THE GENIUS OF THE TRANSLATOR SHOULD BE AKIN TO THAT OF THE
ORIGINAL AUTHOR.—THE BEST TRANSLATORS HAVE SHONE IN ORIGINAL
COMPOSITION OF THE SAME SPECIES WITH THAT WHICH THEY HAVE
TRANSLATED.—OF VOLTAIRE’S TRANSLATIONS FROM SHAKESPEARE.—OF
THE PECULIAR CHARACTER OF THE WIT OF VOLTAIRE.—HIS TRANSLATION
FROM HUDIBRAS.—EXCELLENT ANONYMOUS FRENCH TRANSLATION OF
HUDIBRAS.—TRANSLATION OF RABELAIS BY URQUHART AND MOTTEUX.
From the consideration of those general rules of translation which in
the foregoing essay I have endeavoured to illustrate, it will appear no
unnatural conclusion to assert, that he only is perfectly accomplished
for the duty of a translator who possesses a genius akin to that of
the original author. I do not mean to carry this proposition so far as
to affirm, that in order to give a perfect translation of the works
of Cicero, a man must actually be as great an orator, or inherit the
same extent of philosophical genius; but he must have a mind capable of
discerning the full merits of his original, of attending with an acute
perception to the whole of his reasoning, and of entering with warmth
and energy of feeling into all the beauties of his composition. Thus
we shall observe invariably, that the best translators have been those
writers who have composed original works of the same species with those
which they have translated. The mutilated version which yet remains to us
of the _Timæus_ of Plato translated by Cicero, is a masterly composition,
which, in the opinion of the best judges, rivals the merit of the
original. A similar commendation cannot be bestowed on those fragments
of the _Phænomena_ of Aratus translated into verse by the same author;
for Cicero’s poetical talents were not remarkable: but who can entertain
a doubt, that had time spared to us his versions of the orations of
Demosthenes and Æschines, we should have found them possessed of the most
transcendent merit?
We have observed, in the preceding part of this essay, that poetical
translation is less subjected to restraint than prose translation, and
allows more of the freedom of original composition. It will hence follow,
that to exercise this freedom with propriety, a translator must have the
talent of original composition in poetry; and therefore, that in this
species of translation, the possession of a genius akin to that of his
author, is more essentially necessary than in any other. We know the
remark of Denham, that the subtle spirit of poesy evaporates entirely in
the transfusion from one language into another, and that unless a new,
or an original spirit, is infused by the translator himself, there will
remain nothing but a _caput mortuum_. The best translators of poetry,
therefore, have been those who have approved their talents in original
poetical composition. Dryden, Pope, Addison, Rowe, Tickell, Pitt, Warton,
Mason, and Murphy, rank equally high in the list of original poets, as in
that of the translators of poetry.
But as poetical composition is various in its kind, and the characters
of the different species of poetry are extremely distinct, and often
opposite in their nature, it is very evident that the possession of
talents adequate to one species of translation, as to one species of
original poetry, will not infer the capacity of excelling in other
species of which the character is different. Still further, it may be
observed, that as there are certain species of poetical composition, as,
for example, the dramatic, which, though of the same general character
in all nations, will take a strong tincture of difference from the
manners of a country, or the peculiar genius of a people; so it will be
found, that a poet, eminent as an original author in his own country,
may fail remarkably in attempting to convey, by a translation, an idea
of the merits of a foreign work which is tinctured by the national
genius of the country which produced it. Of this we have a striking
example in those translations from Shakespeare by Voltaire; in which the
French poet, eminent himself in dramatical composition, intended to
convey to his countrymen a just idea of our most celebrated author in
the same department. But Shakespeare and Voltaire, though perhaps akin
to each other in some of the great features of the mind, were widely
distinguished, even by nature, in the characters of their poetical
genius; and this natural distinction was still more sensibly increased by
the general tone of manners, the _hue and fashion_ of thought of their
respective countries. Voltaire, in his essay _sur la Tragédie Angloise_,
has chosen the famous soliloquy in the tragedy of Hamlet, “_To be, or
not to be_,” as one of those striking passages which best exemplify the
genius of Shakespeare, and which, in the words of the French author,
_demandent grace pour toutes ses fautes_. It may therefore be presumed,
that the translator in this instance endeavoured, as far as lay in his
power, not only to adopt the spirit of his author, but to represent him
as favourably as possible to his countrymen. Yet, how wonderfully has he
metamorphosed, how miserably disfigured him! In the original, we have the
perfect picture of a mind deeply agitated, giving vent to its feelings
in broken starts of utterance, and in language which plainly indicates,
that the speaker is reasoning solely with his own mind, and not with any
auditor. In the translation, we have a formal and connected harangue, in
which it would appear, that the author, offended with the abrupt manner
of the original, and judging those irregular starts of expression to be
unsuitable to that precision which is required in abstract reasoning, has
corrected, as he thought, those defects of the original, and given union,
strength, and precision, to this philosophical argument.
Demeure, il faut choisir, et passer à l’instant
De la vie à la mort, ou de l’être au néant.
Dieux justes, s’il en est, éclairez mon courage.
Faut-il vieillir courbé sous la main qui m’outrage,
Supporter, ou finir mon malheur et mon sort?
Que suis-je? qui m’arrête? et qu’est ce que la mort?
C’est la fin de nos maux, c’est mon unique azile;
Apres de longs transports, c’est un sommeil tranquile.
On s’endort et tout meurt; mais un affreux reveil,
Doit succéder peut-être aux douceurs du sommeil.
On nous menace; on dit que cette courte vie
De tourmens éternels est aussitôt suivie.
O mort! moment fatale! affreuse éternité!
Tout cœur à ton seul nom se glace épouvanté.
Eh! qui pourrait sans toi supporter cette vie?
De nos prêtres menteurs bénir l’hypocrisie?
D’une indigne maitresse encenser les erreurs?
Ramper sous un ministre, adorer ses hauteurs?
Et montrer les langueurs de son âme abattue,
A des amis ingrats qui detournent la vue?
La mort serait trop douce en ces extrémités.
Mais le scrupule parle, et nous crie, arrêtez.
Il defend à nos mains cet heureux homicide,
Et d’un héros guerrier, fait un Chrétien timide.[68]
Besides the general fault already noticed, of substituting formal and
connected reasoning, to the desultory range of thought and abrupt
transitions of the original, Voltaire has in this passage, by the
looseness of his paraphrase, allowed some of the most striking beauties,
both of the thought and expression, entirely to escape; while he has
superadded, with unpardonable licence, several ideas of his own, not only
unconnected with the original, but dissonant to the general tenor of the
speaker’s thoughts, and foreign to his character. Adopting Voltaire’s
own style of criticism on the translations of the Abbé des Fontaines, we
may ask him, “Where do we find, in this translation of Hamlet’s soliloquy,
“The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune——
To take arms against a sea of troubles——
The heart-ache, and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to——
Perchance to dream; ay, there’s the rub——
The whips and scorns of time——
The law’s delay, the insolence of office——
The spurns—that patient merit from th’ unworthy takes——
That undiscover’d country, from whose bourne
No traveller returns——?”
Can Voltaire, who has omitted in this short passage all the above
striking peculiarities of thought and expression, be said to have given a
translation from Shakespeare?
But in return for what he has retrenched from his author, he has made a
liberal addition of several new and original ideas of his own. Hamlet,
whose character in Shakespeare exhibits the strongest impressions of
religion, who feels these impressions even to a degree of superstition,
which influences his conduct in the most important exigences, and renders
him weak and irresolute, appears in Mr. Voltaire’s translation a thorough
sceptic and freethinker. In the course of a few lines, he expresses his
doubt of the existence of a God; he treats the priests as liars and
hypocrites, and the Christian religion as a system which debases human
nature, and makes a coward of a hero:
Dieux justes! S’il en est——
De nos prêtres menteurs bénir l’hypocrisie——
Et d’un héros guerrier, fait un Chrêtien timide——
Now, who gave Mr. Voltaire a right thus to transmute the pious and
superstitious Hamlet into a modern _philosophe_ and _Esprit fort_?
Whether the French author meant by this transmutation to convey to his
countrymen a favourable idea of our English bard, we cannot pretend to
say; but we may at least affirm, that he has not conveyed a just one.[69]
But what has prevented the translator, who professes that he wished
to give a just idea of the merits of his original, from accomplishing
what he wished? Not ignorance of the language; for Voltaire, though no
great critic in the English tongue, had yet a competent knowledge of it;
and the change he has put upon the reader was not involuntary, or the
effect of ignorance. Neither was it the want of genius, or of poetical
talents; for Voltaire is certainly one of the best poets, and one of the
greatest ornaments of the drama. But it was the original difference of
his genius and that of Shakespeare, increased by the general opposition
of the national character of the French and English. His mind, accustomed
to connect all ideas of dramatic sublimity or beauty with regular design
and perfect symmetry of composition, could not comprehend this union
of the great and beautiful with irregularity of structure and partial
disproportion. He was capable indeed of discerning some features of
majesty in this colossal statue; but the rudeness of the parts, and the
want of polish in the whole figure, prevailed over the general impression
of its grandeur, and presented it altogether to his eye as a monstrous
production.
The genius of Voltaire was more akin to that of Dryden, of Waller, of
Addison, and of Pope, than to that of Shakespeare: he has therefore
succeeded much better in the translations he has given of particular
passages from these poets, than in those he has attempted from our great
master of the drama.
Voltaire possessed a large share of wit; but it is of a species peculiar
to himself, and which I think has never yet been analysed. It appears
to me to be the result of acute philosophical talents, a strong spirit
of satire, and a most brilliant imagination. As all wit consists in
unexpected combinations, the singular union of a philosophic thought with
a lively fancy, which is a very uncommon association, seems in general to
be the basis of the wit of Voltaire. It is of a very different species
from that wit which is associated with humour, which is exercised in
presenting odd, extravagant, but natural views of human character, and
which forms the essence of ludicrous composition. The novels of Voltaire
have no other scope than to illustrate certain philosophical doctrines,
or to expose certain philosophical errors; they are not pictures of life
or of manners; and the persons who figure in them are pure creatures
of the imagination, fictitious beings, who have nothing of nature in
their composition, and who neither act nor reason like the ordinary
race of men. Voltaire, then, with a great deal of wit, seems to have
had no talent for humorous composition. Now if such is the character of
his original genius, we may presume, that he was not capable of justly
estimating in the compositions of others what he did not possess himself.
We may likewise fairly conclude, that he should fail in attempting to
convey by a translation a just idea of the merits of a work, of which
one of the main ingredients is that quality in which he was himself
deficient. Of this I proceed to give a strong example.
In the poem of _Hudibras_, we have a remarkable combination of Wit
with Humour; nor is it easy to say which of these qualities chiefly
predominates in the composition. A proof that humour forms a most capital
ingredient is, that the inimitable Hogarth has told the whole story of
the poem in a series of characteristic prints: now painting is completely
adequate to the representation of humour, but can convey no idea of wit.
Of this singular poem, Voltaire has attempted to give a specimen to his
countrymen by a translation; but in this experiment he says he has found
it necessary to concentrate the first four hundred lines into little more
than eighty of the translation.[70] The truth is, that, either insensible
of that part of the merit of the original, or conscious of his own
inability to give a just idea of it, he has left out all that constitutes
the humour of the painting, and attached himself solely to the wit of
the composition. In the original, we have a description of the figure,
dress, and accoutrements of Sir Hudibras, which is highly humorous, and
which conveys to the imagination as complete a picture as is given by the
characteristic etchings of Hogarth. In the translation of Voltaire, all
that we learn of those particulars which _paint_ the hero, is, that he
wore mustachios, and rode with a pair of pistols.
Even the wit of the original, in passing through the alembic of Voltaire,
has changed in a great measure its nature, and assimilated itself to
that which is peculiar to the translator. The wit of Butler is more
concentrated, more pointed, and is announced in fewer words, than the
wit of Voltaire. The translator, therefore, though he pretends to have
abridged four hundred verses into eighty, has in truth effected this by
the retrenchment of the wit of his original, and not by the concentration
of it: for when we compare any particular passage or point, we find there
is more diffusion in the translation than in the original. Thus, Butler
says,
The difference was so small, his brain
Outweigh’d his rage but half a grain;
Which made some take him for a tool
That knaves do work with, call’d a fool.
Thus amplified by Voltaire, and at the same time imperfectly translated.
Mais malgré sa grande eloquence,
Et son mérite, et sa prudence,
Il passa chez quelques savans
Pour être un de ces instrumens
Dont les fripons avec addresse
Savent user sans dire mot,
Et qu’ils tournent avec souplesse;
Cet instrument s’appelle un sot.
Thus likewise the famous simile of Taliacotius, loses, by the
amplification of the translator, a great portion of its spirit.
So learned Taliacotius from
The brawny part of porter’s bum
Cut supplemental noses, which
Would last as long as parent breech;
But, when the date of nock was out,
Off dropt the sympathetic snout.
Ainsi Taliacotius,
Grand Esculape d’Etrurie,
Répara tous les nez perdus
Par une nouvelle industrie:
Il vous prenoit adroitement
Un morceau du cul d’un pauvre homme,
L’appliquoit au nez proprement;
Enfin il arrivait qu’en somme,
Tout juste à la mort du prêteur
Tombait le nez de l’emprunteur,
Et souvent dans la même bière,
Par justice et par bon accord,
On remettait au gré du mort
Le nez auprès de son derriere.
It will be allowed, that notwithstanding the supplemental witticism of
the translator, contained in the last four lines, the simile loses, upon
the whole, very greatly by its diffusion. The following anonymous Latin
version of this simile is possessed of much higher merit, as, with equal
brevity of expression, it conveys the whole spirit of the original.
_Sic adscititios nasos de clune torosi_
_Vectoris doctâ secuit Talicotius arte,_
_Qui potuere parent durando æquare parentem:_
_At postquam fato clunis computruit, ipsum_
_Unâ sympathicum cœpit tabescere rostrum._
With these translations may be compared the following, which is taken
from a complete version of the poem of _Hudibras_, a very remarkable
work, with the merits of which (as the book is less known than it
deserves to be) I am glad to have this opportunity of making the English
reader acquainted:
Ainsi Talicot d’une fesse
Savoit tailler avec addresse
Nez tous neufs, qui ne risquoient rien
Tant que le cul se portoit bien;
Mais si le cul perdoit la vie,
Le nez tomboit par sympathie.
In one circumstance of this passage no translation can come up to the
original: it is in that additional pleasantry which results from the
structure of the verses, the first line ending most unexpectedly with a
preposition, and the third with a pronoun, both which are the rhyming
syllables in the two couplets:
So learned Taliacotius _from_, &c.
Cut supplemental noses, _which_, &c.
It was perhaps impossible to imitate this in a translation; but setting
this circumstance aside, the merit of the latter French version seems to
me to approach very near to that of the original.
The author of this translation of the poem of _Hudibras_, evidently
a man of superior abilities,[71] appears to have been endowed with an
uncommon share of modesty. He presents his work to the public with the
utmost diffidence; and, in a short preface, humbly deprecates its censure
for the presumption that may be imputed to him in attempting that which
the celebrated Voltaire had declared to be one of the most difficult of
tasks. Yet this task he has executed in a very masterly manner. A few
specimens will shew the high merit of this work, and clearly evince, that
the translator possessed that essential requisite for his undertaking, a
kindred genius with that of his great original.
The religion of Hudibras is thus described:
For his religion, it was fit
To match his learning and his wit:
’Twas Presbyterian true blue;
For he was of that stubborn crew
Of errant saints, whom all men grant
To be the true church-militant:
Such as do build their faith upon
The holy text of pike and gun;
Decide all controversies by
Infallible artillery;
And prove their doctrine orthodox,
By apostolic blows and knocks.
_Canto_ 1.
Sa réligion au genie
Et sçavoir étoit assortie;
Il étoit franc Presbyterien,
Et de sa secte le soutien,
Secte, qui justement se vante
D’être l’Eglise militante;
Qui de sa foi vous rend raison
Par la bouche de son canon,
Dont le boulet et feu terrible
Montre bien qu’elle est infallible,
Et sa doctrine prouve à tous
Orthodoxe, à force de coups.
In the following passage, the arch ratiocination of the original is
happily rivalled in the translation:
For Hudibras wore but one spur,
As wisely knowing could he stir
To active trot one side of’s horse,
The other would not hang an a—se.
Car Hudibras avec raison
Ne se chaussoit qu’un éperon,
Ayant preuve démonstrative
Qu’un coté marchant, l’autre arrive.
The language of Sir Hudibras is described as a strange jargon, compounded
of English, Greek, and Latin,
Which made some think when he did gabble
They’d heard three labourers of Babel,
Or Cerberus himself pronounce
A leash of languages at once.
It was difficult to do justice in the translation to the metaphor of
Cerberus, by translating _leash of languages_: This, however, is very
happily effected by a parallel witticism:
Ce qui pouvoit bien faire accroire
Quand il parloit à l’auditoire,
D’entendre encore le bruit mortel
De trois ouvriers de Babel,
Ou Cerbere aux ames errantes
Japper trois langues différentes.
The wit of the following passage is completely transfused, perhaps even
heightened in the translation:
For he by geometric scale
Could take the size of pots of ale;
Resolve by sines and tangents straight
If bread or butter wanted weight;
And wisely tell what hour o’ th’ day
The clock does strike, by algebra.
En géometre raffiné
Un pot de bierre il eut jaugé;
Par tangente et sinus sur l’heure
Trouvé le poids de pain ou beurre,
Et par algebre eut dit aussi
A quelle heure il sonne midi.
The last specimen I shall give from this work, is Hudibras’s consultation
with the lawyer, in which the Knight proposes to prosecute Sidrophel in
an action of battery:
Quoth he, there is one Sidrophel
Whom I have cudgell’d—“Very well.”—
And now he brags t’have beaten me.
“Better and better still, quoth he.”—
And vows to stick me to the wall
Where’er he meets me—“Best of all.”—
’Tis true, the knave has taken’s oath
That I robb’d him—“Well done, in troth.”—
When h’ has confessed he stole my cloak,
And pick’d my fob, and what he took,
Which was the cause that made me bang him
And take my goods again—“Marry, hang him.”
——“Sir,” quoth the lawyer, “not to flatter ye,
You have as good and fair a battery
As heart can wish, and need not shame
The proudest man alive to claim:
For if they’ve us’d you as you say;
Marry, quoth I, God give you joy:
I would it were my case, I’d give
More than I’ll say, or you believe.”
Il est, dit-il, de par le monde
Un Sidrophel, que Dieu confonde,
Que j’ai rossé des mieux. “Fort bien”—
Et maintenant il dit, le chien,
Qu’il m’a battu.—“Bien mieux encore.”—
Et jure, afin qu’on ne l’ignore,
Que s’il me trouve il me tuera—
“Le meilleur de tout le voila”—
Il est vrai que ce misérable
A fait serment au préalable
Que moi je l’ai dévalisé—
“C’est fort bien fait, en vérité”—
Tandis que lui-meme il confesse,
Qu’il m’a volé dans une presse,
Mon manteau, mon gousset vuidé;
Et c’est pourquoi je l’ai rossé;
Puis mes effets j’ai sçu reprendre—
“Oui da,” dit-il, “il faut le pendre.”
——Dit l’avocat, “sans flatterie,
Vous avez, Monsieur, batterie
Aussi bonne qu’on puisse avoir;
Vous devez vous en prévaloir.
S’ils vous ont traité de la sorte,
Comme votre recit le porte,
Je vous en fais mon compliment;
Je voudrais pour bien de l’argent,
Et plus que vous ne sauriez croire,
Qu’il m’arrivât pareille histoire.”
These specimens are sufficient to shew how completely this translator
has entered into the spirit of his original, and has thus succeeded in
conveying a very perfect idea to his countrymen of one of those works
which are most strongly tinctured with the peculiarities of national
character, and which therefore required a singular coincidence of the
talents of the translator with those of the original author.
If the English can boast of any parallel to this, in a version from the
French, where the translator has given equal proof of a kindred genius
to that of his original, and has as successfully accomplished a task of
equal difficulty, it is in the translation of Rabelais, begun by Sir
Thomas Urquhart, and finished by Mr. Motteux, and lastly, revised and
corrected by Mr. Ozell. The difficulty of translating this work, arises
less from its obsolete style, than from a phraseology peculiar to the
author, which he seems to have purposely rendered obscure, in order to
conceal that satire which he levels both against the civil government
and the ecclesiastical policy of his country. Such is the studied
obscurity of this satire, that but a very few of the most learned and
acute among his own countrymen have professed to understand Rabelais in
the original. The history of the English translation of this work, is
in itself a proof of its very high merit. The three first books were
translated by Sir Thomas Urquhart, but only two of them were published in
his lifetime. Mr. Motteux, a Frenchman by birth, but whose long residence
in England had given him an equal command of both languages, republished
the work of Urquhart, and added the remaining three books translated by
himself. In this publication he allows the excellence of the work of
his predecessor, whom he declares to have been a complete master of the
French language, and to have possessed both learning and fancy equal to
the task he undertook. He adds, that he has preserved in his translation
“the very style and air of his original;” and finally, “that the English
readers may now understand that author better in their own tongue, than
many of the French can do in theirs.” The work thus completed in English,
was taken up by Mr. Ozell, a person of considerable literary abilities,
and who possessed an uncommon knowledge both of the ancient and modern
languages. Of the merits of the translation, none could be a better
judge, and to these he has given the strongest testimony, by adopting it
entirely in his new edition, and limiting his own undertaking solely
to the correction of the text of Urquhart and Motteux, to which he has
added a translation of the notes of M. Du Chat, who spent, as Mr. Ozell
informs us, forty years in composing annotations on the original work.
The English version of Rabelais thus improved, may be considered, in
its present form, as one of the most perfect specimens of the art of
translation. The best critics in both languages have borne testimony
to its faithful transfusion of the sense, and happy imitation of the
style of the original; and every English reader will acknowledge, that
it possesses all the ease of original composition. If I have forborne
to illustrate any of the rules or precepts of the preceding Essay from
this work, my reasons were, that obscurity I have already noticed, which
rendered it less fit for the purpose of such illustration, and that
strong tincture of licentiousness which characterises the whole work.
APPENDIX
No. I
_STANZAS from TICKELL’S Ballad of COLIN AND LUCY_
_Translated by LE MIERRE_
Cheres compagnes, je vous laisse;
Une voix semble m’apeller,
Une main que je vois sans cesse
Me fait signe de m’en aller.
L’ingrat que j’avois cru sincere
Me fait mourir, si jeune encor:
Une plus riche a sçu lui plaire:
Moi qui l’aimois, voila mon sort!
Ah Colin! ah! que vas tu faire?
Rends moi mon bien, rends-moi ta foi;
Et toi que son cœur me préfère
De ses baisers détourne toi.
Dès le matin en épousée
À l’église il te conduira;
Mais homme faux, fille abusée,
Songez que Lucy sera là.
Filles, portez-moi vers ma fosse;
Que l’ingrat me rencontre alors,
Lui, dans son bel habit de noce,
Et Lucy sous le drap des morts.
_I hear a voice you cannot hear,_
_Which says I must not stay;_
_I see a hand you cannot see,_
_Which beckons me away._
_By a false heart, and broken vows,_
_In early youth I die;_
_Am I to blame, because his bride_
_Is thrice as rich as I?_
_Ah Colin, give not her thy vows,_
_Vows due to me alone;_
_Nor thou, fond maid, receive his kiss,_
_Nor think him all thy own._
_To-morrow in the church to wed,_
_Impatient both prepare,_
_But know, fond maid, and know, false man,_
_That Lucy will be there._
_There bear my corse, ye comrades, bear,_
_The bridegroom blithe to meet;_
_He in his wedding-trim so gay,_
_I in my winding-sheet._
No. II
_ODE V. of the First Book of HORACE_
_Translated by MILTON_
_Quis multa gracilis, &c._
What slender youth, bedew’d with liquid odours,
Courts thee on roses in some pleasant cave?
Pyrrha, for whom bind’st thou
In wreaths thy golden hair,
Plain in thy neatness? O how oft shall he
On faith and changed Gods complain, and seas
Rough with black winds, and storms
Unwonted, shall admire.
Who now enjoys thee credulous, all gold,
Who always vacant, always amiable,
Hopes thee; of flattering gales
Unmindful? Hapless they
To whom thou untry’d seem’st fair. Me in my vow’d
Picture the sacred wall declares t’have hung
My dank and dropping weeds
To the stern God of sea.
No. III
_The beginning of the VIIIth Book of the ILIAD_
_Translated by T. HOBBES_
The morning now was quite display’d, and Jove
Upon Olympus’ highest top was set;
And all the Gods and Goddesses above,
By his command, were there together met.
And Jupiter unto them speaking, said,
You Gods all, and you Goddesses, d’ye hear!
Let none of you the Greeks or Trojans aid:
I cannot do my work for you: forbear!
For whomsoever I assisting see
The Argives or the Trojans, be it known,
He wounded shall return, and laught at be,
Or headlong into Tartarus be thrown;
Into the deepest pit of Tartarus,
Shut in with gates of brass, as much below
The common hell, as ’tis from hell to us.
But if you will my power by trial know,
Put now into my hand a chain of gold,
And let one end thereof lie on the plain,
And all you Gods and Goddesses take hold,
You shall not move me, howsoe’er you strain
At th’ other end, if I my strength put to ’t,
I’ll pull you Gods and Goddesses to me,
Do what you can, and earth and sea to boot,
And let you hang there till my power you see.
The Gods were out of countenance at this,
And to such mighty words durst not reply, &c.
No. IV
A very learned and ingenious friend,[72] to whom I am indebted for some
very just remarks, of which I have availed myself in the preceding Essay,
has furnished me with the following acute, and, as I think, satisfactory
explanation of a passage in Tacitus, extremely obscure in itself, and
concerning the meaning of which the commentators are not agreed. “Tacitus
meaning to say, ‘That Domitian, wishing to be the great, and indeed
the only object in the empire, and that no body should appear with any
sort of lustre in it but himself, was exceedingly jealous of the great
reputation which Agricola had acquired by his skill in war,’ expresses
himself thus:
In Vit. Agr. cap. 39
“_Id sibi maxime formidolosum, privati hominis nomen suprà principis
attolli. Frustra studia fori, et civilium artium decus in silentium
acta, si militarem gloriam alius occuparet: et cætera utcunque facilius
dissimulari, ducis boni imperatoriam virtutem esse._ Which Gordon
translates thus: ‘Terrible above all things it was to him, that the name
of a private man should be exalted above that of the Prince. In vain had
he driven from the public tribunals all pursuits of popular eloquence
and fame, in vain repressed the renown of every civil accomplishment,
if any other than himself possessed the glory of excelling in war: Nay,
however he might dissemble every other distaste, yet to the person of
Emperor properly appertained the virtue and praise of being a great
general.’
“This translation is very good, as far as the words ‘civil
accomplishment,’ but what follows is not, in my opinion, the meaning of
Tacitus’s words, which I would translate thus:
“‘If any other than himself should become a great object in the empire,
as that man must necessarily be who possesses military glory. For however
he might conceal a value for excellence of every other kind, and even
affect a contempt of it, yet he could not but allow, that skill in war,
and the talents of a great General, were an ornament to the Imperial
dignity itself.’
“Domitian did not pretend to any skill in war; and therefore the word
‘_alius_’ could never be intended to express a competitor with him in
it.”
FOOTNOTES
[1] Vertere Græca in Latinum, veteres nostri oratores optimum judicabant.
Id se Lucius Crassus, in illis Ciceronis de oratore libris, dicit
factitasse. Id Cicero suâ ipse personâ frequentissimè præcipit. Quin
etiam libros Platonis atque Xenophontis edidit, hoc genere translatos.
Id Messalæ placuit, multæque sunt ab eo scriptæ ad hunc modum orationes
(_Quinctil. Inst. Orat._ l. 10, c. 5).
Utile imprimis, ut multi præcipiunt, vel ex Græco in Latinum, vel
ex Latino vertere in Græcum: quo genere exercitationis, proprietas
splendorque verborum, copia figurarum, vis explicandi, præterea
imitatione optimorum, similia inveniendi facultas paratur: simul quæ
legentem fefellissent, transferentem fugere non possunt (_Plin. Epist._
l. 7, ep. 7).
[2] There remain of Cicero’s translations some fragments of the
_Œconomics_ of Xenophon, the _Timæus_ of Plato, and part of a poetical
version of the _Phenomena_ of Aratus.
[3] When the first edition of this Essay was published, the Author had
not seen Dr. Campbell’s new translation of the Gospels, a most elaborate
and learned work, in one of the preliminary dissertations to which, that
ingenious writer has treated professedly “Of the chief things to be
attended to in translating.” The general laws of the art as briefly laid
down in the first part of that dissertation are individually the same
with those contained in this Essay; a circumstance which, independently
of that satisfaction which always arises from finding our opinions
warranted by the concurring judgement of persons of distinguished
ingenuity and taste, affords a strong presumption that those opinions
are founded in nature and in common sense. Another work on the same
subject had likewise escaped the Author’s observation when he first
published this Essay; an elegant poem on translation, by Mr. Francklin,
the ingenious translator of Sophocles and Lucian. It is, however, rather
an apology of the art, and a vindication of its just rank in the scale
of literature, than a didactic work explanatory of its principles. But
above all, the Author has to regret, that, in spite of his most diligent
research, he has never yet been fortunate enough to meet with the work
of a celebrated writer, professedly on the subject of translation,
the treatise of M. Huet, Bishop of Avranches, _De optimo genere
interpretandi_; of whose doctrines, however, he has some knowledge, from
a pretty full extract of his work in the _Dictionnaire Encyclopédique de
Grammaire et Litterature_, article _Traduction_.
[4] Founding upon this principle, which he has by no means proved, That
the arrangement of the Greek and Latin languages is the order of nature,
and that the modern tongues ought never to deviate from that order, but
for the sake of sense, perspicuity, or harmony; he proceeds to lay down
such rules as the following: That the periods of the translation should
accord in all their parts with those of the original—that their order,
and even their length, should be the same—that all conjunctions should
be scrupulously preserved, as being the joints or articulations of the
members—that all adverbs should be ranged next to the verb, &c. It may be
confidently asserted, that the Translator who shall endeavour to conform
himself to these rules, even with the licence allowed of sacrificing to
sense, perspicuity, and harmony, will produce, on the whole, a very sorry
composition, which will be far from reflecting a just picture of his
original.
[5]
Such is our pride, our folly, or our fate,
That few, but such as cannot write, translate.
_Denham to Sir R. Fanshaw._
hands impure dispense
The sacred streams of ancient eloquence;
Pedants assume the task for scholars fit,
And blockheads rise interpreters of wit.
_Translation by Francklin._
[6] _Batteux de la Construction Oratoire_, par. 2, ch. 4. Such likewise
appears to be the opinion of M. Huet: “_Optimum ergo illum esse dico
interpretandi modum, quum auctoris sententiæ primum, deinde ipsis
etiam, si ita fert utriusque linguæ facultas, verbis arctissimè adhæret
interpres, et nativum postremo auctoris characterem, quoad ejus fieri
potest, adumbrat; idque unum studet, ut nulla cum detractione imminutum,
nullo additamento auctum, sed integrum, suique omni ex parte simillimum,
perquam fideliter exhibeat.—Universè ergo verbum, de verbo exprimendum,
et vocum etiam collocationem retinendam esse pronuncio, id modo per
linguæ qua utitur interpres facultatem liceat_” (Huet de Interpretatione,
lib. 1).
[7] Dom Vincent Thuillier.
[8] _Mémoires militaires de M. Guischardt._
[9] Dr. George Campbell, _Preliminary Dissertations to a new Translation
of the Gospels_.
[10] _Cic. de Fin._ l. 2.
[11] _Cic. Tusc. Quæst._ l. 4.
[12] _Trans. of Royal Soc. of Edin._ vol. 3.
[13] The excellent translation of Tacitus by Mr. Murphy had not appeared
when the first edition of this Essay was published.
[14] Mr. Gordon has translated the words _ad tempus_, “in pressing
emergencies;” and Mr. Murphy, “in sudden emergencies only.” This sense
is, therefore, probably warranted by good authorities. But it is
evidently not the sense of the author in this passage, as the context
sufficiently indicates.
[15] There is a French translation of this ballad by Le Mierre, which,
though not in all respects equal to that of Bourne, has yet a great
deal of the tender simplicity of the original. See a few stanzas in the
Appendix, No. I.
[16] From the modern allusion, _barrieres du Louvre_, this passage,
strictly speaking, falls under the description of imitation, rather than
of translation. See _postea_, ch. xi.
[17] In the poetical works of Milton, we find many noble imitations of
detached passages of the ancient classics; but there is nothing that can
be termed a translation, unless an English version of Horace’s _Ode to
Pyrrha_; which it is probable the author meant as a whimsical experiment
of the effect of a strict conformity in English both to the expression
and measure of the Latin. See this singular composition in the Appendix,
No. 2.
[18]
That servile path thou nobly dost decline,
Of tracing word by word, and line by line.
A new and nobler way thou dost pursue,
To make translations and translators too:
They but preserve the ashes, thou the flame;
True to his sense, but truer to his fame.
DENHAM to Sir R. FANSHAW.
[19] One of the best passages of Fanshaw’s translation of the _Pastor
Fido_, is the celebrated apostrophe to the spring—
Spring, the year’s youth, fair mother of new flowers,
New leaves, new loves, _drawn by the winged hours_,
Thou art return’d; but the felicity
Thou brought’st me last is not return’d with thee.
Thou art return’d; but nought returns with thee,
Save my lost joy’s regretful memory.
Thou art the self-same thing thou wert before,
As fair and jocund: but I am no more
The thing I was, so gracious in her sight,
_Who is heaven’s masterpiece and earth’s delight_.
O bitter sweets of love! far worse it is
To lose than never to have tasted bliss.
O Primavera gioventu del anno,
Bella madre di fiori,
D’herbe novelle, e di novelli amori:
Tu torni ben, ma teco,
Non tornano i sereni,
E fortunati dì de le mie gioie!
Tu torni ben, tu torni,
Ma teco altro non torna
Che del perduto mio caro tesoro
La rimembranza misera e dolente.
Tu quella se’ tu quella,
Ch’eri pur dianzi vezzosa e bella.
Ma non son io già quel ch’un tempo fui,
Sì caro a gli occhi altrui.
O dolcezze amarissime d’amore!
Quanto è più duro perdervi, che mai
Non v’haver ò provate, ò possedute!
_Pastor Fido_, act 3, sc. 1.
In those parts of the English version which are marked in Italics, there
is some attempt towards a freedom of translation; but it is a freedom of
which Sandys and May had long before given many happier specimens.
[20] I am happy to find this opinion, for which I have been blamed
by some critics, supported by so respectable an authority as that of
M. Delille; whose translation of the _Georgics_ of Virgil, though
censurable, (as I shall remark) in a few particulars, is, on the whole,
a very fine performance: “Il faut etre quelquefois superieur à son
original, précisément parce qu’on lui est très-inférieur.” _Delille Disc.
Prelim. à la Trad. des Georgiques._ Of the same opinion is the elegant
author of the poem on Translation.
Unless an author like a mistress warms,
How shall we _hide his faults_, or taste his charms?
How all his modest, latent beauties find;
How trace each lovelier feature of the mind;
_Soften each blemish_, and _each grace improve_,
And treat him with the dignity of love?
FRANCKLIN.
[21] Witness the attempt of a translator of no ordinary ability.
Pulchra mari, crocea surgens in veste, per omnes
Fundebat sese terras Aurora: deorum
Summo concilium cœlo regnator habebat.
Cuncta silent: Solio ex alto sic Jupiter orsus.
Huc aures cuncti, mentesque advertite vestras,
Dîque Deæque, loquar dum quæ fert corde voluntas,
Dicta probate omnes; neve hinc præcidere quisquam
Speret posse aliquid, seu mas seu fœmina. Siquis
Auxilio veniens, dura inter prælia, Troas
Juverit, aut Danaos, fœde remeabit Olympum
Saucius: arreptumve obscura in Tartara longè
Demittam ipse manu jaciens; immane barathrum
Altè ubi sub terram vasto descendit hiatu,
Orcum infra, quantum jacet infra sidera tellus:
Ære solum, æterno ferri stant robore portæ.
Quam cunctis melior sim Dîs, tum denique discet.
Quin agite, atque meas jam nunc cognoscite vires,
Ingentem heic auro e solido religate catenam,
Deinde manus cuncti validas adhibete, trahentes
Ad terram: non ulla fuat vis tanta, laborque,
Cœlesti qui sede Jovem deducere possit.
Ast ego vos, terramque et magni cœrula ponti
Stagna traham, dextra attollens, et vertice Olympi
Suspendam: vacuo pendebunt aëre cuncta.
Tantum supra homines mea vis, et numina supra est.
_Ilias Lat. vers. express. a Raym. Cunighio_, _Rom._ 1776.
[22] See a translation of this passage by Hobbes, in the true spirit of
the _Bathos_. Appendix, No. III.
[23] A similar instance of good taste occurs in the following translation
of an epigram of Martial, where the indelicacy of the original is
admirably corrected, and the sense at the same time is perfectly
preserved:
_Vis fieri liber? mentiris, Maxime, non vis:_
_Sed fieri si vis, hac ratione potes._
_Liber eris, cœnare foris, si, Maxime, nolis:_
_Veientana tuam si domat uva sitim:_
_Si ridere potes miseri Chrysendeta Cinnæ:_
_Contentus nostrâ si potes esse togâ._
_Si plebeia Venus gemino tibi vincitur asse:_
_Si tua non rectus tecta subire potes:_
_Hæc tibi si vis est, si mentis tanta potestas,_
_Liberior Partho vivere rege potes._
MART. lib. 2, ep. 53.
Non, d’etre libre, cher Paulin,
Vous n’avez jamais eu l’envie;
Entre nous, votre train de vie
N’en est point du tout le chemin.
Il vous faut grand’chere, bon vin,
Grand jeu, nombreuse compagnie,
Maitresse fringante et jolie,
Et robe du drap le plus fin.
Il faudrait aimer, au contraire,
Vin commun, petit ordinaire,
Habit simple, un ou deux amis;
Jamais de jeu, point d’Amarante:
Voyez si le parti vous tente,
La liberté n’est qu’à ce prix.
[24] Fitzosborne’s _Letters_, l. 19.
[25] Thus likewise translated with great beauty of poetry, and sufficient
fidelity to the original:
Ut lunam circa fulgent cum lucida pulchro
Astra choro, nusquam cœlo dum nubila, nusquam
Aerios turbant ventorum flamina campos;
Apparent speculæ, nemoroso et vertice montes
Frondiferi et saltus; late se fulgidus æther
Pandit in immensum, penitusque abstrusa remoto
Signa polo produnt longe sese omnia; gaudet
Visa tuens, hæretque immoto lumine pastor.
_Ilias Lat. vers. a Raym. Cunighio_, _Rom._ 1776.
[26] Dr. Beattie, _Dissertation on Poetry and Music_, p. 357. 4to. ed.
[27] Fitzosborne’s _Letters_, 43.
[28] It is amusing to observe the conceit of this author, and the
compliment he imagines he pays to the taste of his patron, in applauding
this miserable composition: “Adeo tibi placuit, ut quædam etiam in
melius mutasse tibi visus fuerim.” With similar arrogance and absurdity,
he gives Milton credit for the materials only of the poem, assuming to
himself the whole merit of its structure: “Miltonus Paradisum Amissum
invenerat; ergo Miltoni hìc lana est, at mea tela tamen.”
[29] _Third Preliminary Diss. to New Translation of the Four Gospels._
[30] “His affectation of the manner of some of the poets and orators
has metamorphosed the authors he interpreted, and stript them of the
venerable signatures of antiquity, which so admirably befit them; and
which, serving as intrinsic evidence of their authenticity, recommend
their writings to the serious and judicious. Whereas, when accoutred in
this new fashion, nobody would imagine them to have been Hebrews; and
yet, (as some critics have justly remarked), it has not been within the
compass of Castalio’s art, to make them look like Romans.” Dr. Campbell’s
10th _Prelim. Diss._
[31] Dr. Campbell, 10th _Prel. Diss._ part 2.
[32] The language of that ludicrous work, _Epistolæ obscurorum virorum_,
is an imitation, and by no means an exaggerated picture, of the style
of _Arias Montanus’s_ version of the Scriptures. _Vos bene audivistis
qualiter Papa habuit unum magnum animal quod vocatum fuit Elephas; et
habuit ipsum in magno honore, et valde amavit illud. Nunc igitur debetis
scire, quod tale animal est mortuum. Et quando fuit infirmum, tunc Papa
fuit in magna tristitia, et vocavit medicos plures, et dixit eis: Si est
possibile, sanate mihi Elephas. Tunc fecerunt magnam diligentiam, et
viderunt ei urinam, et dederunt ei unam purgationem quæ constat quinque
centum aureos, sed tamen non potuerunt Elephas facere merdare, et sic est
mortuum; et Papa dolet multum super Elephas; quia fuit mirabile animal,
habens longum rostrum in magna quantitate.—Ast ego non curabo ista
mundana negotia, quæ afferunt perditionem animæ. Valete._
[33] _Lond._ 1691.
[34]
_Sectantem levia nervi_
_Deficiunt animique: professus grandia turget:_
_Serpit humi tutus nimium timidusque procellæ._
_In vitium ducit culpæ fuga_, si caret arte.
HOR. _Ep. ad. Pis._
[35] The _Orations of M. T. Cicero_ translated into English, with notes
historical and critical. Dublin, 1766.
[36] Echard has here mistaken the author’s sense. He ought to have said,
“o’ my conscience, this night is twice as long as that was.”
[37]
_Hor._ Donec gratus eram tibi,
Nec quisquam potior brachia candidæ
Cervici juvenis dabat;
Persarum vigui rege beatior.
_Lyd._ Donec non aliam magis
Arsisti, neque erat Lydia post Chloen;
Multi Lydia nominis
Romanâ vigui clarior Iliâ.
_Hor._ Me nunc Thressa Chloe regit,
Dulceis docta modos, et citharæ sciens;
Pro qua non metuam mori,
Si parcent animæ fata superstiti.
_Lyd._ Me torret face mutuâ
Thurini Calaïs filius Ornithi;
Pro quo bis patiar mori,
Si parcent puero fata superstiti.
_Hor._ Quid, si prisca redit Venus,
Diductosque jugo cogit aheneo?
Si flava excutitur Chloe,
Rejectæque patet janua Lydiæ?
_Lyd._ Quamquam sidere pulchrior
Ille est, tu levior cortice, et improbo
Iracundior Hadriâ;
Tecum vivere amem, tecum obeam libens.
HOR. l. 3, Od. 9.
[38] Dr. Warton.
[39] _Hujus (viz. Aristidis) pictura est, oppido capto, ad matris
morientis e vulnere mammam adrepens infans; intelligiturque sentire mater
et timere, ne emortuo lacte sanguinem infans lambat._ Plin. Nat. Hist.
l. 35, c. 10.—If the epigram was made on the subject of this picture,
Pliny’s idea of the expression of the painting is somewhat more refined
than that of the epigrammatist, though certainly not so natural. As a
complicated feeling can never be clearly expressed in painting, it is not
improbable that the same picture should have suggested ideas somewhat
different to different observers.
[40] J. H. Beattie, son of the learned and ingenious Dr. Beattie of
Aberdeen, a young man who disappointed the promise of great talents by
an early death. In him, the author of _The Ministrel_ saw his _Edwin_
realised.
[41] _Observer_, vol. 4, p. 115, and vol. 5, p. 145.
[42] The original of the fragment of Timocles:
Ω ταν, ἂκουσον ην τι σοι μέλλω λέγειν.
Ανθρωπός ἐστι ζῶον ἐπίπονον φύσει,
Καὶ πολλὰ λυπῆρ’ ὁ βίος ἐν ἑαυτω φέρει.
Παραψυχὰς ουν φροντίδων ανευρατον
Ταυτας· ὁ γὰρ νοῦς των ἰδίων λήθην λαβὼν
Πρὸς ἀλλοτριῳ τε ψυχαγωγηθεὶς πάθει,
Μεθ’ ἡδονῆς ἀπῆλθε παιδευθεὶς ἃμα.
Τοὺς γὰρ τραγῳδοὺς πρῶτον εἰ βούλει σκόπει,
Ὡς ὠφελοῦσί παντας· ὁ μὲν γὰρ ὤν πένης
Πτωχότερον αὑτου καταμαθὼν τὸν Τήλεφον
Γενόμενον, ἤδη την πενίαν ῥᾶον φέρει.
Ο νοσῶν δὲ μανικῶς, Αλκμαίων’ εσκεψατο.
Οφθαλμιᾶ τις; εἰσὶ Φινεῖδαι τυφλοί.
Τέθνηκε τω παῖς; η Νιόβη κεκούφικε.
Χωλός τις ἐστι, τὸν Φιλοκτήτην ὁρᾷ.
Γέρων τὶς ἀτυχεῖ; κατέμαθε τὸν ΟΙνέα.
Απαντα γὰρ τὰ μείζον’ ἤ πέπονθέ τις
Ατυχήματ’ ἄλλοις γεγονότ’ ἐννοούμενος,
Τὰς αὐτὸς αὑτοῦ συμφορὰς ῥᾷον φέρει.
Thus, in the literal version of Dalechampius:
_Hem amice, nunc ausculta quod dicturus sum tibi._
_Animal naturâ laboriosum homo est._
_Tristia vita secum affert plurima:_
_Itaque curarum hæc adinvenit solatia:_
_Mentem enim suorum malorum oblitam,_
_Alienorum casuum reputatio consolatur,_
_Indéque fit ea læta, et erudita ad sapientiam._
_Tragicos enim primùm, si libet, considera,_
_Quàm prosint omnibus. Qui eget,_
_Pauperiorem se fuisse Telephum_
_Cùm intelligit, leniùs fert inopiam._
_Insaniâ qui ægrotat, de Alcmeone is cogitet._
_Lippus est aliquis, Phinea cœcum is contempletur._
_Obiit tibi filius, dolorem levabit exemplum Niobes._
_Claudicat quispiam, Philocteten is respicito._
_Miser est senex aliquis, in Oeneum is intuetor._
_Omnia namque graviora quàm patiatur_
_Infortunia quivis animadvertens in aliis cùm deprehenderit,_
_Suas calamitates luget minùs._
[43] The original of the fragment of Diphilus:
Τοιοῦτο νόμιμόν ἐστὶ βέλτιστ’ ενθαδε
Κορίνθίοις, ἵν’ ἐαν τιν’ ὀψωνοῦντ’ ἀεὶ
Λαμπρῶς ὁρωμεν, τοῦτον ἀνακρινείν πόθεν
Ζῇ, καὶ τί ποιῶν. κᾂν μεν οὐσίαν εχῃ
Ης αἱ προσοδοι λυουσι τ’ ἀναλώματὰ,
Εᾶν ἀπολαύειν. ἤδε τοῦτον τὸν βίον.
Εαν δ’ ὑπέρ την οὐσίαν δαπανῶν τύχῃ,
Απεῖπον αὐτῶ τοῦτο μὴ ποιεῖν ἔτι.
Ος ἂν δὲ μή πείθητ’, ἐπέβαλον ζημίαν.
Εάν δὲ μηδε ὁτιοῦν ἔχων ζῇ πολυτελῶς,
Τῷ δημιῳ παρέδωκαν αὐτον. Ηράκλεις.
ΟΥκ ἐνδέχεται γὰρ ζῇν ἂνευ κακοῦ τινὸς
Τοῦτον. συνίης; ἀλλ’ ἀναγκαίως ἔχει
Ηλοποδυτεῖν τὰς νύκτας, ἢ τοιχωρυχεῖν,
Η τῶν ποιουντων ταῦτα κοινωνεῖν τισιν.
Η συκοφαντεῖν κατ’ ἀγορὰν, ἢ μαρτυρεῖν
Ψευδῆ, τοιοῦτων ἐκκαθαίρομεν γενος.
Ορθῶς γε νὴ Δί’, ἀλλὰ δὴ τί τοῦτ’ ἐμοί;
Ορῶμεν ὀψωνοῦνθ’ ἑκάστης ἡμέρας,
ΟΥχι μετριως βέλτιστέ σ’, ἀλλ’ ὑπερηφάνως.
ΟΥκ ἔστιν ἰχθυηρὸν ὑπὸ σοῦ μεταλαβεῖν.
Συνηκας ἡμῶν εἰς τὰ λάχανα την πόλιν,
Περὶ τῶν σελινων μαχόμεθ’ ὥσπερ Ισθμίοις.
Λαγώς τις εἰσελήλυθ’. ευθὺς ἥρπακας.
Πέρδικα δ’ ἢ κιχλην; καὶ νὴ Δί’ οὐκ ἔτι
Εστιν δἰ ὑμᾶς οὐδὲ πετομενην ἰδεῖν,
Τὸν ξενικὸν οἶνον ἐπιτετίμηκας πολύ.
Thus in the version of Dalechampius:
A. _Talis istic lex est, ô vir optime,_
_Corinthiis: si quem obsonantem semper_
_Splendidiùs aspexerint, illum ut interrogent_
_Unde vivat, quidnam agat: quòd si facultates illi sunt_
_Quarum ad eum sumptum reditus sufficiat,_
_Eo vitæ luxu permittunt frui:_
_Sin amplius impendat quàm pro re sua,_
_Ne id porrò faciat interdicitur._
_Si non pareat, mulctâ quidem plectitur._
_Si sumptuosè vivit qui nihil prorsus habet,_
_Traditur puniendus carnifici._
B. _Proh Hercules._
A. _Quod enim scias, fieri minimè potest_
_Ut qui eo est ingenio, non vivat improbè: itaque necessum_
_Vel noctu grassantem obvios spoliare, vel effractarium, parietem
suffodere,_
_Vel his se furibus adjungere socium,_
_Aut delatorem et quadruplatorem esse in foro: aut falsum_
_Testari: à talium hominum genere purgatur civitas._
B. _Rectè, per Jovem: sed ad me quid hoc attinet?_
A. _Nos te videmus obsonantem quotidie_
_Haud mediocriter, vir optime, sed fastuosè, et magnificè,_
_Ne pisciculum quidem habere licet caussâ tuâ:_
_Cives nostros commisisti, pugnaturos de oleribus:_
_De apio dimicamus tanquam in Isthmiis._
_Si lepus accessit, eum extemplo rapis._
_Perdicem, ac turdum ne volantem quidem_
_Propter vos, ita me Juppiter amet, nobis jam videre licet,_
_Peregrini multùm auxistis vini pretium._
[44] It is to be regretted that Mr. Cumberland had not either published
the original fragments along with his translations, or given special
references to the authors from whom he took them, and the particular
part of their works where they were to be found. The reader who wishes
to compare the translations with the originals, will have some trouble
in searching for them at random in the works of Athenæus, Clemens
Alexandrinus, Stobæus, and others.
[45] C’est en quoi consiste le grand art de la Poësie, de dire figurément
presque tout ce qu’elle dit. _Rapin. Reflex. sur la Poëtique en général._
§ 29.
[46] “Quand il s’agit de représenter dans une autre langue les choses,
les pensées, les expressions, les tours, les tons d’un ouvrage; les
choses telles qu’elles sont sans rien ajouter, ni retrancher, ni
déplacer; les pensées dans leurs couleurs, leurs degrés, leurs nuances;
les tours, qui donnent le feu, l’esprit, et la vie au discours; les
expressions naturelles, figurées, fortes, riches, gracieuses, délicates,
&c. le tout d’après un modele qui commande durement, et qui veut qu’on
lui obéisse d’un air aisé; il faut, sinon autant de génie, du moins
autant de gout pour bien traduire, que pour composer. Peut-être même
en faut il davantage. L’auteur qui compose, conduit seulement par une
sorte d’instinct toujours libre, et par sa matiere qui lui présente des
idées, qu’il peut accepter ou rejetter à son gré, est maitre absolu
de ses pensées et de ses expressions: si la pensée ne lui convient
pas, ou si l’expression ne convient pas à la pensée, il peut rejetter
l’une et l’autre; _quæ desperat tractata nitescere posse, relinquit_.
Le traducteur n’est maitre de rien; il est obligé de suivre partout
son auteur, et de se plier à toutes ses variations avec une souplesse
infinie. Qu’on en juge par la variété des tons qui se trouvent
nécessairement dans un même sujet, et à plus forte raison dans un même
genre.——Quelle idée donc ne doit-on pas avoir d’une traduction faite avec
succès?”—_Batteux de la construction Oratoire_, par. 2.
[47] ΓΝ. Τι τοῦτο; παιεις ω Τιμων; μαρτυρομαι· ω Ηρακλεις· ιου, ιου.
Προκαλοῦμαι σε τραυματος εις Αρειον παγον· Τιμ. Και μεν αν γε μακρον
επιβραδυνης, φονον ταχα προκεκληση με. _Lucian_, _Timon_.
[48] Και ὅλως πανσοφον τι χρημα, και πανταχοθεν ακριβες, και ποικιλως
εντελες· οιμωξεται τοιγαρουν ουκ εις μακραν χρηστος ων. _Lucian_, _Timon_.
[49] Αντι του τεως Πυρριου, η Δρομωνος, η Τιβιου, Μεγακλης, Μεγαβυζος,
η Πρωταρχος μετονομασθεις, τους ματην κεχηνοτας εκεινους εις αλληλους
αποβλεποντας καταλιπων, &c. _Lucian_, _Timon_.
[50] The following apology made by D’Ablancourt of his own version of
Tacitus, contains, however, many just observations; from which, with a
proper abatement of that extreme liberty for which he contends, every
translator may derive much advantage.
Of Tacitus he thus remarks: “Comme il considere souvent les choses par
quelque biais étranger, il laisse quelquefois ses narrations imparfaites,
ce qui engendre de l’obscurité dans ses ouvrages, outre la multitude des
fautes qui s’y rencontrent, et le peu de lumière qui nous reste de la
plupart des choses qui y sont traitées. Il ne faut donc pas s’étonner
s’il est si difficile à traduire, puisqu’il est même difficile à
entendre. D’ailleurs il a accoutumé de méler dans une même période, et
quelquefois dans une même expression diverses pensées qui ne tiennent
point l’une à l’autre, et dont il faut perdre une partie, comme dans
les ouvrages qu’on polit, pour pouvoir exprimer le reste sans choquer
les délicatesses de notre langue, et la justesse du raisonnement. Car
on n’a pas le même respect pour mon François que pour son Latin; et
l’on ne me pardonneroit pas des choses, qu’on admire souvent chez lui,
et s’il faut ainsi dire, qu’on revere. Par tout ailleurs je l’ai suivi
pas à pas, et plutôt en esclave qu’en compagnon; quoique peut-être je
me pusse donner plus de liberté, puisque je ne traduis pas un passage,
mais un livre, de qui toutes les parties doivent être unies ensemble,
et comme fondues en un même corps. D’ailleurs, la diversité qui se
trouve dans les langues est si grande, tant pour la construction et la
forme des périodes, que pour les figures et les autres ornemens, qu’il
faut à touts coups changer d’air et de visage, si l’on ne veut faire un
corps monstrueux, tel que celui des traductions ordinaires, qui sont ou
mortes et languissantes, ou confuses et embrouillées, sans aucun ordre
ni agrément. Il faut donc prendre garde qu’on ne fasse perdre la grace
à son auteur par trop de scrupule, et que de peur de lui manquer de
foi en quelque chose, on ne lui soit infidèle en tout: principalement,
quand on fait un ouvrage qui doit tenir lieu de l’original, et qu’on ne
travaille pas pour faire entendre aux jeunes gens le Grec ou le Latin.
Car on fait que les expressions hardies ne sont point exactes, parce que
la justesse est ennemie de la grandeur, comme il se voit dans la peinture
et dans l’ecriture; mais la hardiesse du trait en supplée le défaut,
et elles sont trouvées plus belles de la sorte, que si elles étoient
plus régulières. D’ailleurs il est difficile d’etre bien exact dans la
traduction d’un auteur qui ne l’est point. Souvent on est contraint
d’ajouter quelque chose à sa pensée pour l’eclaircir; quelquefois
il faut en retrancher une partie pour donner jour à tout le reste.
Cependant, cela fait que les meilleures traductions paroissent les moins
fideles; et un critique de notre tems a remarqué deux mille fautes dans
le Plutarque d’Amyot, et un autre presqu’autant dans les traductions
d’Erasme; peut-être pour ne pas savoir que la diversité des langues et
des styles oblige à des traits tout differens, _parce que l’Eloquence est
une chose si delicate, qu’il ne faut quelquefois qu’une syllabe pour la
corrompre_. Car du reste, il n’y a point d’apparence que deux si grands
hommes se soient abusés en tant de lieux, quoiqu’il ne soit pas étrange
qu’on se puisse abuser en quelque endroit. Mais tout le monde n’est pas
capable de juger d’une traduction, quoique tout le monde s’en attribuë la
connoissance; et ici comme ailleurs, la maxime d’Aristote devroit servir
de regle, qu’il faut croire chacun en son art.”
[51] A striking resemblance to this beautiful apostrophe “Ahi padri
irragionevoli,” is found in the beginning of Moncrif’s _Romance d’Alexis
et Alis_, a ballad which the French justly consider as a model of
tenderness and elegant simplicity.
Pourquoi rompre leur mariage,
Mechans parens?
Ils auroient fait si bon menage
A tous momens!
Que sert d’avoir bagues et dentelle
Pour se parer?
Ah! la richesse la plus belle
Est de s’aimer.
Quand on a commencé la vie
Disant ainsi:
Oui, vous serez toujours ma mie,
Vous mon ami:
Quand l’age augmente encor l’envie
De s’entreunir,
Qu’avec un autre on nous marie
Vaut mieux mourir.
[52]
Otium divos rogat in patenti
Prensus Ægeo, simul atra nubes
Condidit Lunam, neque certa fulgent
Sidera nautis.
Otium bello furiosa Thrace,
Otium Medi pharetrâ decori,
Grosphe, non gemmis, neque purpurâ ve-
nale, nec auro.
Non enim gazæ, neque Consularis
Summovet lictor miseros tumultus
Mentis, et curas laqueata circum
Tecta volantes.
Vivitur parvo bene, cui paternum
Splendet in mensâ tenui salinum:
Nec leves somnos Timor aut Cupido
Sordidus aufert.
Quid brevi fortes jaculamur ævo
Multa? quid terras alio calentes
Sole mutamus? Patriæ quis exul,
Se quoque fugit?
Scandit æratas vitiosa naves
Cura, nec turmas equitum relinquit,
Ocyor cervis, et agente nimbos
Ocyor Euro.
Lætus in præsens animus, quod ultra est
Oderit curare; et amara lento
Temperat risu. Nihil est ab omni
Parte beatum.
Abstulit clarum cita mors Achillem:
Longa Tithonum minuit senectus:
Et mihi forsan, tibi quod negârit,
Porriget hora.
Te greges centum, Siculæque circum
Mugiunt vaccæ: tibi tollit hinnitum
Apta quadrigis equa: te bis Afro
Murice tinctæ.
Vestiunt lanæ: mihi parva rura, et
Spiritum Graiæ tenuem Camœnæ
Parca non mendax dedit, et malignum
Spernere vulgus.
HOR. _Od. 2, 16._
[53] There is, however, a very common mistake of translators from the
French into English, proceeding either from ignorance, or inattention
to the general construction of the two languages. In narrative, or the
description of past actions, the French often use the present tense
for the preterite: _Deux jeunes nobles Mexicains jettent leurs armes,
et viennent à lui comme déserteurs. Ils mettent un genouil à terre
dans la posture des supplians; ils le saisissent, et s’élancent de la
platforme.—Cortez s’en débarasse, et se retient à la balustrade. Les deux
jeunes nobles périssent sans avoir exécuté leur généreuse entreprise._
Let us observe the aukward effect of a similar use of the present tense
in English. “Two young Mexicans of noble birth throw away their arms and
come to him as deserters. They kneel in the posture of suppliants; they
seise him, and throw themselves from the platform.—Cortez disengages
himself from their grasp, and keeps hold of the ballustrade. The noble
Mexicans perish without accomplishing their generous design.” In like
manner, the use of the present for the past tense is very common
in Greek, and we frequently remark the same impropriety in English
translations from that language. “After the death of Darius, and the
accession of Artaxerxes, Tissaphernes accuses Cyrus to his brother of
treason: Artaxerxes gives credit to the accusation, and orders Cyrus
to be apprehended, with a design to put him to death; but his mother
having saved him by her intercession, sends him back to his government.”
Spelman’s _Xenophon_. In the original, these verbs are put in the present
tense, διαβαλλει, πειθεται, συλλαμβανει, αποπεμπει. But this use of the
present tense in narrative is contrary to the genius of the English
language. The poets have assumed it; and in them it is allowable, because
it is their object to paint scenes as present to the eye; _ut pictura
poesis_; but all that a prose narrative can pretend to, is an animated
description of things past: if it goes any farther, it encroaches on the
department of poetry. In one way, however, this use of the present tense
is found in the best English historians, namely, in the summary heads,
or contents of chapters. “Lambert Simnel invades England.—Perkin Warbeck
is avowed by the Duchess of Burgundy—he returns to Scotland—he is taken
prisoner—and executed.” Hume. But it is by an ellipsis that the present
tense comes to be thus used. The sentence at large would stand thus.
“_This chapter relates how_ Lambert Simnel invades England, _how_ Perkin
Warbeck is avowed by the Duchess of Burgundy,” &c.
[54] It is surprising that this fault should meet even with approbation
from so judicious a critic as Denham. In the preface to his translation
of the second book of the _Æneid_ he says: “As speech is the apparel of
our thoughts, so there are certain garbs and modes of speaking which vary
with the times; the fashion of our clothes being not more subject to
alteration, than that of our speech: and this I think Tacitus means by
that which he calls _Sermonem temporis istius auribus accommodatum_, the
delight of change being as due to the curiosity of the ear as of the eye:
and therefore, if Virgil must needs speak English, it were fit he should
speak, not only _as a man of this nation, but as a man of this age_.” The
translator’s opinion is exemplified in his practice.
_Infandum, Regina, jubes renovare dolorem._
“_Madam_, when you command us to review
Our fate, you make our old wounds bleed anew.”
Of such translation it may with truth be said, in the words of Francklin,
Thus Greece and Rome, in modern dress array’d,
Is but antiquity in masquerade.
[55] The modern air of the following sentence is, however, not
displeasing: Antipho asks Cherea, where he has bespoke supper; he
answers, _Apud libertum Discum_, “At Discus the freedman’s.” Echard, with
a happy familiarity, says, “At old Harry Platter’s.” _Ter. Eun._ act 3,
sc. 5.
[56] Alluding to the French Admiral’s ship _Le Soleil Royal_, beaten and
disabled by Russell.
[57] The translation published by Motteux declares in the title-page,
that it is the work of several hands; but as of these Mr. Motteux was
the principal, and revised and corrected the parts that were translated
by others, which indeed we have no means of discriminating from his own,
I shall, in the following comparison, speak of him as the author of the
whole work.
[58] The only French translation of _Don Quixote_ I have ever seen, is
that to which is subjoined a continuation of the Knight’s adventures,
in two supplemental volumes, by Le Sage. This translation has undergone
numberless editions, and is therefore, I presume, the best; perhaps
indeed the only one, except a very old version, which is mentioned in the
preface, as being quite literal, and very antiquated in its style. It
is therefore to be presumed, that when Jarvis accuses Motteux of having
taken his version entirely from the French, he refers to that translation
above mentioned to which Le Sage has given a supplement. If this be
the case, we may confidently affirm, that Jarvis has done Motteux the
greatest injustice. On comparing his translation with the French, there
is a discrepancy so absolute and universal, that there does not arise the
smallest suspicion that he had ever seen that version. Let any passage be
compared _ad aperturam libri_; as, for example, the following:
“De simples huttes tenoient lieu de maisons, et de palais aux habitants
de la terre; les arbes se defaisant d’eux-memes de leurs écorces,
leur fournissoient de quoi couvrir leurs cabanes, et se garantir de
l’intempérie des saisons.”
“The tough and strenuous cork-trees did of themselves, and without other
art than their native liberality, dismiss and impart their broad, light
bark, which served to cover those lowly huts, propped up with rough-hewn
stakes, that were first built as a shelter against the inclemencies of
the air.”—MOTTEUX.
“La beaute n’étoit point un avantage dangereux aux jeunes filles; elles
alloient librement partout, etalant sans artifice et sans dessein tous
les présents que leur avoit fait la Nature, sans se cacher davantage,
qu’autant que l’honnêteté commune à tous les siecles l’a toujours
demandé.”
“Then was the time, when innocent beautiful young shepherdesses
went tripping over the hills and vales, their lovely hair sometimes
plaited, sometimes loose and flowing, clad in no other vestment but
what was necessary to cover decently what modesty would always have
concealed.”—MOTTEUX.
It will not, I believe, be asserted, that this version of Motteux bears
any traces of being copied from the French, which is quite licentious and
paraphrastical. But when we subjoin the original, we shall perceive, that
he has given a very just and easy translation of the Spanish.
_Los valientes alcornoques despedian de sí sin otro artificio que el de
su cortesia, sus anchas y livianas cortezas, sin que se commençaron á
cubrir las casas, sobre rusticas, estacas sustentadas, no mas que para
defensa de las inclemencias del cielo._
_Entonces sí, que andaban las simples y hermosas zagalejas de valle en
valle, y de otero en otero, en trenza y en cabello, sin mas vestidos de
aquellos que eran menester para cubrir honestamente lo que la honestidad
quiere._
[59] Perhaps a parody was here intended of the famous epitaph of
Simonides, on the brave Spartans who fell at Thermopylæ:
Ω ξειν, αγγειλον Λακεδαιμονιοις, οτι τηδε
Κειμεθα, τοις κεινων ρημασι πειθομενοι.
“O stranger, carry back the news to Lacedemon, that we died here to prove
our obedience to her laws.” This, it will be observed, may be translated,
or at least closely imitated, in the very words of Cervantes; _diras—que
su caballero murio por acometer cosas, que le hiciesen digno de poder
llamarse suyo_.
[60] One expression is omitted which is a little too gross.
[61] Thus it stands in all the editions by the Royal Academy of Madrid;
though in Lord Carteret’s edition the latter part of the proverb is given
thus, apparently with more propriety: _del mal que le viene no se enoje_.
[62] _Mas ligera que un alcotan_ is more literally translated by Smollet
than by Motteux; but if Smollet piqued himself on fidelity, why was
_Cordobes o Mexicano_ omitted?
[63] Smollet has here mistaken the sense of the original, _como si ellos
tuvieran la culpa del maleficio_: She did not blame the hair for being
guilty of the transgression or offence, but for being the cause of the
Moor’s transgression, or, as Motteux has properly translated it, “this
affront.” In another part of the same chapter, Smollet has likewise
mistaken the sense of the original. When the boy remarks, that the Moors
don’t observe much form or ceremony in their judicial trials, Don Quixote
contradicts him, and tells him there must always be a regular process and
examination of evidence to prove matters of fact, “_para sacar una verdad
en limpio menester son muchas pruebas y repruebas_.” Smollet applies this
observation of the Knight to the boy’s long-winded story, and translates
the passage, “There is not so much proof and counter proof required to
bring truth to light.” In both these passages Smollet has departed from
his prototype, Jarvis.
[64] I add this qualification not without reason, as I intend afterwards
to give an example of a species of florid writing which is difficult to
be translated, because its meaning cannot be apprehended with precision.
[65] The following translation of these verses by Parnell, is at once
a proof that this excellent poet felt the characteristic merit of the
original, and that he was unable completely to attain it.
My change arrives; the change I meet
Before I thought it nigh;
My spring, my years of pleasure fleet,
And all their beauties die.
In age I search, and only find
A poor unfruitful gain,
Grave wisdom stalking slow behind,
Oppress’d with loads of pain.
My ignorance could once beguile,
And fancied joys inspire;
My errors cherish’d hope to smile
On newly born desire.
But now experience shews the bliss
For which I fondly sought,
Not worth the long impatient wish
And ardour of the thought.
My youth met fortune fair array’d,
In all her pomp she shone,
And might perhaps have well essay’d
To make her gifts my own.
But when I saw the blessings show’r
On some unworthy mind,
I left the chace, and own’d the power
Was justly painted blind.
I pass’d the glories which adorn
The splendid courts of kings,
And while the persons mov’d my scorn,
I rose to scorn the things.
In this translation, which has the merit of faithfully transfusing
the sense of the original, with a great portion of its simplicity of
expression, the following couplet is a very faulty deviation from that
character of the style.
My errors cherish’d hope to smile
On newly born desire.
[66] The attempt, however, has been made. In a little volume, intitled
_Prolusiones Poeticæ_, by the Reverend T. Bancroft, printed at Chester
1788, is a version of the _Fidicinis et Philomelæ certamen_, which
will please every reader of taste who forbears to compare it with the
original; and in the Poems of Pattison, the ingenious author of the
_Epistle of Abelard to Eloisa_, is a fable, intitled, the _Nightingale
and Shepherd_, imitated from Strada. But both these performances serve
only to convince us, that a just translation of that composition is a
thing almost impossible.
[67] The occasional blemishes, however, of a good writer, are a fair
subject of castigation; and a travesty or burlesque parody of them will
please, from the justness of the satire: As the following ludicrous
version of a passage in the 5th _Æneid_, which is among the few examples
of false taste in the chastest of the Latin Poets:
——_Oculos telumque tetendit._
——He cock’d his eye and gun.
[68]
To be, or not to be, that is the question:—
Whether ’tis better in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune;
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die;—to sleep;
No more?—And by a sleep, to say we end
The heart-ache, and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to;—’tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish’d. To die;—to sleep;—
To sleep! perchance to dream;—ay, there’s the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: There’s the respect,
That makes calamity of so long life:
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor’s wrong, the proud man’s contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law’s delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To groan and sweat under a weary life;
But that the dread of something after death—
That undiscover’d country, from whose bourne
No traveller returns—puzzles the will;
And makes us rather bear those ills we have,
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all, &c.
_Hamlet_, act 3, sc. 1.
[69] Other ideas superadded by the translator, are,
Que suis-je——Qui m’arrête?——
On nous menace, on dit que cette courte vie, &c.
——Affreuse éternité!
Tout cœur à ton seul nom se glace épouvanté——
A des amis ingrats qui detournent la vue——
In the _Essay on the Writings and Genius of Shakespeare_, which is one
of the best pieces of criticism in the English language, the reader will
find many examples of similar misrepresentation and wilful debasement of
our great dramatic poet, in the pretended translations of Voltaire.
[70] Pour faire connoitre l’esprit de ce poëme, unique en son genre, il
faut retrancher les trois quarts de tout passage qu’on veut traduire; car
ce _Butler_ ne finit jamais. J’ai donc réduit à environ quatre-vingt vers
les quatre cent premiers vers d’Hudibras, pour éviter la prolixité. _Mel.
Philos. par Voltaire, Oeuv. tom. 15. Ed. de Genève._ 4to.
[71] I have lately learnt, that the author of this translation was
Colonel Townley, an English gentleman who had been educated in France,
and long in the French service, and who thus had acquired a most intimate
knowledge of both languages.
[72] James Edgar, Esq., Commissioner of the Customs, Edinburgh.
INDEX
A
Ablancourt, his translations excellent, 120
——, his just observations on translation, 120
Adrian, his _Address to his Soul_, 126
Alembert, D’, quoted, 13
——, his translations from Tacitus, 15 _et seq._ 34
_Alis et Alexis_, romance, 129
Aldrich, Dr., his translation of a humorous song, 202
Ambiguous expressions, how to be translated, 17
Ancient translation, few specimens of, existing at present, 4
Anguillara, beautiful passage from his translation of Ovid’s
_Metamorphoses_, 128
_Anthologia_, translation of an epigram from, by Webb, 88
Aratus, _Phenomena_ of, translated by Cicero, 2
Arias Montanus, his version of the Scriptures, 67
Atterbury, his translation of Horace’s dialogue with Lydia, 85
B
Barnaby, _Ebrii Barnabæ Itinerarium_, 202
Batteux, Abbé, remarks on the art of translation, 3, 4, 112
Beattie, Dr., his remark on a passage of Dryden, 58; his remark
on Castalio, 66
Beattie, J. H., his translation of Pope’s _Messiah_ quoted, 90
Bible, translations of, 64 _et seq._ _See_ Castalio, Arias
Montanus
Bourne, Vincent, his translation of _Colin and Lucy_, 23; of
_William and Margaret_, 80; of _Chloe hunting_, 82
Brown, Thomas, his translations from Lucian, 118
Buchanan, his version of the Psalms, 145
Burlesque translation, 197 _et seq._
Butler. _See_ _Hudibras_
C
Campbell, Dr., preliminary dissertation to a new translation of
the Gospels, 3, cited 64 _et seq._
Casaubon, his translation of Adrian’s _Address to his Soul_, 126
Castalio, his version of the Scriptures, 65
Cervantes. _See_ _Don Quixote_
Chaulieu, his beautiful _Ode on Fontenai_ quoted, 181
Chevy-chace, whimsical translation of, 203
Cicero had cultivated the art of translation, 1; translated
Plato’s _Timæus_, Xenophon’s _Œconomics_, and the _Phenomena_
of Aratus, 2
——, epistles of, translated by Melmoth, 17, 28, 32
Claudian, translation from, by Hughes, 89
_Colin and Lucy_, translated by Bourne, 23; by Le Mierre, _see_
Appendix, No. 1
Colloquial phrases, 135 _et seq._
Congreve, translation from Horace cited, 57
Cotton, his translation of Montaigne cited, 138; his Virgil
travesty, 201
Cowley, translation from Horace cited, 56
Cumberland, Mr., his excellent translations of fragments of the
ancient Greek dramatists, 90 _et seq._
Cunighius, his translation of the _Iliad_ cited, 49, 55
D
Definition or description of a good translation, 8
Delille, or De Lille, his opinion as to the liberty allowed in
poetical translation, 46; his translation of the _Georgics_
cited, 61, 73
Denham, his opinion of the liberty allowed in translating
poetry, 35; his compliment to Fanshaw, 43
Descriptions, containing a series of minute distinctions,
extremely difficult to be translated, 188
Diphilus, fragment of, translated by Mr. Cumberland, 91
_Don Quixote_, difficulty of translating that romance, 150;
comparison of the translations of, by Motteux and Smollet, 151
_et seq._
Dryden improved poetical translation, 44; his translation of
Lucian’s dialogues, 29, 118; his translation of Virgil cited,
30, 57, 58, 72; his translation of Du Fresnoy on painting, 59,
110; his translations from Horace, 59, 125; his translation of
Tacitus, 70; translation from Ovid’s _Metamorphoses_, 76
Duclos, a just observation of, 14
Du Fresnoy’s _Art of Painting_ admirably translated by Mr.
Mason, 27; translation of, by Dryden, 59, 110
E
Echard, his translation of Plautus cited, 77, 143 _et seq._
——, his translation of Terence cited, 138, 140, 143 _et seq._
Ellipsis more freely admitted in Latin than in English, 105
Epigrams sometimes incapable of translation, 147
Epigram from Martial well translated, 53
_Epistolæ obscurorum virorum_, 68
Epithets used by Homer, sometimes mere expletives, 31
F
Fanshaw praised as a translator by Denham, 43; his translation
of _Pastor Fido_ cited, 44
Fenelon’s _Telemachus_, 108
Festus _de verborum significatione_, 13
Florid writing, 179, 192
Folard, his commentary on Polybius erroneous from his ignorance
of the Greek language, 11
Fontaine, La, his character as a fabulist drawn by Marmontel,
185
——, his fables cited, 184, 188
Fontaines, Abbé des, his translation of Virgil, 69
Fontenelle, his translation of Adrian’s _Address to his Soul_,
127
Fresnoy. _See_ Du Fresnoy.
G
Girard, _Synonymes François_, 14
Gordon’s Tacitus cited, 19, 104; his injudicious imitation of
the Latin construction, 19, 104
Greek language admits of inversions which are inconsistent with
the genius of the English, 104
Guischardt has demonstrated the errors in Folard’s commentary
on Polybius, 11
H
Hobbes, his translation of Homer cited, 50, 71, 146
Hogæus, _Paradisus Amissus Miltoni_ cited, 61
Holland’s translation of Pliny cited, 191
Homer, his epithets frequently mere expletives, 32
Homer, characteristics of his style, 69
——, Pope’s translation of the _Iliad_ cited, 25, 31, 46 _et
seq._, 60, 71, 73 (_see_ Cunighius, Hobbes); Mr. Pope departs
sometimes from the character of Homer’s style, 69; translation
of the _Odyssey_ cited, 146; Macpherson’s Homer cited, 105, 108
Horace, translations from, cited. _Vide_ Jonson, Roscommon,
Dryden, Congreve, Nivernois, Hughes
_Hudibras_, remarkable combination of wit and humour in that
poem, 213; Voltaire has attempted to translate some passages of
that poem, 214 _et seq._; excellent French translation of that
poem cited, 215
Hughes’s translation from Claudian cited, 89; ditto from
Horace, 130
I
Ideas superadded to the original by the translator—examples of,
from Bourne, 23; from Pope’s _Homer_, 25; from his imitations
of Horace, 27; from Johnston’s version of the Psalms, 25; from
Mason’s _Du Fresnoy on Painting_, 27; from Malherbe, 28; from
Melmoth’s _Cicero’s Epistles_, 27; from Dryden’s _Lucian_, 29
Ideas retrenched from the original by the translator—examples
of, from Dryden’s _Virgil_, 30; from Pope’s _Iliad_, 31; from
Melmoth’s _Cicero’s Epistles_, 32, 33
The liberty of adding to or retrenching from the ideas of
the original, is more allowable in poetical than in prose
translation, 35; and in lyric poetry more than any other, 123
Idiomatic phrases, how to be translated, 135; the translation
is perfect, when corresponding idioms are employed, 137;
examples from Cotton’s translation of Montaigne, from Echard,
Sterne, 138 _et seq._; licentiousness in the translation of
idioms, 140; examples, 141; translator’s resource when no
corresponding idioms are to be found, 147
_Iliad._ _See_ Homer
Isidorus Hispalensis, _Origines_, 13
J
Jonson, Ben, translation from Horace, 36 _et seq._
Johnston, Arthur, his translation of the Psalms, 25, 144
Jortin, Dr., translation from Simonides, 85
Juvenal, translation of, by Holiday cited, 38
L
Latin language admits of a brevity of expression which
cannot be successfully imitated in English, 96; it admits of
inversions, which are inconsistent with the genius of the
English, 104; admits of ellipsis more freely than the English,
105
L’Estrange, his translations from Seneca cited, 78
Lowth, Dr., his imitation of an ode of Horace, 124
Lucan. _See_ May, Rowe.
_Lucian_, Francklin’s translation of, cited, 118 _et seq._;
Dryden’s, Brown’s, &c., 117 _et seq._
M
Macpherson’s translation of the _Iliad_, 105, 108
Malherbe cited, 28
Markham, Dr., his imitation of Simonides, 87
Mason’s translation of Du Fresnoy’s _Art of Painting_, 27
May, his translation of Lucan, 39 _et seq._; compared with
Rowe’s, 41
Melmoth, one of the best of the English translators, 32, 114
_et seq._; his translation of Cicero’s _Epistles_ cited, 17,
28, 32, 96, 98, 114, 147; his translation of Pliny’s _Epistles_
cited, 33, 97, 116, 117, 147; his unjust censure of a passage
in Mr. Pope’s version of the _Iliad_, 31
Milton, his translation of Horace’s _Ode to Pyrrha_, 43, App.
No. 2
——, a passage from his tractate on education difficult to be
translated with corresponding simplicity, 179; his _Paradise
Lost_ cited, 177 (_see_ Hogæus); his _Comus_ cited, 178
Moncrif, his ballad of _Alexis et Alis_, 129
Montaigne, Cotton’s translation of, cited, 138
Motteux, his translation of _Don Quixote_ compared with that of
Smollet, 151 _et seq._; his translation of Rabelais, 222
Murphy, his translation of Tacitus cited, 17, 19, 99 _et seq._
N
_Naïveté_, in what it consists, 183, 185; the fables of Phædrus
are remarkable for this character, 183; as are those of La
Fontaine, 184, 185; _naïveté_ of particular phrases very
difficult to be imitated in a translation, 149
Nivernois, Duc de, his translation of Horace’s dialogue with
Lydia, 83
Nonius, _de Proprietate Sermonum_, 13
O
Ovid. _See_ Sandys, Dryden, Anguillara
Ozell, his edition of Urquhart and Motteux translation of
Rabelais, 223
P
Paraphrase, examples of, as distinguished from translation,
124, 127, 128 _et seq._
Parnell, his translation of Chaulieu’s verses on Fontenai, 181
Phædrus, his fables cited, 183
Pitcairne, Dr., his Latin poetry characterised, 143
Pitt, eminent as a translator, 206
Plautus. _See_ Echard
Pliny the Elder, his description of the Nightingale, 190;
analysis of a chapter of his _Natural History_, 190
Pliny the Younger, his _Epistles_. _See_ Melmoth
Poem, whether it can be well translated into prose, ch. 8
Poetical translation, liberty allowed to it, 35 _et seq._
——, progress of poetical translation in England, 36 _et seq._
Poetry, characteristics essential to it, 108; didactic poetry
is the most capable of a prose translation, 109; lyric poetry
incapable of a prose translation, 111; lyric poetry admits of
the greatest liberty in translation, 123
Polybius erroneously understood by Folard, 10
Pope. _See_ Homer. His translation of Sappho’s _Epistle to
Phaon_ cited, 61; his _Dying Christian to his Soul_, 127
Popma, Ausonius, _de Differentiis Verborum_, 13
Prior, his _Chloe Hunting_ translated by Bourne, 82
Q
Quinctilian recommends the practice of translation, 1
_Quixote, Don_, comparison of Motteux’s translation of, with
Smollet’s, 151 _et seq._
R
Rabelais admirably translated by Urquhart and Motteux, ch. 15
Roscommon’s Essay on translated verse, 45; a precept of
his, with regard to poetical translation, controverted, 45;
translation from Horace cited, 55
Rousseau, _Devin de Village_ cited, 79; his translations from
Tacitus cited, 103
Rowe’s Lucan cited, 41
S
Sandys, his character as a translator of poetry, 42; his
translation of Ovid cited, 42
Scarron’s burlesque translation of Virgil cited, 200
Seneca. _See_ L’Estrange
Shakespeare, translations from, by Voltaire, 209 _et seq._;
his phraseology difficult to be imitated in a translation, 177,
178
Simonides, fragment of, translated by Jortin, 85; imitated by
Dr. Markham, 87
Simplicity of thought and expression difficult to be imitated
in a translation, 179
Smart’s prose translation of Horace, 111
Spelman’s _Xenophon_ cited, 136
Sterne’s _Slawkenbergius’s Tale_ cited, 139
Strada’s _Contest of the Musician and Nightingale_, extreme
difficulty of translating it, 187
Style and manner of the original to be imitated in the
translation, 63 _et seq._; a just taste requisite for the
discernment of those characters, 74; limitations of the rule
regarding the imitation of style, 96 _et seq._
T
Tacitus. _See_ D’Ablancourt, D’Alembert, Gordon, Murphy,
Dryden, Rousseau. Difficulty of translating that author, 120
_Telemachus_, a poem in prose, 108
Terence. _See_ Echard
Tickell’s ballad of _Lucy and Colin_, translated by Bourne, 23;
translated by Le Mierre, Appendix, No. 1
Timocles, fragment of, translated by Cumberland, 90
Townley, Colonel, his translation of _Hudibras_, 218
Translation, art of, very little cultivated, 1; ancient
translations, few specimens of, existing, 2 _et seq._; reasons
why the art is at a low ebb among the moderns, 5; description
or definition of a good translation, 7, 8; laws of translation,
9; first general law, “That the translation should give a
complete transcript of the ideas of the original work,” 10 _et
seq._; second general law, “The style and manner of writing
in a translation should be of the same character with that
of the original,” 63 _et seq._; specimens of good poetical
translations, 80 _et seq._; third general rule, “A translation
should have all the ease of original composition,” 112 _et
seq._; a translator ought always to figure to himself in what
manner the original author would have expressed himself, if he
had written in the language of the translation, 107; licentious
translation, 117; the best translators have shone in original
composition of the same species, 206
Travesty or burlesque translation, 197 _et seq._; Scarron’s and
Cotton’s Virgil Travesty, 200, 202
U
Urquhart, Sir Thomas, his excellent translation of Rabelais, 222
V
Varro, _de Lingua Latina_, 13
Virgil. _See_ Dryden, Delille, Fontaines. Example of false
taste in a passage of Virgil, 199
Voltaire, his remark on the Abbé des Fontaines’s translation of
Virgil, 69; his translations from Shakespeare very faulty, 207;
character of the wit of Voltaire, 212; he had no talent for
humorous composition, 213 _et seq._; character of his novels,
213
W
Warton, eminent as a poetical translator, 206
Wollaston’s _Religion of Nature_, passage from, difficult to be
translated, 180
X
Xenophon’s _Œconomics_ translated by Cicero, 1, 2; Spelman’s
Xenophon cited, 136
RICHARD CLAY & SONS, LIMITED,
BREAD STREET HILL, E.C., AND
BUNGAY, SUFFOLK.