>>7593222 >>7593228 Source pls. I've never seen anything saying he could read Chinese fluently- everything I've seen points to the opposite. See for example https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=CDBFfbjKpM0C&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=It+is+a+bold+man+who+will+undertake+to+render+into+English+a+language+he+does+not+know.+But+Ezra+Pound+dared+to+be+bold+when+the+occasion+demanded&source=bl&ots=1MUKeYPhCo&sig=skBGe-0CwTdPC8OHQDZbCXJO8Rk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjjq8Kfg6_KAhVLAxoKHWZ0AiAQ6AEIFDAA#v=onepage&q=It%20is%20a%20bold%20man%20who%20will%20undertake%20to%20render%20into%20English%20a%20language%20he%20does%20not%20know.%20But%20Ezra%20Pound%20dared%20to%20be%20bold%20when%20the%20occasion%20demanded&f=false
A.C. Graham's book Disputers of the Tao gives a general philosophical/historical overview of warring states period China (the milieu in which Confucius was writing).
Unlike the cryptic Daoist sources like the Daodejing, the analects of Confucius are pretty straightforward, and so I'd say even the antiquated Legge translation still holds its own. But there have been more modern renditions - most recently Burton Watson, a mega-legit sinologist. That will be more understandable to a contemporary mind.
But if it's ConfucianISM you're interested in, I'd argue that Confucius isn't actually even the most important guy. He sort of spawned two schools of thought - those of Mengzi and of Xunzi. Mengzi became orthodoxy in the Han. So you should at the very least check out Mengzi (Mencius) as well.
>>7593888 Chinese authors, more than other East Asian authors, utilise their language features in a way that just can't be reproduced in English. When you read a translated version, its absolutely gutted. I think it's you who is Reddit lad.
>>7593979 I'm guessing the nay-sayers in this thread can't actually read classical Chinese? Sure, there's a good case that the daodejing is untranslatable. Even phrasing it in modern Chinese is always a hack job requiring extensive footnotes.
But the Kongzi is actually really straight head. Sure the meaning is tricky, and the hermeneutical gymnastics it endures from the Han through the Qing requires a lifetime of study to even get the gist of, but the syntax is quite plain.
The same goes for Mengzi, whose prose really set the standard for classical philosophical language. My prof used to say Mengzi was to classical Chinese as Plato was to classical Greek. He really set the standard.
So no, this stuff isn't in any way untranslatable. Of course you get more out of it if you're reading it in the classical Chinese, but people like Legge and Watson still get the point across.
>>7594642 Which meme? Is claiming Ezra Pound was good enough at Chinese to translate it a meme?
>>7594236 >I'm guessing the nay-sayers in this thread can't actually read classical Chinese? I was thinking either that, or a Chinese person being all 'muh super secret five thousand year old culture, no waiguoren will ever understand it'.
In the New Directions Anthology of Classical Chinese Poetry, I believe it says he basically faked it till he made it with an Italian translation. The intro to that collection makes it pretty clear that the translations are not the most faithful.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.