If you're reading a translated work, you are merely reading another author's interpretation of a piece and you're having a very different (usually worse) reading experience than you would have if you read it in the author's original words. All those weebs who say they love Murakami (pic related), basically none of them have actually read Murakami's writing, they've read some english speaker's interpretation of his writing
>>7380545
If you're reading a transcribed work, you are merely reading your own interpretation of a piece and you're having a very different (usually worse) reading experience than you would have if you experienced it in the author's original mind. All those nerds who say they love literature (pic related), basically none of them have actually experienced the author's true intention, they've read some squiggly lines that the author happened to make while thinking of something ineffable and intuited meaning based on their socio-political background
>>7380545
I'm guessing this comes from your wealth of experience as a linguist who habitually reads translated works?
>>7380562
Nice meme but the author's original words are as close as we can get to their ideas. Filtering the author's words through another person makes the words that of the second person, not the first.
>>7380564
I used to read translated works on occasion but after re-reading certain works in their original languages, I've realized that many translations (especially recent ones) sacrifice many things and often certain cultural concepts and references are completely erased in favor of ones that would be understood by the target audience of the translation.
>>7380571
But what you experience when reading the author's words is so far removed from their actual intention that anything lost in translation (assuming it's a good translation) is negligible.
I'm not saying translations don't effect the message at all but rather that what you're experiencing is so indebted to your own situation that to put any meaningful weight into "experiencing what the author originally intended" vis-a-vis translation is like being pissed that it's raining as you attempt to walk across the Atlantic ocean.
Language is an imperfect means of communication, literature is subjective. Daniel Radcliffe could have had his mind blown by 1Q84 while a person born and raised in Japan might think it's pleb shit. Neither of their experiences are de-legitimized because philologists are anal about their profession. The horizon of expectation touches everything, regardless of language, and you're just being a pretentious asshole looking for some easy social capital if you think otherwise.
>>7380599
no shit
>>7380599
kill self
>>7380586
On the other hand is someone doing the translation you would have to do in the first step of the process. I'm thankful for not having to invest large amounts of time to learn another language and getting quite good pieces to read
If you think reading in other language is entierly different experience you are racist cause emotions is universe,
But I StilL luv u bb
>not reading Pope's translations
>not reading Fitzgerald's translation
>not reading Hearn's translations
>not reading Burton's translations
>not reading Waley translations
>not reading Shakespeare
>not specifying which Murakami
you're trying not to read a book the girl you're never going to screw gave you.
>>7380652
>>not specifying which Murakami
Yeah, it's so hard to guess which one hairy pooper have read.
