Some Reflections on Translation

Translation is a necessary cog in the wheel of a world where we have to operate with a multiplicity of languages. However, in spite of its recent ubiquity, we typically forget that translation is as much an art, as it is a science. As an art, it has a subjective side. Although this can be freeing with certain texts, it often leads to imprecision in others. I’ve come across this most recently while reading George Long’s translation of “Meditations” by Marcus Aurelius¹. “Meditations” was originally written in Koine Greek which was in use around 2000 years ago, most famously in the New Testament². In “Meditations” there is constant reference to “universal reason” and “universe”³. As it turns out, in the original, Aurelius uses “λόγος” (logos) and “κοσμος” (cosmos)⁴ respectively⁵.

If you are familiar at all with Greek philosophy, you will recognise these to be incredibly important concepts⁶. Translating Logos from Greek is hard; it is practically the definition of a loaded word. Generally, one associates with it the following concepts: “word”, “conversation”, “ratio”, “reason”, “study” etc., but also “the ordering/structuring principle” and later, in Christianity, literally God⁷. Cosmos is in a similar predicament, associated with “universe” and “world”, but also “order” and many others. So, which of these did Marcus Aurelius intend? Herein lies one of the many issues of translation; the multiplicity of meanings is lost on a lay reader.

We might think that such problems only arise in older texts, written in archaic languages, which have a higher propensity to loaded meanings. However, that is nowhere near the case. While doing the IB, I wrote an essay on “The Reader” by Bernhard Schlink⁸. The novel was originally written in German which I was also coincidentally learning at the time. What sorts of translation shenanigans may we find? How about the title itself? “Der Vorleser” in German is not exactly “The Reader” in English, but a reader who reads to someone else. In the related terms, we have “vorlesen” which is the act of reading aloud and “Vorlesung” which takes on the meaning of lecture. See, we have spun yet another semantic web which is lost on a person who does not know German. The nuance is forlorn.

So, the problems of translation that have crystallised for me are as follows:

• Problem I. (Texts Are Inherently Ambiguous): the reason that we are able to analyse a seemingly simple text to shreds in a literature class is two-fold. Firstly, texts have a built-in degree of ambiguity without taking the intentionality of the author into account. Writing is not an ideal medium. Secondly, we have the interpretative framework of the reader. We parse information differently based on our individual predicaments.

• Problem II.: Translators take liberties in their craft. This is necessary to some extent, as one has to adapt a text to a given audience; the nuance here includes the time period in which the translation is being written as well as the given socio-economic class which is its target audience.

  In the case of “Meditations”, the upper classes were the only ones who had the possibility to learn Ancient Greek and Latin in George Long’s time. They were also most likely to be educated in philosophy. It makes sense then, that Long’s translation, albeit detailed in his account of the text’s corruption and certain matters of translation, chooses not to mention the aforementioned linguistic and philosophical ambiguities. I suppose that this has to do with the English translation being “for the masses”, so to speak. As an aside, it would be interesting to compare multiple translations, contemporary ones thereamong, in order to see if they have some common ground.

Conclusively, the process of translation poses a variety of problems, especially with older texts, but also to a lesser extent with more modern texts. But how might one resolve these issues? The first and perhaps most obvious solution, is to just avoid the problem entirely; problem II that is. Unfortunately, problem I is, and will continue to be, an issue. What I propose is to read as much as possible in a given text’s original language. If not to fully parse it without translation, at least be aware of the context and connotations surrounding a given work. Although I do not yet know Ancient Greek well enough to read it; I am familiar with the time period, certain common Greek words, as well as the philosophical tradition in which Marcus Aurelius was participating. Essentially, I believe that it is imperative that we understand the context in which the text was written⁹.

If we cannot avoid translation, however, I find that a potential solution is to have translators give notes on their translations for those interested. Of course, we then offload both problem I, II to the translator, whom we need to have a sufficient trust in.

Although these solutions are not fail-proof, I believe that they can bring a more reasonable reading of foreign-language texts.