9/28 Readings

     I never really thought about how individuals translate a poem because I have never attempted to do so. Whenever I read a Spanish to English translation of a poem, I see many similar aspects to them because they are both Romance languages. Sure, there are a few differences, but overall they convey the same meaning. And conveying the same meaning to a reader in that specific language you're translating it to is the goal, according to both Roger Pulvers and Janine Beichman. Pulvers states that reliable translators get the literal meaning right but sometimes miss the tone, and I feel like I will definitely struggle with this. I am terrible at reading poems and understanding them, and I always try to take the "multiple interpretations" approach. I am not sure about all the tones and sometimes miscount syllables in the English language, so this will surely be a challenge. I understand what Pulvers says when he says we have to drag a text through a wormhole into another universe controlled by the laws of our language. I recently did this with 「夜のくもざる」.  I at first struggled with this story because I was trying to stay close to the Japanese language when in reality I needed to make it understandable to the English audience. 

    I'm surprised Pulvers decided to change a negative tone to a positive one in one of Miyazawa's poems because I thought staying faithful meant you couldn't do that. Beichman stated that it is impossible to make a clone of a poem in a different language, and I agree. Some words in Spanish are much longer than those in English, or vice-versa, so the whole poem can look entirely different in length. I enjoyed Beichman's comment that without translating Western poems, modern Japanese poetry as we know it would not exist. I wonder what type of poetry there would be then. Beichman's biggest comment that spoke to me was "tiny changes can make or break a translation." I will definitely keep this in mind when I attempt the translation of a poem.