It seems O'Rourke made an error in translation due to cultural ignorance, and Ahn & Lee's version is somewhat inadequate. The original term, "책보", does refer to a piece of cloth used to wrap books, but it's definitely not a book jacket. You wrap books with it and bring it with you like a bag. The piece of cloth is rather large when unwrapped, accordingly. This is what 책보 looks like: http://image.aladin.co.kr/img/events/book/2018/181019_changbikids_roll07.jpg
Also, Idk if I'd call O'Rourke's translation an error. I think it was a choice to domesticate the language to the "target audience," which is not my preference for translations but is a common choice. Most English readers in the US and UK are unlikely to understand the book-wrap reference, so O'Rourke (I think clumsily) offers another reference.
This is one of the ever-going debates regarding translations indeed. I belong to the other camp, believing that translations should feel foreign so as to disrupt the language a work gets translated into, even following the syntax of the original language as much as possible. But I see your point. O'Rourke might have made a conscious choice.
I would love to compare more translations of The Wings and see which one comes closest to the original syntax, because I think there's so much to be gleaned about how one thinks through syntax, and especially since Korean and English have fundamentally different sentence structures. I admire you translators for doing such heavy lifting!
E.C., You and Hyun Woo are probably professionals in this field esp. translation. I am just beginning to study Korean and think making a reader understand the culture and language better is worthwhile. Yesterday, I came across a youtube video which, as a beginner, I appreciated. It says much about how we hear and interpret a language. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4wOiAUu7Fw
I am of the same opinion. Why should a word like that be Americanized simply because wrapping books in cloth is unknown in America? One of the reasons I read world literature is to discover the ways and customs that I don't know. I certainly don't want those details altered by a filter that denies them their local specialness. 'Book jacket' is a sorry substitution for the silky cloth that books are wrapped in.
I agree and it's actually really interesting when you dig into it how often this happens even in what we consider canonical works of western literature!
Yes!! Thank you for sharing. I used to do this as a small child. I'd take my mom's silk scarves and wrap my books like this. I wonder if my mother showed me; I can't remember if she did. But I do remember her wrapping books in saran wrap. She stopped doing this when I was young, I'm not sure when. Strange, I didn't remember until I saw the picture you shared.
I love the imagery created from the words describing the sunlight.
For the exercise, I will give it a try using a recent experience I had seeing a Cooper's Hawk fly in front of me while I was hiking a few weeks ago.
Example:
“I watch the Cooper's Hawk with stunned silence. Seconds before, the hawk had glided in front of me and landed in a maple tree 20 yards away. The hawk remains a statue and becomes another branch of the tree. Only the eyes dart around in search of movement, seeking an opportunity to pursue and capture the next meal.”
I love this kind of exercise. I'll probably give it a try. But before that, I just wanted to note what bothered me about the O'Rourke translation: a book-jacket-sized chunk of sunlight might be actually be smaller than the size of a handkerchief, if the handkerchief is unfolded. Therefore it can't be reduced in size to a handkerchief. Since the description is dealing with something that evokes a visualization in the mind, the error in size is irritating. I also find 'book jacket' as analogy rather precious and dull, even if the character is involved with books (I don't know since I've never read Yi Sang). The Ahn & Lee translation sounds more inviting.
It's interesting isn't it? I'm going to update the post with a picture of what my Google translate is telling me the translation should be. The "book-jacket-sized" may be closer to the letter of the translation, but I think the Ahn & Lee captures the spirit!
Thanks for posting the Google translation! Now the analogy makes sense, having to do with the thickness of the book (against the thinness of the handkerchief) rather than the area of the book jacket vs that of the handkerchief. But it's still rather belabored. I agree with you that the Ahn & Lee seems much more effortlessly literary.
It seems O'Rourke made an error in translation due to cultural ignorance, and Ahn & Lee's version is somewhat inadequate. The original term, "책보", does refer to a piece of cloth used to wrap books, but it's definitely not a book jacket. You wrap books with it and bring it with you like a bag. The piece of cloth is rather large when unwrapped, accordingly. This is what 책보 looks like: http://image.aladin.co.kr/img/events/book/2018/181019_changbikids_roll07.jpg
Also, Idk if I'd call O'Rourke's translation an error. I think it was a choice to domesticate the language to the "target audience," which is not my preference for translations but is a common choice. Most English readers in the US and UK are unlikely to understand the book-wrap reference, so O'Rourke (I think clumsily) offers another reference.
This is one of the ever-going debates regarding translations indeed. I belong to the other camp, believing that translations should feel foreign so as to disrupt the language a work gets translated into, even following the syntax of the original language as much as possible. But I see your point. O'Rourke might have made a conscious choice.
I would love to compare more translations of The Wings and see which one comes closest to the original syntax, because I think there's so much to be gleaned about how one thinks through syntax, and especially since Korean and English have fundamentally different sentence structures. I admire you translators for doing such heavy lifting!
E.C., You and Hyun Woo are probably professionals in this field esp. translation. I am just beginning to study Korean and think making a reader understand the culture and language better is worthwhile. Yesterday, I came across a youtube video which, as a beginner, I appreciated. It says much about how we hear and interpret a language. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4wOiAUu7Fw
I agree, translators do much heavy lifting.
Oh that is fascinating. Thank you for sharing the video! I'll have to watch it a few more times!! ☺️
I am of the same opinion. Why should a word like that be Americanized simply because wrapping books in cloth is unknown in America? One of the reasons I read world literature is to discover the ways and customs that I don't know. I certainly don't want those details altered by a filter that denies them their local specialness. 'Book jacket' is a sorry substitution for the silky cloth that books are wrapped in.
I agree and it's actually really interesting when you dig into it how often this happens even in what we consider canonical works of western literature!
Yes!! Thank you for sharing. I used to do this as a small child. I'd take my mom's silk scarves and wrap my books like this. I wonder if my mother showed me; I can't remember if she did. But I do remember her wrapping books in saran wrap. She stopped doing this when I was young, I'm not sure when. Strange, I didn't remember until I saw the picture you shared.
I love the imagery created from the words describing the sunlight.
For the exercise, I will give it a try using a recent experience I had seeing a Cooper's Hawk fly in front of me while I was hiking a few weeks ago.
Example:
“I watch the Cooper's Hawk with stunned silence. Seconds before, the hawk had glided in front of me and landed in a maple tree 20 yards away. The hawk remains a statue and becomes another branch of the tree. Only the eyes dart around in search of movement, seeking an opportunity to pursue and capture the next meal.”
Oh I love that! "becomes another branch of the tree"-- emphasizes, while softening, the "statue" imagery. Thank you for sharing!!
I love this kind of exercise. I'll probably give it a try. But before that, I just wanted to note what bothered me about the O'Rourke translation: a book-jacket-sized chunk of sunlight might be actually be smaller than the size of a handkerchief, if the handkerchief is unfolded. Therefore it can't be reduced in size to a handkerchief. Since the description is dealing with something that evokes a visualization in the mind, the error in size is irritating. I also find 'book jacket' as analogy rather precious and dull, even if the character is involved with books (I don't know since I've never read Yi Sang). The Ahn & Lee translation sounds more inviting.
It's interesting isn't it? I'm going to update the post with a picture of what my Google translate is telling me the translation should be. The "book-jacket-sized" may be closer to the letter of the translation, but I think the Ahn & Lee captures the spirit!
Thanks for posting the Google translation! Now the analogy makes sense, having to do with the thickness of the book (against the thinness of the handkerchief) rather than the area of the book jacket vs that of the handkerchief. But it's still rather belabored. I agree with you that the Ahn & Lee seems much more effortlessly literary.