps://annas-archive.gl/md5/f8024a0105df20bae5f2b311c401917bhere are some other booksFrenchhttps://archive.org/details/easyfrenchreadin00fishhttps://archive.org/details/childsillustrate00keethttps://archive.org/details/tudeprogressived00sterhttps://archive.org/details/longmansillustra00bidghttps://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pst.000006968175https://archive.org/details/jensen-arthur-le-francais-par-la-methode-naturehttps://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLf8XN5kNFkhdIS7NMcdUdxibD1UyzNFTPhttps://archive.org/details/progressivepro00collhttps://archive.org/details/selectionofonehu00perrhttps://archive.org/details/premierlivredele00unsehttps://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.31158003239810Germanhttps://annas-archive.gl/md5/4402dfb824853ccf06d456a09cc8f009https://archive.org/details/progressivegerma00adlehttps://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.32044102864030https://archive.org/details/deutsch-nach-der-naturmethodehttps://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLf8XN5kNFkhc0J7rC_vQMUBIVdaj---V5Latinhttps://archive.org/details/CommentariesOnTheGallicWarCaesarCompletelyParsedBookIhttps://archive.org/details/completely-parsed-cicero-oration-1https://archive.org/details/fully-parsed-horace-odes-translation-pub-cohttps://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uc1.31822003632080https://archive.org/details/familia-romanaSpanishhttps://archive.org/details/firstspanishbook00wormrichItalianhttps://archive.org/details/LitalianoSecondoIlMetodoNaturahttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLf8XN5kNFkhfQonvCySTrKEUV742WzshJhttps://archive.org/details/storiesfromital00panigoogPortuguesehttps://annas-archive.gl/md5/92518052642022924fbbdc82fe391500Russianhttps://annas-archive.gl/md5/053ac45be095d8fcb5a3028d034b57ac
>>25235872Yeah but you are. You're the one that's pathetic.
>>25235678>Is there even a point in reading translations? Can you even say you read a book or an author if you read a translation?Yes if it's a good translation.Are you a nominalist? Why would you think specific words dictate the content? Words are signposts of ideas, not the ideas themselves. Different words can communicate the same ideas.
>>25235942>Why would you think specific words dictate the content?I didn't say that. Read the thread. I said I am not very interested in the semantic content. Most people only care about semantic content, and especially anglophone monolinguals, probably because English has very poor grammar, and because they never learned a single word in any other language. Anglophone monolinguals think like you, that you can just copy-paste into google translate any language, languages are all essentially the same. Maybe learn one word of any language other than English before you utter an opinion on language.
The average IQ on this board is clearly not any higher than on the other boards. Bunch of fucking retards all who replied.
>>25235678Works translated into English are improved by the process of translation, but if you were to just translate a book from German into French or something, it would be pointless because you'd just be shuffling from one ugly bunch of gibberish to the next.
>>25236343Someone’s upset. Felt you were deceived did you?Perhaps you should go and be amongst your fellow intellectuals on... anywhere but this dead board.
>>25235678even if you're of the opinion that a translated work is a different work altogether, that doesn't mean it isn't a good book by itself. No idea why /lit/ are such pedantic shitheads about this. I'm lying, I do know, but it's stupid.
>>25235678>Bragging about reading children's books and schlock fictionight
>>25236530All so he can say he knows another language! My illiterate grandfather who couldn’t even spell two syllable words properly was fluent in 4 including Greek!
>>25236391>>25236412>>25236507>>25236530>>25236536I can tell you're females by your total lack of debate skills and by how emotional you are.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd0jOtxHWDQ
bumping in case there is someone with a triple-digit IQ on this board
>>25236536Who cares about speaking languages fluently?This is /lit/ not /int/
>>25235866You can also check these.https://annas-archive.gl/search?&ext=pdf&q=french+otto+bondI see book 2 there as an individual booklet. There are also other files for the books 1-5 collection, and they might not have the bookmark issue, but I think some of them had markings. I might go through them all again myself, but I think I looked at them all and I think that for the books 1-5 collection the one I linked was the best one, and for book 1 as individual booklet there was only the link I posted. For book 2 as individual booklet there is this link:https://annas-archive.gl/md5/8e79dd7e93f1a1719684704209bc86a3You want the old editions which had Otto Bond or Otto Ferdinand Bond as the only author if you're a complete beginner. The newer editions with Camille Bauer as coauthor are totally different books. Despite being called "premiere etape" (first level) those newer editions are a much higher level, and not for complete beginners.All the books in this series, for all languages, have older and newer editions, and the older editions are always better, but they sometimes have a few different ones among the oldest, and it's not always the absolute oldest that's the best. For German I don't like the newest edition which has Crossgrove as author, it's a worse version of Peter Hagboldt's original which I linked. For the Crossgrove edition they edited the text, made it woke, and inserted a modern degenerate short story at the end. But the oldest editions by Hagboldt are in Fraktur and without pictures. It's a matter of taste if you prefer that or the one I posted which is a little later, with normal font and pictures.
>>25237733>But the oldest editions by Hagboldt are in Fraktur*the absolute oldest
>>25235678I don't even care, I do what I want
>>25237794not an argument
>>25237834He isn’t trying to argue. We get it, you like reading in several languages, that’s fine, good for you. What do you want? Someone to suck your dick?
>>25237852You either post arguments or you don't post at all, since it's off-topic. Fuck off, female, you know jack shit about how to conduct an intellectual discussion. You are shitting up the thread. Take your emotion and SJWing somewhere else, I suggest reddit.
>>25237861Your bitching makes you look more like a woman honestly, why are you so mad, exactly? I think you go too far with calling English worthless outside of learning other languages, because some of the greatest literature ever has been written in English, so you’re dismissing the skill of every writer who wrote primarily in it, as well as the opinions of non-English writers who champion them. You’ve explained your reasoning, but your dismissal of a language simply because it’s a vernacular. Are you ESL (which I am by the way) and simply just seething because you had to learn English as a child or something? Or a pompous American?
>>25235678I sort of disagree with your statement on English, but you’re right to say translation is often flawed, often due to how many languages such as Latin (which is why even English works use it where English has no succinct definition), German, Japanese, French, which all have their own nuances that can’t be mapped very well in translation; German in particular is so precise, take a word like Zeitgeist, which translates to “spirit of the time” aesthetically at least in my opinion, German is of course better. However, I think Faulkner does well with a hypotactic approach to his writing which definitely gives the language more depth.
>>25237898I haven't bitched one fucking bit, retard. Fuck off. You haven't contributed one fucking bit to the topic. Again, take your fucking emotions and SJWing to reddit, female.
>>25237925You're missing my point. Firstly, I said it's not only about semantics, and that I'm not very interested in the semantic content anyway. Secondly, my point is not that one language is superior. It's exactly this attitude that one language "has it all" that I'm questioning. I'm asking what's the point in reading a translation. As I said people view language as a mere window, they only care about the semantic content, but I see this idea of languages as being a very shallow thing that you can just copy-paste into google translate, and where the semantic content is the be-all and end-all, which is very commonly held, as being akin to watching the shadow play in Plato's cave and taking it to be real. I lack interest in reading anything in English. But instead of providing arguments for why reading anything in English is worthwhile, beyond for learning other languages, and especially translations, people just throw a tantrum. People need to learn basic argumentation, how to take a proposition or thesis and present arguments for or against it, without mingling it with their ego and without ad hominem. A lot to ask, I know, it won't happen anytime soon. Or as in your case, they miss the point.
>>25237971Perhaps I didn’t communicate the message as well as intended and bear in mind I haven’t read through the thread yet. I agree with you, in the sense that reading a translation will only give you the crux, and an attempt at uncovering the ideas in a work, so clearly, that won’t appeal to you, but does appeal to others, you understand this, don’t you? It’s an interesting analogy you use with Plato’s Cave though, I suppose many do think that way. Let me ask, what exactly have you read in English — not translated, that brought you to the conclusion that it is not worthwhile other than for learning other languages? Is it perhaps the aesthetics? What is your favourite language? What is your native language? I also just read this:>But what's driving my interest in the language might be a desire to get to a deeper level of insight into what's beyond language.Could you elaborate on that?
>>25237999I just never really got into reading fiction, until I got an interest in learning languages, as I said. I used to read now and then, but only had one period where I got a good flow. Anyway, the discussion isn't getting anywhere anyway. I might get an interest in reading fiction in English again, but it sure won't be this board that triggered it.>Could you elaborate on that?Picrel is a quote from Foundation by Isaac Asimov, which I read a few years ago, it kind of sums it up. Grammar, logic, rhetoric.
>>25235678I'm only reading a translation of your primordial thoughts to English, I'm not reading your actual thoughts. Is reading you pointless?
>>25238030That’s understandable, with the fact that you’re not generally a fiction reader. And now, reading fiction in another language is not only entertaining I’m sure, but it has a practical purpose for you, as non fiction in English likely did. It serves to expand your understanding of language, universally I take it? And with this, You realise there’s so little you know about it when you’re only fluent in one. I don’t know if you’ve read Melville, or Joyce at all, but in my opinion, the way they use it, is quite beautiful, as though they’re trying to push the limited capabilities of it to its limit, the latter especially, who has brilliant syntax in my opinion. But, given what actually interests you, I don’t think you’ll find as much in English that l know of that you will find in say, German, with respect to tightly engineered syntax in the hypotactic sense.>I might get an interest in reading fiction in English again, but it sure won't be this board that triggered it.Well, only you can make that decision anyway.
>>25238035You're implying that we even have thoughts before and beyond language, but this is debated. I thought of a good example the other day of how we think in language, rather than just translate thoughts to language, but I forgot what it was.>>25238067Well, now the discussion has gone into being about me, which I said is not the topic. People enjoying this or that isn't the topic either.
>>25235678>Is there even a point in reading translations?A translated work can be entertaining, even of high quality depending on how good of an artist the translator is himself. But you should understand you're essentially reading a work of fanficiton.
>>25238171Of course it’s about you, this is your feeling towards English we’re talking about here. I wanted to understand where it came from. You’re acting very standoffish. I’m trying to be cordial here.
>>25238176Mental midget.
>>25238171Have you read Wittgenstein?
>>25238183Nope. I am not the topic.
>>25238185Speaking from experience of being fully fluent in 3 languages, actually. I can tell you're a monolingual pleb because you didn't even provide a counter argument.
>>25238207a little, why
>>25238185Monolinguals HATE being told that all the translated "great works" they've read are just fanfiction
>>25238215>>25238231>fanfiction Again, you’re a mental midget. Probably a SSRI-addicted zoomer. KYS.
>>25238219>You're implying that we even have thoughts before and beyond language, but this is debated. I thought of a good example the other day of how we think in language, rather than just translate thoughts to language.https://archive.org/details/philosophicalinvestigations_201911/page/n109/mode/1upRead from 316 onwards
>>25238213Well then, yes, there is a point to reading translations, for the semantic content for those not wanting to learn the language it was first written in, which doesn’t interest (You). So that’s that.
>>25238234No counterargument detected
