As a genuine question,what's the problem with P&V? Is inaccurate or does it not preserve the feel and intentions of the original?
P&V
Easton Thompson
Other urls found in this thread:
theguardian.com
twitter.com
Aiden Reed
Nothing is wrong with it at all
Pseuds on here like to be contrarian
Oliver Scott
It should be obvious.
Logan Butler
I have this edition, translation by Sidney Monas. Anybody know if it will suffice?
Brandon Edwards
The P&V fad's very inception itself was contrarian you dumbass.
Hudson Gutierrez
Why don't you fucking compare it to the passages posted, you mongoloid.
Joshua James
Their Master and Margarita feels overly literal- like they were translating word by word. The English often doesn't really feel fluent, more like an (accomplished) EFL student's homework than a work of literature. To my mind that makes it a failure, unless Bulgakov's own prose is awkward and foreign-sounding in Russian I guess.
Can't speak for their other translations though. Noted Russia historian and Amazon-sock-puppeteer Orlando Figes rates their War and Peace.
Lincoln Walker
They get the same general idea across but yeah I suppose you could make the argument the the P&V translation is quite awkward. Things like using closet rather than the simpler explanation one of the others uses
Parker Reed
Perhaps I will. I know nothing of Dosto, and wanted to see if their was a consensus on this particular translator from the experts on Veeky Forums, you mongoloid.
Angel Hall
Not him but how so?