Is True Translation Possible? – An Annotated Bibliography

As someone who is translating on a daily basis, I am curious whether true translation is possible. By true translation I mean that every aspect of the original work is conveyed in the translated work. The translation must reproduce the exact same meaning, it must evoke the same feelings, and envision the same pictures. It is by no means a verbatim translation, because the structure of most languages do not allow that. There certainly are bad translations, good and even better ones. This skill can be improved, but I would like to research whether it can or cannot be perfected. If true translation exists, it would imply that machine translation is possible because it would no longer be a subjective problem, but an objective task.

Benjamin, W. (1997). The translator’s task. TTR: traduction, terminologie, redaction, 10(2), 151-165.

Walter Benjamin was a philosopher, and he approached the topic from a theoretical viewpoint. He considers written texts as forms of art, and pieces of art are not created for the receiver, but for the sake of beauty. Therefore, the task of the translator is “to set free the language imprisoned in the work”, and “to contribute to the service of pure language”. Translators should work as accurately as possible. However, it does not mean that fidelity overrides freedom of form. The form or structure should be graceful, matching the language and culture, but it should not be so free that it is not accurate anymore.

In practice it is problematic to find the golden mean between fidelity and freedom. In some cases it might be more important to stay as close as possible to the grammatical form, but sometimes it would be a severe mistake. Therefore, it is basically up to the translator to decide what kind of translation he will produce. There certainly are bad translations, there may be good and better ones; however, to say that someone has achieved the best translation possible would be arrogant in my opinion.

Bassnett, S., & Lefevere, A. (1990). Introduction: Proust’s grandmother and the thousand and one nights. The culture turn in translation studies. In S. Bassnett and A. Lefevere (Eds.), Translation, History and Culture (1-13). London: Pinter.

This introduction takes into consideration that languages change, which is an influential factor of translation. New expressions and words are invented over time; in different eras language is used in different ways because the culture always changes. Therefore, the meaning of both original texts and translations also changes. Sometimes works need to be interpreted even from our mother tongues. The authors emphasize that languages exist in a cultural background. Without the culture, the language would not exist. Consequently, the translator’s task is to convey the same meaning from the original language to the receiving culture.

Knowing both cultures is essential if we want to produce a good translation. However, it is debatable if one can know every aspect of a culture. And that is not enough; a translator should know at least two cultures perfectly well if he wants to create a true translation. Hypothetically, this person knows two cultures entirely, but the problem of temporality still remains. Often the meanings of words change, and even if someone produced a true translation at one moment in history, it will not remain so.

Gerschenkron, E., & Gerschenkron, A. (1966). Illogical Hamlet: A note on translatability. Texas Studies in Literature and Language, 8(3), 301-336.

In this article, the authors compare a lot of different translation of four lines from Hamlet, analysing each word and their meanings and annotations.  Although they have inspected a hundred translations in sixteen languages, they found a problem with each of them. Shakespeare’s original words were in Act II Scene 2:

“Doubt thou the stars are fire;

Doubt that the sun doth move;

Doubt truth to be a liar;

But never doubt I love.”

According to the article, most translators had problems with the third line. For example, in 1949, Gide translated it to French as (retranslated into English) “[Doubt] whether truth lies, but, my soul,” thus it seems like Hamlet is speaking to himself and not to Ophelia. Or in some cases, translators leave the ‘liar’ out, as Bulhao Poto did in his 1879 translation: “Doubt even that truth be truth.” Most of the translations tried to preserve rhyme and rhythm, but Kanshin (1902) did not, and made the same mistake as Poto. Arthur Masriera’s Catalan translation is also interesting: “Doubt what is certain, believe what is dubious”. There were several kinds of mistakes with different characteristics, but somehow they were all wrong, all 100 translations.

Literary works, such as poems, are so compact and brief that the reader has to pay attention to every little detail, every feeling, inkling and whisper. The closer the reader looks, the harder the translator’s task is. Therefore, it is only wise to look at translations of poems because careful readers examine every word very closely, so the translation must be good if it wants to evoke the same feelings. Since languages are not identical in their vocabulary, it is difficult to imagine that one is able to find the suitable words in a poem, even if he disregards rhymes and rhythm. Consequently, in my opinion, it is impossible to provide a translation of a poem that is objectively the best possible translation.