>translate War and Peace >leave the French bits unchanged

the translators asked the french characters to speak english but they refused.

just spoonfeed me which versions of War and Peace and Anna Karenina to get

It takes like 2 days to learn french, m8, come on.

I guess the assumption is that every somewhat educated man knows French.

It's intentional, given that it's French in the original version, too. It's also clear that in both W&P and Anna Karenina, Tolstoy had interesting thoughts about the use of French among Russian aristocracy, and so it's best to preserve the odd/alienating/annoying effect of these Russian people not wanting to speak Russian for whatever reasons.

Just skip the French parts, you don't miss anything important anyway

>>8833003

Maude for both.

I guess now I know where Cormac McCarthy got it from

>>8833272
Tolstoy is very explicit in his using French. He has one of the characters (or maybe the narrator) outright mention that they speak French in front of the servants so they can not understand them.

>>8833003
P&V for W&P
Maude for AK

>>8833324
Definitely, although that's kind of a standard reason for using a different language.

In Anna Karenina, it goes beyond that. Tolstoy, via Levin, expresses his distaste for using French for superfluous reasons, where Levin out-and-out doesn't like Dolly (his sister-in-law) speaking to her children in a language other than Russian (although Tolstoy sees that its reasonable because these children do need to learn the languages).

More importantly, the fact that Levin and Kitty seem to communicate in Russian whenever possible is a stark contrast to Vronsky and Anna (and their guests later on), who seem to prefer French. And that seems to hint at the latter couple's poor communication skills, where it becomes abundantly clear that they can't read each other's thoughts at all and that they should have a serious heart-to-heart. Yet, their personal insecurities (especially Anna's) get in the way, and the use of French, as is their preference, makes the possibility of a straightforward conversation even more unlikely.

I haven't actually read W&P yet, but given how French is used in Anna Karenina, I imagine it retains some of the biting effect.

>>8832948
They were payed to translate from RUSSIAN to English, what the fuck did you expect? Isn't it enough that they have to split the royalties between the two of them?

>>8833003
Antony Briggs for war and peace
Marian Schwartz for Anna Karenina

>>8833003
Classic option is Maude for both. Their translations are Tolstoy-approved.

But I'm in the middle of Rosamund Bartlett's recent translation of Anna Karenina, and it's good. Sample it on Amazon, see if you like it.

>>8833302
Shame he never learned how to use punctuation.

>reading English "translation"
>entire Latin sentences left untranslated

Every fucking time

i've read samples of several War and Peace translations and I've narrowed it down to P&V and the Maudes

any more input about the difference between these two? i know P&V seem to have gotten a bit of backlash in recent memory tho

>>8832975
underrated

>>8833559
>Anthony Briggs.

B8.

Revised Maude from Oxford World Classics is the definitive translation.

>P&K
>ever

>>8835784
I like how their War and Peace reads desu, almost as good as the revised Maude

Why do people hate P&V again?

>>8835813
Sometimes the idea behind phrases is left unclear and ambiguous.

I secretly like the French filled pages because it means the book is a bit shorter than I thought it was

>>8835813
A review written by someone who doesn't even speak Russian. The reviewer didn't even consult a Russian speaker, they just decided because one reads better in select passages that P&V must not be as good, and used that shit reasoning to say P&V must not be true to the spirit of the original even though those who have actually read the works in question in both langauges find P&V to be the most accurate.
/lit/ used to like P&V, but it got popular and they like being contrarian even more.

>>8832975
heh

Academic Zoja Pavlovskis-Petit has this to say about the translations of War and Peace available in 2000: "Of all the translations of War and Peace, Dunnigan's (1968) is the best. ... Unlike the other translators, Dunnigan even succeeds with many characteristically Russian folk expressions and proverbs. ... She is faithful to the text and does not hesitate to render conscientiously those details that the uninitiated may find bewildering: for instance, the statement that Boris's mother pronounced his name with a stress on the o – an indication to the Russian reader of the old lady's affectation."

On the Garnett translation Pavlovskis-Petit writes: "her ...War and Peace is frequently inexact and contains too many anglicisms. Her style is awkward and turgid, very unsuitable for Tolstoi." On the Maudes' translation she comments: "this should have been the best translation, but the Maudes' lack of adroitness in dealing with Russian folk idiom, and their style in general, place this version below Dunnigan's." She further comments on Edmonds's revised translation, formerly on Penguin: "[it] is the work of a sound scholar but not the best possible translator; it frequently lacks resourcefulness and imagination in its use of English. ... a respectable translation but not on the level of Dunnigan or Maude."[37]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_and_Peace#Comparing_translations

>>8836066
>Zoja Pavolvskis-Petit
literally who

should i fucking care what that bitch says lmao

which translation replaces Orthodox terms with Catholic?

>>8835774
Yeah the revised maudes is quite good as well but Briggs is good too. Wasn't baiting.

>>8833302
>mfw he gets the Spanish all wrong
why make a novel full of mexicans speaking Spanish if you can't even speak it for shit