[lit-ideas] Re: Pluhar's Kant
- From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 11:49:53 +0100 (BST)
> You know me, Robert. I'm a little miffed at this translation, and I ask
> again: Is it me or is there a significant error in every paragraph of
> translated Kant? .
>
> But I must admit that this is fun. Bring me another section.
How about a whole book: I bought Pluhar's translation of the Critique of Pure
Reason some time ago, and still haven't read it. Maybe I shouldn't bother if
it is littered with howlers of translation, so does anyone have a view on the
merits or demerits of this tranlation? How for example does it compare to the
Kemp-Smith, which (in what I have read) seems to be taken as the standard
academic translation. I bought the Pluhar because it looked the business,
nice design, nice font, snazzy jacket. But now I wonder whether I made a
tragic error based on superficial evaluations?
(Incidentally, even Popper had problems with translation - I think it is
'Conjectures and Refutations' that for example has not appeared in German
because Popper could not, in his view, find a good enough translator. Despite
being German speaking Popper would not undertake the translation himself,
perhaps because he had slowly come to detest the German language [see
Hacohen's biography] and did not want to contribute to its survival).
Donal
Offering hints and guesses
London
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo!
Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
