When translations better the originals

As I mentioned here, translations can indeed be both better and worse than the original. Which, if you like your probabilities and mathematics, is a statistically guaranteed outcome.

Of course, quality is subjective, but if 'enjoyment' and 'popularity' are anything to go by, then you can start to see obvious examples of the same-if-not-better translations emerge.

And who can say how good the original was if one cannot read it? Which reader of the source language can truly tell how good translations are? Those able to do so are few and far between, but other, more accessible metrics can at least show us how 'not bad' translations and originals are.

Funny that literary translation is still so poorly rewarded financially. Shouldn't there be a publisher who specialises in highlighting and fairly remunerating these unsung authors? Perhaps the new e-publishing wave will enable this with its lower cost barriers for promotion.

Add new comment

Sharing license

This post is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution license. We have done this to encourage translations into any language, with a credit link back to the original. Feel free to print and share copies in your business, school or university, or to publish your own translation, and be sure to let us know if you do!

We would like to actively discourage reposting it verbatim, at least not without a canonical link, to show search engines that this is the original post. An alternative way to use the post's information is to use it as a key source for a completely re-written post, still giving credit as per the license. Thanks for your understanding.

Get the latest on translation, freelancing and business.
(You'll also get our Translation Marketing Checklist)