[Andrew Frisardi]

Looks like you have your answer already, but this thread from a few years back might be worth a scrolling: http://www.ablemuse.com/erato/showthread.php?t=18160.

[Mary Meriam]

Thanks, guys. If you have a chance, I have a couple more questions.

Roger - how would one translation infringe on another translation?

Mike - it took me a while to decipher your message. In other words, if our book has both French and English versions on facing pages, and some French poems had several versions, and a translator selected certain parts of different versions, and copyrighted it, then those French versions would require permision?

Andrew - how complicated can it get! Lots of helpful info there, especially that post from Janice with the links.

The poet is indeed Renée Vivien, and I'm very excited about this book. The translator stayed true to Vivien's formalism. Her translations are superb.

Do you prefer a book of translations that includes the poems in the original language?

[Andrew Frisardi]

Originally Posted by Mary Meriam

Andrew - how complicated can it get!

Very complicated!

Do you prefer a book of translations that includes the poems in the original language?

Yes, a lot.

[ross hamilton hill]

I would second having both French and English on opposing pages, a lot of literati read French.

[Michael Juster]

Yes, exactly. I am not sure that's what copyright was intended for, but I don't make the rules.

I have some vague recollection it was an issue for a while with Emily Dickinson since her work was scrawled on scraps of paper--I believe deciphering and ordering was considered enough intellectual effort to support a copyright. I may be misremembering, though.

Usually, though, that's not an issue.

[Roger Slater]

Originally Posted by Mary Meriam

Roger - how would one translation infringe on another translation?

Let's say you took someone else's translation and copied it word for word, for example. That would be an infringement of the copyright on the translation even if the original poem is in the public domain. The original poem and the translation each have a separate copyright. So a single poem in French may have a dozen different translations, each with its own copyright.

[Roger Slater]

Since French is a language that many people can read somewhat, I suppose I agree that it makes sense to put the original on a facing page. But I would also consider putting the originals into an appendix instead of facing pages. I find that having the original right there in your face tends to detract attention from the translation as a worthy poem in English, reminding the reader that it is just a translation while encouraging the reader to use it merely as a crutch or a tool to access the original. For me, that often detracts from the experience, since I lose faith in the English while not truly entering the world of the original.

Anyone who is truly comfortable with the French doesn't need the translations at all. And anyone who has zero ability to read French doesn't need the original at all. So the whole idea of facing pages is to indulge those who know a bit of French but not all that much, and who wish to use the translations as a sort of extended footnote to help them read the French. The cost of doing so, however, is to force those without any French to keep looking at the French nonetheless.

[Michael Juster]

I usually agree with Roger on most things literary (not so much political...), but I tend to like the facing original. I have grown increasingly wary about translations, and rather enjoy trying to see what has survived, what has been lost, and what has been shamelessly inserted.

But maybe that's just quirky old me.

[Terese Coe]

Hi Mary

Facing originals are convenient for those who are interested, but with the wide accessibility of the net they are a needless expense for the publisher, and drive up the price of the book.

Similar phrases: it's a complex question, and every instance is different. There are no easy answers, even though translators know that once in a great while there are very few alternatives for a phrase. Of course similarity is one problem and an identical phrase is a much larger problem~~again, each phrase has to be dealt with individually as well as in terms of the whole. And if a whole line is the same as that of a previous translation, the red flags go up, without doubt! But as others have said and keep saying (including Alicia, who for me was the first), it's best never to look at a metrical/rhymed translation (if that is also your intention) before starting out.

[Andrew Frisardi]

But I would also consider putting the originals into an appendix instead of facing pages.

I have to disagree. Mainly because I used to think the same thing, then caught flack for doing it this way in my edition of the Vita Nova. Various people were irritated the text was not right there to look at against the translation.

Obviously it is a matter of taste, but for me, having the original right across from the translation adds a lot of pleasure to the experience of reading, since I enjoy seeing what choices a translator made and am a lot less likely to do that if I have to look in an appendix or online for the original.

At the same time, there's truth to what Roger says about printing the translation alone, without the original across from it, since it simplifies appreciating the translation for itself, when the translation is really well done. I've loved some books of poetry translation that did it this way.

In the end, although I think that both approaches have advantages, I'd opt for having the facing text.