Write to the booksellers
Bellet ( Maurice )
Translation
Bayard 2011, broché, 258pp - très bon état
Reference : 60018
ISBN : 9782227482937
Bookseller's contact details
Librairie Alpha
Anne et Yvan Abbal-Touzart
1 rue Gérard Philipe
26100 Romans sur Isère
France
06 25 54 12 31
Payment mode
Sale conditions
Au prix des livres s'ajoutent les frais de port : tarif de la Poste en lettre, lettre suivie ou en colissimo pour la France et au tarif livres et brochures pour l'étranger si le poids total est inférieur à 2 kg. Envoi des livres dès réception du règlement ( chèque d'une banque française uniquement, à l'ordre de Librairie Alpha ou par virement bancaire via IBAN/BIC ) paiement possible par PayPal sur adresse mail
5 book(s) with the same title
Narratives on Translation across Eurasia and Africa. From Babylonia to Colonial India
, Brepols, 2022 Hardback, 406 pages, Size:156 x 234 mm, Illustrations:2 b/w, 5 tables b/w., Language: English. ISBN 9782503594897.
Summary What has driven acts of translation in the past, and what were the conditions that shaped the results? In this volume, scholars from across the humanities interrogate narratives on the process of translation: by historical translators ranging from ancient Babylonia to early modern Japan and the British Empire, and by academics from the nineteenth to the twentieth centuries who interpreted these translators' practices. In Part 1 the volume authors reflect on the history of the approaches to the phenomenon of translation in their specific fields of competence in order to learn what shaped the academic questions asked, what theoretical and practical tools were deployed, which arguments were privileged, and why certain kinds of evidence (but not others) were thought to be the basis for understanding the function and purpose of all translation performed in a given culture. Part II explores how translators and authors from antiquity to modern times described their own motivations and the circumstances in which they chose to translate. In both parts, the contributors disentangle histories of translation from the specialized intellectual fields (such as science, religion, law, or literature) with which they have been bound in order to make the case that we understand translation best when we take into account all cultural practices and translation activities cutting synchronically and diachronically through the entire societal fabric. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ? Sonja Brentjes, in cooperation with Jens H yrup and Bruce O'Brien Part 1: Observer Narratives Scholarly Translation in the Ancient Middle East: Ancient and Modern Perspectives ? C. Jay Crisostomo Interdisciplinary Interactions: Septuagint Studies, Classics, and Translation Studies ? Benjamin G. Wright III A Plurality of Voices: Fragmented Narratives on Syriac Translations ? Matteo Martelli Re-visiting the Translation Narratives: The Multiple Contexts of the Arabic Translation Projects ? Miriam Shefer-Mossensohn Philosophical Pahlavi Literature of the Ninth Century ? G tz K nig Changing Perceptions in Modern Scholarship on Tangut Translations of Chinese Texts ? Imre Galambos Biblical Theology, Scholarly Approaches, and the Bible in Arabic ? Miriam Lindgren Hj lm Translating inside al-Andalus: From Ibn Rushd to Ibn Juljul ? Maribel Fierro Part 2: Participant Narratives From Opheleia to Precision: Dionysius the Areopagite and the Evolution of Syriac Translation Techniques ? Emiliano Fiori Wisdom in Disguise: Translation Narratives and Pseudotranslations in Arabic Alchemy ? Christopher Braun Philology and Polemics?in the Prologues to the Latin Talmud Dossier ? Alexander Fidora Faraj ben Sal?m of Agrigento: Translation, Politics and Jewish Identity in Medieval Sicily ? Lucia Finotto Practices of Translation in Medieval Kannada Sciences: 'Removing the Conflict between Textual Authority and the Worldly' ? Eric Gurevitch The Trope of Sanskrit Origin in Pre-Modern Tamil Literature ? Eva Wilden Ibn al Quff the Translator, Ibn al-Quff the Physician: Translation and Authority in a Medieval Commentary on the Hippocratic Aphorisms ? Nicolas Carpentieri Isaac Aboab da Fonseca's Preface to his Hebrew Translation of Abraham Cohen De Herrera's Puerta del Cielo ? Federico Dal Bo Mahometism in Translation: Joseph Morgan's Version of Mohamad Rabad n's Discurso de la Luz (1723-1725) ? Teresa de Soto The Possibility of Translation: A Comparison of the Translation Theories of Ogy? Sorai and ?tsuki Gentaku ? Rebekah Clements The Hermeneutics of Mathematical Reconciliation: Two Pandits and the Benares Sanskrit College ? Dhruv Raina Index
Kapital. Kritika politicheskoj ekonomii. Perevod c nmetskago. Tom pervoej. Kniga I. Protschess proizvodstva Kapitala. (Russian, = The Capital. Critique of the Political Economy. Translated from German. Volume One. Book I [all].). - [FIRST TRANSLATION INTO ANY LANGUAGE OF ""THE BIBLE OF MARXISM""]
S.-Peterburg, N.I. Poliakov, 1872. Large 8vo. In a nice recent half calf binding with gilt lettering to spine and five raised bands. First few leaves with light soling and a closed tear and a few marginal repairs to title-page. pp. 11-18 with repairs to upper outer corner. Closed tears to last leaf, otherwise a fine copy. XIII, (3), 678 pp. (wanting the half-title).
First Russian edition (first issue, with the issue-pointers), being the first translation into any language, of Marx' immensely influential main work, probably the greatest revolutionary work of the nineteenth century.Marx' groundbreaking ""Das Kapital"" originally appeared in German in 1867, and only the first part of the work appeared in Marx' lifetime. The very first foreign translation of the work was that into Russian, which, considering Russian censorship at the time, would seem a very unlikely event. But as it happened, ""Das Kapital"" actually came to enjoy greater renown in Russia than in any other country"" for many varying reasons, it won a warm reception in many political quarters in Russia, and it enjoyed a totally unexpected rapid and widespread success. The first Russian translation of ""Das Kapital"" came to have a profound influence the economic development of of Russia. It was frequently quoted in the most important economic and political discussions on how to industrialize Russia and the essential points of the work were seen by many as the essential questions for an industrializing Russia. "" ""Das Kapital"" arrived in Russia just at the moment that the Russian economy was recovering from the slump that followed Emancipation and was beginning to assume capitalist characteristics. Industrialization raised in the minds of the intelligentsia the question of their country's economic destiny. And it was precisely this concern that drew Mikhailovsky and many of the ""intelligenty"" to ""Das Kapital""."" (Resis, p. 232).The story of how the first printing of the first translation of ""Das Kapital"" came about, is quite unexpected. As the ""triumph of Marxism in backward Russia is commonly regarded as a historical anomaly"" (Resis, p. 221), so is the triumph of the first Russian edition of ""Das Kapital"". The main credit for the coming to be of the translation of ""Das Kapital"" must be given to Nicolai Danielson, later a highly important economist in his own right. The idea came from a circle of revolutionary youths in St. Petersburg, including N.F. Danielson, G.A. Lopatin, M.F. Negreskul, and N.N. Liubavin, all four of whom participated in the project. Danielson had read the work shortly after its publication and it had made such an impact on him that he decided to make it available to the Russian reading public. He persuaded N.I. Poliakov to run the risk of publishing it. ""Poliakov, the publisher, specialized in publishing authors, Russian and foreign, considered dangerous by the authorities. Poliakov also frequently subsidized revolutionaries by commissioning them to do translations for his publishing house. Diffusion of advanced ideas rather than profit was no doubt his primary motive in publishing the book."" (Resis, p. 222). Owing to Danielson's initiative, Poliakov engaged first Bakunin, and then Lopatin to do the translation. Danielson himself finished the translation and saw the work through press. It was undeniably his leadership that brought Marx to the Russian reading public. In fact, with the first Russian edition of ""Das Kapital"", Danielson was responsible for the first public success of the revolutionizing work. ""Few scholars today would deny that ""Das Kapital"" has had an enormous effect on history in the past hundred years. Nonetheless, when the book was published in Hamburg on September 5, 1867, it made scarcely a stir, except among German revolutionaries. Marx complained that his work was greeted by ""a conspiracy of silence"" on the part of ""a pack of liberals and vulgar economists."" However desperately he contrived to provoke established economists to take up ""Das Kapital""'s challenge to their work, his efforts came to nought. But in October 1868 Marx received good news from an unexpected source. From Nikolai Frantsevich Danielson, a young economist employed by the St. Petersburg Mutual Credit Society, came a letter informing Marx that N. P. Poliakov, a publisher of that city, desired to publish a Russian translation of the first volume of ""Das Kapital""" moreover, he also wanted to publish the forthcoming second volume. Danielson, the publisher's representative, requested that Marx send him the proofs of volume 2 as they came off the press so that Poliakov could publish both volumes simultaneously. Marx replied immediately. The publication of a Russian edition of volume 1, he wrote, should not be held up, because the completion of volume 2 might be delayed by some six months [in fact, it did not appear in Marx' life-time and was only published ab. 17 years later, in 1885]" and in any case volume 1 represented an independent whole. Danielson proceeded at once to set the project in motion. Nearly four years passed, however, before a Russian translation appeared. Indeed, a year passed before the translation was even begun, and four translators tried their hand at it before Danielson was able to send the manuscript to the printers in late December 1871."" (Resis, pp. 221-22). This explains how the book came to be translated, but how did this main work of revolutionary thought escape the rigid Russian censors? ""By an odd quirk of history the first foreign translation of ""Das Kapital"" to appear was the Russian, which Petersburgers found in their bookshops early in April 1872. Giving his imprimatur, the censor, one Skuratov, had written ""few people in Russia will read it, and still fewer will understand it."" He was wrong: the edition of three thousand sold out quickly"" and in 1880 Marx was writing to his friend F.A. Sorge that ""our success is still greater in Russia, where ""Kapital"" is read and appreciated more than anywhere else."" (PMM 359, p.218). Astonishingly, Within six weeks of the publication date, nine hundred copies of the edition of three thousand had already been sold.""Under the new laws on the press, ""Das Kapital"" could have been proscribed on any number of grounds. The Temporary Rules held, for example, that censorship must not permit publication of works that ""expound the harmful doctrines of socialism or communism"" or works that ""rouse enmity and hatred of one class for another."" The Board of Censors of Foreign Publications was specifically instructed to prohibit importation of works contrary to the tenets of the Orthodox Church or works that led to atheism, materialism, or disrespect for Scriptures. Nor did the recent fate of the works of Marx and Engels at the hands of the censors offer much hope that ""Das Kapital"" would pass censorship. As recently as August 11, the censors of foreign works had decided to ban importation of Engels' ""Die Lage der arbeitenden Klassen in England"", and, according to Lopatin, the censors reprimanded Poliakov for daring to run announcements on book jackets of the forthcoming publication of ""Das Kapital"". By 1872 the censors had prohibited the importation and circulation of all works by Marx and Engels except one - ""Das Kapital"". The book, as we shall see, had already won some recognition in Russia shortly after its publication in Germany. Not until 1871, however, did the censors render a judgment on the book, when the Central Committee of Censors of Foreign Publications, on the recommendation of its reader, permitted importation and circulation of the book both in the original language and in translation. The official reader had described the book as ""a difficult, inaccessible, strictly scientific work,"" implying that it could scarcely pose a danger to the state. [...] The length and complexity of the book prompted the office to divide the task of scrutinizing it between two readers, D. Skuratov, who read the first half of the book, and A. De-Roberti, who read the last half. Skuratov dutifully listed objectionable socialist and antireligious passages, taking special note of Marx's harsh attack on the land reforms General Kiselev had instituted in the Danubian Principalities. But in his report Skuratov dismissed these attacks as harmless, since they were imbedded in a ""colossal mass of abstruse, somewhat obscure politico-economic argumentation."" Indeed, he regarded the work as its own best antidote to sedition. ""It can be confidently stated,"" he wrote, ""that in Russia few will read it and even fewer will understand it."" Second, he said, the book could do little harm. Since the book attacked a system rather than individual persons, Skuratov implied that the book would not incite acts threatening the safety of the royal family and government officials. Third, he believed that the argument of the book did not apply to Russia. Marx attacked the unbridled competition practiced in the British factory system, and such attacks, Skuratov asserted, could find no target in Russia because the tsarist regime did not pursue a policy of laissez faire. Indeed, at that very moment, Skuratov stated, a special commission had drafted a plan that ""as zealously protects the workers' well-being from abuses on the part of the employers as it protects the employers' interests against lack of discipline and nonfulfillment of obligations on the part of the workers."" Repeating most of Skuratov's views, De-Roberti also noted that the book contained a good account of the impact of the factory system and the system of unpaid labor time that prevailed in the West. In spite of the obvious socialist tendency of the book, he concluded, a court case could scarcely be made against it, because the censors of foreign works had already agreed to permit importation and circulation of the German edition. With the last barrier removed, on March 27, 1872, the Russian translation of ""Das Kapital"" went on sale in the Russian Empire. The publisher, translators, and advocates of the book had persevered in the project for nearly four years until they were finally able to bring the book to the Russian reading public."" (Resis, pp. 220-22). The Russian authorities quickly realized, however, that Skuratov's statement could not have been more wrong, and the planned second edition of the Russian translation was forbidden"" thus it came to be published in New York, in 1890. That second edition is nearly identical to the first, which can be distinguished by the misplaced comma opposite ""p. 73"" in the table of contents (replaced by a full stop in the 2nd ed.) and the ""e"" at the end of l. 40 on p. 65 (replaced by a ""c"" in the 2nd ed.). A third edition, translated from the fourth German edition, appeared in 1898. Volumes 2 and 3 of ""Das Kapital"" appeared in Russian translation, also by Danielson, in 1885 and 1896.See: Albert Resis, Das Kapital Comes to Russia, in: Slavic Review, Vol. 29, No. 2 (Jun., 1970), pp. 219-237.
Eugene Onegin : A Novel in VerseVolume I Introduction and Translation. Volume II Commentary and Index
Princeton Princeton University Press 1955 2 12,5 x 20,5 cm broché xxviii, 334 pp Translated by Vladimir Nabokov. Bollingen series LXXII.
good condition edition originale-envoi-
Anacreontis teii antiquitissimi poëtae Lyrici Odae, ab Helia Andre Latinae factae. - [ANDRÉ'S SEMINAL LATIN TRANSLATION OF THE ANACREONTEA]
Lutetiae (i.e. Paris), Robert Stephanum (i.e. Robert Estienne) & Guillaume Morel, 1556. Small 8vo. Lovely newer full marbled paper binding with gilt leather title-label to spine (Jens E. Hansen, Aarhus). Light brownspotting to a few leaves and somne leaves towards the end with inkspotting at outer blank margin. Early neat handwritten marginal annotations throughout. A lovely copy. 54 pp.
Scarce second edition of Elie André’s seminal Latin translation of the Anacreontea – the first complete - which itself is a classic in the history of classical literature. It came to directly influence all later readings of Anacreon. In 1554, Henri Estienne II published the seminal editio princeps of Anacreon, which is no less than an outright Renaissance sensation, causing the “Anacreaonta” to become the most influential “ancient” Greek poetic text during the Renaissance, initiating a poetic revolution in Europe. Simultaneously with this editio princeps, Henri Estienne published his own Latin translation of it, which constitutes the first translation into Latin. Merely a year later, in 1555, Elie André extremely important translation of the Anacreaontea appeared, in 1555, printed by Thomas Richard. This translation included additional Odes not in the Estienne edition and was thus the first complete Latin translation of the “Anacreontia”. The following year, 1556, Robert Estienne II published his first work, namely a second edition of the original Greek Anacreontea that Henri Estienne had published in 1554. Silmultaneously, Robert Estienne republished Elie André’s Latin translation, which was published separately, but which is often found together with the 1556 second edition of the Greek Anacreontea. “The first full translation of CA was again in Latin. It was published by the humanist Elie André (1509-1587) from Bordeaux, who was friendly with the Parisian circle around the Pléiade. André’s translation appeared less than a year after Estienne’s edition and comprised the Latin translation only, without the Greek text. In a way, this can be taken as a signal that the Latin tradition was coming into its own. Accordingly, André makes some bolder choices in his translation, which already shows in his first lines (see Aiijr): Cantare nunc Atridas, Nunc expetesso Cadmum: Testudo vero nervis Solum refert Amorem (…). In classical Latin, the verb expetessere is used only by Plautus (and it is extremely rare in postclassical Latin). This brings a somewhat odd ring of comedy to the poem. Here, and in a number of other places, the translator wishes to strike his readers with an unusual turn of phrase or by some sort of amplification. He does not just imitate ‘Anacreon’, but also competes with him (as arguably with Estienne’s translation). André’s willingness to adapt the original text shows also in a certain moralistic tendency not otherwise seen in Latin translations. On the one hand, he openly and avowedly changes the text when it comes to unequivocal references to homosexuality: in CA 12 (10).8-10 (τ? µευ καλ?ν ?νε?ρων […] ?φ?ρπασας Β?θυλλον “Why from my sweet dreams […] have you snatched away Bathyllus?”), for instance, he replaces Bathyllus with a puella (Cur mane somnianti / Ista loquacitate / Mihi eripis puellam?),… in CA 29 (17).1-2 (Γρ?φε µοι Β?θυλλον ο?τω / τ?ν ?τα?ρον ?ς διδ?σκω, “Paint for me thus Bathyllus, my lover, just as I instruct you”) he simply suppresses the word ?τα?ρον, “lover” (Mihi pinge sic Bathyllum / ... Estienne’s translation is: Meos Bathyllum amores, / Ut te docebo pinge). Here, André proceeds in a way similar to the original Neo-Latin Anacreontics, in which homosexual love simply does not occur. On the other hand, André makes generous use of a metatextual element which is less conspicuous than his changes, but is even more extensive and significant. He includes a considerable number of passages in quotation marks and thus identifies them as sort of sententiae. In CA 4 (32), for instance, lines 1-6 describe how the poet wishes to lie down on myrtles, drink, and have Eros as his wine steward. This description of a specific setting is followed by some more general lines about the brevity of life, which André includes in quotation marks (lines 7- 10): “Cita nanque currit aetas, / Rota ceu voluta currus. / Sed et ossibus solutis / Iaceam cinis necesse est” (“For hurried life runs along just like a rolling wheel, but I shall soon lie, a bit of dust from crumbling bones”). The focus of this quotation technique is on lines concerned with the transitory nature of life, the uncertainness of tomorrow, and the futility of riches. By marking out such lines as sententiae, André distinguishes Anacreon the philosopher from Anacreon the drinker and lover and contributes to a larger discourse about the morality of the poet and his poems. While opinions in antiquity were often critical of Anacreon’s morals, ‘Anacreon’s’ large flock of modern imitators was united to defend their hero’s virtue. From Estienne’s preface onwards they usually referred to Plato’s Phaedrus 235c, where Socrates calls Anacreon “wise” (σοφ?ς) in matters concerned with Eros. In the 18th century, Anacreon, the philosopher, could even turn into a key-image of enligthened discourses. André’s identification of sententiae in ‘Anacreon’ prepared for this development and could have had a direct influence on it since his translation was widely read until well into the 18th century. The Latin translations of Estienne and André soon became classics in themselves and were the most successful ones in the early modern period.” (Tilg: Neo-Latin Anacreontic Poetry. Its Shape(s) and Its Significance, 214. Pp. 177-78). Brunet: I:250 Renouard: I:(161).
Acquisition through Translation. Towards a Definition of Renaissance Translation
, Brepols, 2020 Paperback, 380 pages, Size:156 x 234 mm, Illustrations:12 b/w, Languages: English, Italian, German. ISBN 9782503589541.
Summary The definition of translation in Renaissance Europe is here proposed as a process of acquisition: the book studies how a number of European languages, finding their identification in the newly evolving concept of nation, shape their countries' vernacular libraries by appropriating ancient and contemporary classics. The emergence of standard modern languages in early modern Europa entailed a competition with the dominant Latin culture, which remained the prevalent medium for the language of science, philosophy, theology and philology until at least the eighteenth century. In this process, translation played a very special role: in a number of significant instances we can identify in the undertaking of a specific translation a policy of acquisition of classical - and by definition authoritative - texts that contributed to the building of an intellectual library for the emerging nation. At the same time, the transmission of ideas and texts across Europe constructed a diasporic and transnational culture: the emerging vernacular cultures acquired not only the classical Latin models, incorporating them in their own intellectual libraries, but turned their attention also to contemporary, or near-contemporary, vernacular texts, conferring on them, through the act of translation, the status of classics. Through the examination of case studies, that take into account both literary and scientific texts, this volume offers an overview of how early modern Europe developed its vernacular national literatures, following the model suggested in the late Middle Ages, through a process of acquisition and translation. TABLE OF CONTENTS Alessandra Petrina (University of Padua) and Federica Masiero (University of Padua) Introduction: acquisition through translation in early modern Europe Biblical and classical literature in translation Camilla Caporicci Translating Solomon's Song: Gervase Markham's Poem of Poems. Or Sions Muse Bryan Brazeau 'I write sins, not tragedies': manuscript translations of Aristotle's hamartia in late sixteenth-century Italy Carla Suthren Iphigenia in English: Reading Euripides with Jane Lumley Angelica Vedelago Plutarch in sixteenth-century France and England: an insight into the Life of Coriolanus as translated by Amyot and North Marta Balzi Lodovico Dolce's Italian translation of Ovid's Metamorphoses and the canonization of the Orlando furioso Francesco Roncen Stesso corpo in 'cangiate forme': traduzione fedele e ottava rima nelle Metamorfosi di Fabio Marretti (1570) Ilaria Pernici The revolution of Ovid's Metamorphoses in Golding's translation: the case of Thomas Lodge Petr Valenta Virgil in Czech seventeenth-century translations and Past ?sk rozmlouv n o narozen P n? by V clav Jan Rosa Horizontal translation and the definition of literature Valentina Gallo Dall'Agrigento del III sec. a.C. alla Londra di Jonathan Swift Giulio Vaccaro Tra traduzione, tradizione e identit : il Libro dell'Aquila Lucia Assenzi bersetzen f r die Muttersprache. bersetzung und Fremdwortpurismus in der barocken Sprachreflexion am Beispiel der Verdeutschung des Novellino (1624) Andrea Rado?evi? - Marijana Horvat Translation strategies in the Sermon Collection Besjede (1616) written by the Franciscan Matija Divkovi? Alice Equestri The first English translation?of Tommaso Garzoni's Ospidale De' Pazzi Incurabili: cultural context and representation of idiocy Heritage and archives at the close of the early modern period Dominika Bopp Das Sprachlehrbuch Janua linguarum reserata von J.A. Comenius (1592-1670) und seine ersten deutschsprachigen bersetzungen Roberto De Pol Il contributo dell'editore Georg M ller e del traduttore Johann Makle alla ricezione della letteratura italiana in Germania nel XVII secolo Anna Just bersetzungstexte aus der ehemaligen Bibliotheca Zalusciana (1747-1795) als Indikator einer transnationalen Literatur im fr hneuzeitlichen Polen
