A discussion of the issues that arise from translating a text was addressed due to the class’s reading of Dany Laferriѐre’s The World is Moving Around Me. Laferriѐre is a Creole speaker, but wrote his text in French, and this text was then translated into the English version I read. In considering the problems of translating a work, I was greatly troubled by two questions: 1) What is “lost in translation?” 2) If this text, or any text, is interpreted and rewritten in another language by another individual, then is it authentic (I am terming the word authentic as a work interpreted and written by its author)?

Language is culturally created, and often there are words of a specific language that cannot be expressed in another. There are idioms and meanings encompassed in a word that simply do not exist in another, and this must be considered when reading a translated work. As a student who attempted to learn Italian and is currently studying Dante’s La Divina Commedia, I surely see a loss of depth to Dante’s original work in its translated form. The rhymes, the tenses, the pronouns, and the nouns are often completely loss or inaccurately translated. I was more aware of this loss in La Divina Commedia than Lafferriѐre’s work, but now I question whether the issues I recognized in the translation of Dante’s comedy is equivalent to the issues that can be found in the translation of The World is Moving Around Me. 

A translator needs to read the original text, interpret it, and rewrite it according to the new vocabulary of the new language and audience; on top of this, the content must be understandable, and sound natural to the reader. If all these elements must be considered, I wonder if I am receiving an authentic representation of Laferriѐre’s intentions or am I simply reading a secondary source? Just as Art Spiegelman received and interpreted Vladek’s story in Maus, is David Homel simply receiving and interpreting Laferriѐre’s story? If this is true, then I am not receiving the authentic story, but hearing it from a secondary source who chanced upon the authentic story.