[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 157 KB, 758x1000, 81N7HaJilZL._AC_UF1000,1000_QL80_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22421889 No.22421889 [Reply] [Original]

What's the best english translation?

>> No.22421900

>>22421889
Learn early modern Spanish and read the original as intended. It's not much more work if you already know late Carolingian Latin.

>> No.22421924

>>22421889
you're not a Cervantes scholar; the edith grossman translation is fine

>> No.22421948

>>22421889
Grossman and Rutherford

>> No.22421999

although I haven't read it myself I've heard a few people highly recommend the Tobias Smollett translation.

>> No.22422037

>>22421889
Putnam. He took 20 years and it's Nabokov approved.

>> No.22423542

Walter Starkie

>> No.22423565

>>22422037
>Nabokov approved.
Not a good sign. Also Nabokov couldn't read Spanish so he's not the best judge.

>> No.22423609

>>22423565
Tell me what other translation he approved that he got wrong.
>Also Nabokov couldn't read Spanish so he's not the best judge.
He put effort into understanding as much as he could about the translations of his work outside of the three languages he was fluent in. The man spent a lot of time on translations, more than most authors.

>> No.22423633

>>22421900
Oh, well in that case, piece of fuggin' cake bro.

>> No.22423655

>>22423633
lol

>> No.22423673

>>22423609
This was the translation that made Nabokov call DQ a "crude book". He only chose it because it was the most recent translation at the time.

>> No.22424161
File: 307 KB, 1133x1417, p003.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22424161

>>22421889
Burton Raffel and John Ormsby

https://gutenberg.org/ebooks/996

>> No.22425468

ive been reading the rutherford version and have been enjoying it a lot. how different is the grossman one?

>> No.22425488

>>22421889
I recently got a copy, whichever affordable paperback I found (Oxford press). English translation by Charles Jarvis.
What am I in for?

Mother language is Greek but I've been reading books in English for 20 years. I do NOT intend to learn Spanish.

>> No.22425799
File: 126 KB, 562x568, borged.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22425799

>>22421889
cervantes has already been outclassed, you should look for a translation of menard instead.

>> No.22425919

>>22421900
You can learn normal spanish and understand DQ perfectly

>> No.22425980

So what's the verdict? Rutherford, Grossman or Lathrop?

>> No.22425997

>>22425980
Edburg. Or Wythenshawe, if you're feeling cheeky.

>> No.22426017

>>22425997
is this a bot post? who? I don't know these people. I couldn't even find anything on them about DQ.

>> No.22426021

Rutherford takes poetic licence but gets the feeling across, whereas Grossman translates literally. Read Rutherford's sonnets and Grossman's prose, but either is fine overall.

>> No.22426033

The correct answer is Tom Lathrop and don't let any of the retards in this thread tell you otherwise. Lathrop was Starkie's student, who himself was a Don Quixote translator. He made his own spanish version before he made his translation. He has made very valid criticism of both Rutherford's and Grossman's translations, and shows a much deeper understanding of Cervantes' language and style than all the other translators.

>> No.22426037

>>22426033
Also Lathrop has gotten recognition by the Spanish king for his work on Cervantes fwiw

>> No.22426295

>>22426033
> and shows a much deeper understanding of Cervantes' language and style than all the other translators.

How so?

>> No.22426567

>>22422037
>Nabokov approved

into the trash it goes