Rough translation: “What is well understood can be told clearly, and words to express it should come easily.”
ETA: it is worth pondering the converse; just because something rolls off the tongue doesn’t mean it’s well understood. It could be that it’s only well-rehearsed.
What the quote is aimed at is work of a supposedly high intellectual caliber, which just so happens to be couched in impenetrable jargon. Far more often, that is in fact evidence of muddled thought, not that the material is “beyond me”.
It’s obvious, but I must point out that giving the quote in the original French and providing a “rough translation” seems at odds with the message of the quote.
Why? I’m not an expert French->English translator, and I only invested a few minutes in the translation, so calling it “rough” seems appropriate. And saying something clearly in more than one language is more difficult than saying the same thing clearly in one language.
That a perfect, instant translation of a well-crafted quote by a talented French Enlightenment philosopher doesn’t just roll off my fingertips in English shouldn’t compromise the message.
That a perfect, instant translation of a well-crafted quote by a talented French Enlightenment philosopher doesn’t just roll off my fingertips in English shouldn’t compromise the message.
Weird. I thought you’d posted it this way to be ironic. Anyway...
It compromises the message for precisely that reason. If you agree with the quote, then if you understand what it means, then it should be easy to express it clearly.
Which are you claiming: a) that I don’t understand the quote, or b) that my rough translation is unclear?
Are you perhaps supposing that “rough” and “clear” are antonyms?
I think the translation is clear enough; what makes it “rough” is that a perfect translation would feel like it was a literal translation, all the while keeping the exact nuance of the original. If you will, it is the fact of its being a translation which makes it rough.
For more on the subtleties of translation, I’ll direct you to Hofstadter’s excellent Le Ton Beau de Marot.
-- Nicolas Boileau
Rough translation: “What is well understood can be told clearly, and words to express it should come easily.”
ETA: it is worth pondering the converse; just because something rolls off the tongue doesn’t mean it’s well understood. It could be that it’s only well-rehearsed.
What the quote is aimed at is work of a supposedly high intellectual caliber, which just so happens to be couched in impenetrable jargon. Far more often, that is in fact evidence of muddled thought, not that the material is “beyond me”.
It’s obvious, but I must point out that giving the quote in the original French and providing a “rough translation” seems at odds with the message of the quote.
Why? I’m not an expert French->English translator, and I only invested a few minutes in the translation, so calling it “rough” seems appropriate. And saying something clearly in more than one language is more difficult than saying the same thing clearly in one language.
That a perfect, instant translation of a well-crafted quote by a talented French Enlightenment philosopher doesn’t just roll off my fingertips in English shouldn’t compromise the message.
Weird. I thought you’d posted it this way to be ironic. Anyway...
It compromises the message for precisely that reason. If you agree with the quote, then if you understand what it means, then it should be easy to express it clearly.
Which are you claiming: a) that I don’t understand the quote, or b) that my rough translation is unclear?
Are you perhaps supposing that “rough” and “clear” are antonyms?
I think the translation is clear enough; what makes it “rough” is that a perfect translation would feel like it was a literal translation, all the while keeping the exact nuance of the original. If you will, it is the fact of its being a translation which makes it rough.
For more on the subtleties of translation, I’ll direct you to Hofstadter’s excellent Le Ton Beau de Marot.