[Sca-cooks] C.A. translation and organization questions
JIMCHEVAL at aol.com
JIMCHEVAL at aol.com
Sat Nov 2 13:14:32 PDT 2013
Personally, I'd be inclined to stick to the voice of the original, but I
don't think it's a major violation to change it, especially if you make it
clear in the introduction that that is the approach you take. Half of
translation is how the original and new audience read, and if passive voice is
more of an impediment to a modern reader than it would have been to the
original audience, an argument can be made for changing it.
In my own translations (done with no input from a publisher or an editor),
I put any interpolated words in square brackets [ ]. That way the sense is
clarified for the reader, but the original text remains untouched.
There's also the question of omitted words. Every translator of Anthimus,
for instance, omits his use of "vero" (truly) as a kind of verbal tic.
Typically if a writer has such a convention that was less distracting at the
time I think the best approach is to remove it and alert the reader to that in
the introduction.
I prefer myself to respect the order of any original (I even kept the order
for the Enseignemenz, even though one note makes it clear that that is
erroneous). My own reasoning is that if someone is trying to compare with the
original, this will make it clearer. If a functional order seems useful, I
would simply provide that as a separate key.
I put all redactions in a separate section on the assumption that someone
browsing the original may be reading in a different way than someone
actually preparing a given dish.
Jim Chevallier
(http://www.chezjim.com/) www.chezjim.com
Les Leftovers: sort of a food history blog
leslefts.blogspot.com
In a message dated 11/2/2013 1:01:03 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
lilinah at earthlink.net writes:
Second, i will need to interpolate some words into the recipes - such as,
after a long sequence of processes, "and" before the final one. In his
French translation, Stephane Yerasimos frequently move the periods - making the
last sequence of one sentence to become the first of the next sentence -
he did it to make better sense, but i prefer to leave the original order.
However, for a modern reader, some sentences could really use that "and".
What do you think? [if you don't understand, i can post some examples]
Third, should i present the recipes in the exact order they are in the
book or should i group them as meat, savory, sweet, beverage, etc., as i have
done for my personal use. Arabic cookbooks tend to group them by cooking
process or by certain dominant flavors, but Shirvani's recipes are in no
particular order.
Finally, i will be adding a certain number of worked-out recipes. Should
the worked out recipes be in a separate section after the translations, or
should each worked out recipe follow the original? I will be checking with
the CA editors about this, but i wanted your opinions.
More information about the Sca-cooks
mailing list