Help a brother out

File: crime.jpg (27KB, 320x500px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 320x500px

This is the edition I read. Pretty sure it's based on the Constant Garnish translation. Highly recommend over the Penor and Vedonkadonk version.

>>9675812

Is there any real difference between the translation, or more a matter of preference? E.g relatively little difference stylistically, just like differences in wording here and there

File: pekachu.jpg (11KB, 302x276px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 302x276px

>>9675817

It varies from translation to translation. For example, in the version I read (above), page 185 actually just doesn't exist. Not just in my copy either, every copy at Barns & Nobel were like that. It goes from 184-186, so some plot points are excluded, but that's okay because the prose is extraordinary. It all depends on your own personal reading style.

>>9675834

They just skip over a page? Idk about the sounds of that, but thanks, I appreciate the response anon

File: 816ZRCiirkL.jpg (259KB, 762x1168px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 762x1168px

>>9675781
This one.

> Constance Garnett translation
If you're a cultured Englishman who knows the English language inside and out superbly

>Oliver Ready
If you're not

that's not to say the Oliver Ready version isn't bad, it's quite good and better than a lot of the others like megashark .

>>9675781
Constance Garnett is excellent.

>>9675781

Translations I would recommend:
-David Magarshack: an older translation like Garnett, but he was far more careful in his work and didn't change/omit/add tyhings like Garnett did;
-David McDuff: a good recent translation;
-Oliver Ready: another good recent choice

Garnett isn't a bad choice per se and has the advantage of being public domain. Her prose is pleasant to read, in an older way, but it's her style and not Dosto's (or any of the many other authors she translated). Whishaw is never all that good I think. Monas's is kind of a mess. P&V are both monolingual and introduce twice as much error (while claiming fidelity to the letter of the original).

>>9675781
The one you posted is translated by Monas, I recommend it. I compared passages with PV and Garnett and preferred Monas.
I dislike the more neurotic depiction of Raskolnikov in Ready's translation. Some people like it, I don't.
If I didn't plan on rereading C&P in Coulson's translation (I've heard it's the "best") I'd reread Monas. Don't be put off by the fact its a mass market paperback