What's the 'best' translation...

>commentarymagazine.com/articles/the-pevearsion-of-russian-literature/

How correct is he?

Entirely

>How correct is he?
0%.

One of the main points of that critique -- using "wicked" instead of "spiteful" in Notes from Underground -- is addressed in P&V's introduction to the book.

"There is, however, one tradition of mistranslation attached to Notes from Underground that raises something more than a question of 'mere tone.' The second sentence of the book, Ya zloy chelovek, has most often been rendered as 'I am a spiteful man.' Zloy is indeed at the root of the Russian word for 'spiteful' (zlobnyi), but it is a much broader and deeper word, meaning 'wicked,' 'bad,' 'evil.' The wicked witch in Russian folktales is zlaya ved'ma (zlaya being the feminine of zloy). The opposite of zloy is dobryi, 'good,' as in 'good fairy' (dobraya feya). This opposition is of great importance for Notes from Underground; indeed it frames the book, from 'I am a wicked man' at the start to the outburst close to the end: 'They won't let me . . . I can't be . . . good!' We can talk forever about the inevitable loss of nuances in translating from Russian into English (or from any language into any other), but the translation of zloy as 'spiteful' instead of 'wicked' is not inevitable, nor is it a matter of nuance. It speaks for that habit of substituting the psychological for the moral, of interpreting a spiritual condition as a kind of behavior, which has so bedeviled our century, not least in its efforts to understand Dostoevsky. Besides, 'wicked' has the lucky gift of picking up the internal rhyme in the first two sentences of the original."

Which ones don't translate the names?

I'm halfway through the Oxford edition of Maude now and it's easily the best. It's very well translated/written.

I bought Maude AND the pic related P&V and Maude is easily better. The language and sentence structure is noticeably better.

Maude

Rest are shit

Maude and Maude, or Dunnigan
Briggs drops f-bombs, which doesn't seem like it represents Tolstoy at all
I'm generally strongly anti-P&V, but this title might be okay from them. They seem to handle the French here, along with Tolstoy's deliberate repetition, in a decent way

They address it, but nonetheless they get it wrong. Their imposition on such an encompassing/comprehensive translation of zloy is wooden and misses the context of the rest of the book, which points to 'spiteful' or something similar (as basically all other translators have gone with) instead of 'evil'. There's even a term (albeit one generally used in biblical hermeneutics) for the mistake P&V have made in this instance: illegitimate totality transfer.

P&V translation is the best. Don't listen to what plebs who don't know russian tell you otherwise.

Address this post:

Russian here, I quickly scanned the first chapter of Maude and Pevear translations, and the latter is obviously more accurate. I wouldn't know if it's a good thing or bad, as I wouldn't claim to understand the language of Tolstoy, but if it's the accuracy you need, Pevear is almost autistically correct. Compare

Original
>- Aх, нe гoвopитe мнe пpo Aвcтpию! Я ничeгo нe пoнимaю, мoжeт быть, нo Aвcтpия никoгдa нe хoтeлa и нe хoчeт вoйны. Oнa пpeдaeт нac. Poccия oднa дoлжнa быть cпacитeльницeй Eвpoпы. Haш блaгoдeтeль знaeт cвoe выcoкoe пpизвaниe и бyдeт вepeн eмy. Boт oднo, вo чтo я вepю. Haшeмy дoбpoмy и чyднoмy гocyдapю пpeдcтoит вeличaйшaя poль в миpe, и oн тaк дoбpoдeтeлeн и хopoш, чтo Бoг нe ocтaвит eгo, и oн иcпoлнит cвoe пpизвaниe зaдaвить гидpy peвoлюции, кoтopaя тeпepь eщe yжacнee в лицe этoгo yбийцы и злoдeя..

Maude:
>“Oh, don’t speak to me of Austria. Perhaps I don’t understand things, but Austria never has wished, and does not wish, for war. She is betraying us! Russia alone must save Europe. Our gracious sovereign recognizes his high vocation and will be true to it. That is the one thing I have faith in! Our good and wonderful sovereign has to perform the noblest role on earth, and he is so virtuous and noble that God will not forsake him. He will fulfill his vocation and crush the hydra of revolution, which has become more terrible than ever in the person of this murderer and villain!
Quite a few artistic liberties here, such as the word "things", using the word "sovereign" twice, also 'вepa' can be translated as both 'trust' and 'faith', but I believe trust is more fitting in this instance. 'Хopoш' certainly does not translate as 'noble'. I also think the auxiliary verb has in 'has to perform' makes the sentence sound strangely imperative, which isn't present in original text.

Pevear
>"Ah, don't speak to me of Austria!" Maybe I don't understanbd anything, but Austria does not want and has never wanted war. She's betraying us. Russia alone must be the savior of Europe. Our benefactor knows his lofty calling and will be faithful to it. That is the one thing I trust in. Our kind and wonderful sovereign is faced with the greatest role in the world, and he is so virtuous and good that God will not abandon him, and he will fulfill his calling to crush the hydra of revolution, which has now become still more terrible in the person of this murderer and villian"
Basically word for word, for better or worse

so pevear:
>autistic broken english for purists

maude:
>makes the reading and language lovely

not a tough choice

welcome to the club, friend!

Do english translators translate French in W&P?

you would hope not
if its foreign to the native audience, it should stay foreign in translation (barring the translation in the selfsame foreign language, where it should be clearly demarcated)

I also liked this one, but I haven't read the Pevear/Volokhonski translation, but I think Brigg's is quite enjoyable which, in the end, is what we can judge in a translation if we don't know the original language itself.

But french was widely talked and read in XIX century Russia...