Appendix: Ethical questions in literary

Copyright © 2001. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses

translation
There are no right or wrong answers to these questions. The opinions of the
author of this guide, based solely on his own experience, should be taken as
suggestions rather than as absolutes.
(1) In translating a recent novel, you discover that the author, now
deceased, made a factual error in the order of geological epochs,
reversing the Jurassic and the Cretaceous periods. Would you rectify
this oversight in your translation?
Yes o No o
A. Would you act any differently if the author were living?
Yes o No o
B. Would it make a difference if the error appeared to be the mistake on
the part of a character in the novel?
Yes o No o
C. Would deadline considerations have any effect on your decision?
Yes o No o
(2) You understand perfectly the meaning of a given SL phrase in a short
story, recognizing also its strangeness in the original. If you translate it
faithfully, you will achieve one of two results, neither especially desir-
able: either the author will sound awkward in English or the reader
permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

will think you’re a poor translator. Do you retain the strange construc-
tion in your translation?
Yes o No o
(3) In a possibly corrupted text of a 19th-century novel, in a crucial
passage you encounter a grammatical construction that can be inter-
preted two distinct ways, depending on the presence or absence of a
diacritical marking. You are almost certain, based on internal
evidence, that your interpretation is correct but have no way to verify
the original SL text. Would you point out to the editor or publisher the
doubtful passage?
Yes o No o

210

Literary translation
 Appendix: Ethical questions in literary translation 211

(4) In selecting a title for your translation of a short story you have
two choices. One is straightforward but uninspiring; the other is
thematically less apropos but is catchy and more likely to increase
Copyright © 2001. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses

the salability of the piece and attract readers. Which do you

choose?
The inventive title o The straightforward title o
(5) An earlier translation of the text you are now translating, which has
become part of the 20th-century canon, became a best seller despite the
mistranslation of the title. Should you give it a new title or stick to the
old, less-than-optimal one?
New title o Old title o
(6) Either of two words will satisfactorily render the SL term, but one of
them achieves a subtle foreshadowing effect related to events that
occur later in the work. Unfortunately, there was no such effect in the
original. Should you use it anyway?
Yes o No o
(7) A particular pun in the novel you are dealing with is untranslatable,
but in the same passage there is an opportunity to create a pun
based on a different sentence uttered by the same speaker, a pun
that did not occur in the original. Are you justified in ‘transferring’
the pun?
Yes o No o
(8) Would you read an earlier translation of a novel or short story before
beginning your own translation?
Yes o No o
of a poem?
permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

Yes o No o
(9) For full understanding by the TL reader, a certain cultural referent
requires explanation beyond that found in the SL text. But introducing
a footnote will destroy the mimetic effect. The item in question is a
one-time reference of no importance to the development of plot and
the theme. An approximate translation renders the term in a way that,
while comprehensible and unobtrusive to the TL reader, does not
convey its full sense. Do you use a footnote?
Yes o No o
(10) In a passage ostensibly in a language that is neither SL nor TL, the
author has erroneously placed non-existent grammatical construc-
 212 Literary translation

tions in the mouths of supposedly native speakers. The third language

is sufficiently close to the SL so that readers of the original text could
easily make out the meaning, but this is not the case in the TL into
Copyright © 2001. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses

which you are translating.

A. Do you translate the third language into the TL?
Yes o No o
B. Do you leave it in the third language and correct the grammatical
errors?
Yes o No o
(1) No. The author presumably had the opportunity to correct such
errors of fact during his or her lifetime, whether in a subsequent SL
printing or through an errata insert. It is also possible that the
mistake was intentional; only a close examination of the text, based
on internal evidence, can determine that. Finally, a check of transla-
tions of the work into other languages will reveal if any change was
made, which might be a clue to the author’s intention. Finally, there
is the possibility that the author left instructions for future transla-
tors that may include mention of this anomaly. All in all, in the
absence of any clear probative evidence, the tendency should be to
leave the passage as it is.
A. Yes, because then it would be a simple matter to ask the author.
B. Yes. Leave it as is; many people of all levels of education could
easily make the same mistake.
C. Conceivably. If time pressure were a significant factor, you
would probably have to base your decision on the considerations
enumerated above.
permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

(2) There is no clear-cut answer. Your chosen solution depends on where

you stand on the author-translator-reader continuum. (See ‘Decisions
at the outset.’) Obviously, your feelings about the desirability of ‘resis-
tance’ also play a part.
(3) Yes. Usually the publisher or editor will defer to the translator’s judg-
ment in such cases, and you have met your ethical duty by reporting
the problem.
(4) The inventive title. (See ‘The all- important title.’) Your goal is to maxi-
mize the potential audience for the work in the TL, and the biblio-
graphical equivalent of ‘curb appeal’ – the title and the dust jacket
 Appendix: Ethical questions in literary translation 213

material – is crucial. Most authors accept retitling as a way of life and

do not take umbrage at the practice; to the typical TL reader, of course,
the act is invisible
Copyright © 2001. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses

(5) Indeterminate. More often than not, the choice is not in your hands;
the publisher will make the final decision. If, however, it’s left up to
you, here are the practical dimensions of the dilemma: if you go with a
more accurate title, some unsophisticated members of the larger
public may take it to be a new (or newly discovered) work by the same
author; contrariwise, if you use the existing less-than-accurate title
many will be unaware that this is a new translation. All told, it’s not an
easy nut to crack. I lean about 60% toward the former, based on the
idea that people who read translations are a cut above the reading
public in general and will not be seriously misled by the new title.
(6) Yes, provided there does not exist in the source language a term that
would adequately convey such foreshadowing. If there is such a term,
we must assume the author considered and rejected it, and we have no
right to ‘improve’ the original. As in similar cases, when in doubt, run
it past the author.
(7) Yes. Note that this is not an instance of ‘improving’ the original. The
authorial intent was to convey a personality trait of a specific char-
acter, namely the type who makes puns, and by having the same indi-
vidual make a different play on words in another part of dialogue you
effectively convey that impression.
(8) No (whether short story, novel, or poem). In all three genres the same
danger lurks: your perception of meaning – that is, how you interpret
ambiguous items – as well as your choice of vocabulary and even
syntax may be influenced unconsciously by exposure to previous
permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.

translations. While this is not plagiarism, why subject yourself to

second-guessing? Note that there is no ethical constraint against
checking your own translation against previous ones upon comple-
tion of your first draft. The fact that the ideal word or turn of phrase
has already appeared in an earlier translation should not preclude
your own use of it; isolated words can’t be copyrighted, and there are
only so many ways to express, say, ‘She turned heads wherever she
went.’
(9) No, in fiction or poetry. Yes, in non-fiction. (See ‘Other areas of literary
translation.’) The mimetic effect in fiction and the need for succinct-
ness in poetry trump fine semantic distinctions. Given a single
 214 Literary translation

non-crucial occurrence of a problem word, an undertranslation is

acceptable.
Copyright © 2001. Multilingual Matters. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses

(10) Indeterminate. Either approach is justifiable. If opting to translate the

passage into English, an interpolation might be used, such as ‘he said,
in Spanish.’ If leaving it in the third language, grammatical errors
should be corrected. (See ‘Care and feeding of authors.’)
permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.