Is Garnett a good translation of The Brothers Karamazov?

Yes.

No.

File: Screen Shot 2016-10-16 at 6.02.16 PM.png (347KB, 419x414px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 419x414px

>>8629314
>>8629320
>>8629334

This is a general russian lit question. Who's the better translator: P&V vs McDuff

>>8629347
McDuff

>>8629334
Why not?

>>8629347
Some people here tend to hate P&V. I like them, but I advise you to read the same pages of a book in both translations, and seeing which one you prefer.

>>8629355
The only legit advice in this thread. Check it out and compare the different translations.

File: colossal chondrichthyes.jpg (45KB, 640x358px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 640x358px

>>8629314
Garnett had a very nice way with words, so from an aesthetic standpoint she's a good choice actually. From a translation standpoint, though, there are issues with her work. (I've likened her to the King James Bible before, for both of these reasons.) If you're interested in Garnett's translation, I recommend Ralph Matlaw's revision of it, which is the translation in the Norton Critical Editions version.
Aside from Matlaw, I recommend David Magarshack, David McDuff, and Ignat Avsey.

P&V is really good.

TBK was a really good translation and Crime and Punishment (which i'm currently reading) is a good translation.

>>8629456
Sorry, P(iss) and V(omit) is very bad, after reading the Monas version which maintains the accents of characters, uses an intriguing system of nicknames that keeps character addressing closer to the original feeling and extenuates a Russian feeling, and overall uses a more mature voice. The P and V version is unreadable. So much of the humor and character was lost. I know that reading Dostoevsky in English will always be lackluster, but switching the translations gave me a feeling of emptiness so great I had to stop for fear it would ruin the story for me.

>>8629314
>Garnett
Good "literary" version. A bit archaic; her translation is considered to be the standard by which others are measured and the version that your favorite authors read. She makes Dosto's prose a bit prettier and more readable in English. There are many revised versions of Garnett that correct her typos and other errors, which is recommended.

>P&V
Literalists only praised by Russian academics(for its accuracy of transliteration) and those who have never read anything else. V does the translating, P does the polishing, the end result is an English version of Dostoyevsky's Russian, though most agree that the spirit of his message is lost and the language/culture gap makes for some odd wording. For people who are into the linguistic aspects of Russian lit.

>Avsey
His translations are a complete overhaul and reupholstering of the original Russian in order to speak within an English speaking context. The accuracy of the Russian is sacrificed for a translation of Dostoyevsky's narrative intentions. Here we have the meaning of Fyodor's words, not the words themselves. For this reason he entitled his translation of Brothers Karamazov as Karamazov Brothers.

I also personally recommend Monas' Crime abd Punishment. I found it very readable and preferred it over PV.

>>8629347
I personally hate P&V and even prefer Garnett over them. It's a matter of taste, though. P&V may be more literal/ faithful but they read terribly. Revised Garnett is good, I liked her C&P.

>>8629314
>reading translations

>>8630666

There's the obvious meme finally. Took you long enough Satan

>>8629413
Revised Garnett is the only answer desu.

>>8629347
Avsey