tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 18 08:59:36 2002
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
RE: Tao Te Ching (part III)
> >I don't know chinese yet;
> toH, Holvam Daghoj 'e' DaHech'a'?
Right now I'm learning Maori
> "Concise" doesn't begin to describe it! In fact, one of the reasons why
> there are so many diverse translations of "Tao Te Ching" is because the book
> was written in an extremely laconic way, with most of the grammatical words
> (particles, prepositions, even pronouns, etc) omitted. Reading "Tao Te
> Ching" is almost like going through a book written mainly in Clipped
> Klingon!
#1 > Inevitably each translator resolves the intederminacies and
> ambiguities in his or her own different way.
#2 > However, a decent Klingon version need not be the shortest one.
Sentence #2 suggests maybe you're going to attempt #1.
A translation should be as ambiguous as the original. It is up to the reader
to figure out what the (original) author intended.
DloraH