Journal #12 Kafka, Camus, and Importance of Translations

The Translations

1. In the first translation, there are no commas, colons, and semicolons used. Because of this, the translator had to narrate the sentence more. If the translator had used a semicolon, they would have justified the Gregor Samsa's awakening. He also used more verbiage in his sentence. For example, "he found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect." This appears to be long-winded and not something somebody would actually say if they were verbally telling somebody what happened. This was necessary because of the lack of commas, colons, and semicolons. This sentence also appears to be longer than most of the other translations because of this. The translation also appears to be translated more literally because it said "in his bed into a gigantic insect." These two different events could have been broken up and the repetition of "in" made it appear long winded and unnatural. This kind of mimics what Google Translate does. However, one could argue that the this unnatural feeling emphasizes the discomfort Samsa would have been feeling once he found out he had been transformed into a bug. 
2. This sentence is very simple and short in comparison to the other translations. However, the short and simpleness of the sentence kind of brushes over the fact hat Samsa got turned into a "bug." This is seen through the phrase "to find himself." This kind of adds to the groggy mood Samsa must have been feeling because he "woke from uneasy dreams." The phrase "one morning" also adds to the simplistic vibe felt by the sentence. The translator also choose to use the word bug instead of insect making the reader think of small house-bug. Usually when I hear the word insect I think of more complex species of bugs like the ones that I cannot pronounce.
3. In this translation appears to be setting the sentence in a particular time period and stresses the fact that it is appearing in the morning by starting the sentence off with "when." This sentence appears to be the second longest translation out of all of the other ones. The fact that this translator used the word "transform" it makes me believe that they are trying to imply that mystical forces are afoot. Since Franz Kafka never actually explains to his readers how Samsa turned into a bug, this kind of justifies what happened. This sentence appears to emphasize on the extraordinary aspects of the event by specifying Samsa's size. The translator distinguishes the fact that Samsa did not get turned into a regular bug but an "enormous bug." This makes me think that Samsa is still the same size he was when he was a human except now he is a bug.



Image taken from the article "12 Unsettling Facts
About The Metamorphosis" by Jeff Wells

4. This translation appears to be more formal by starting off with the phrase "one morning." There also appears to be more commas in this sentence than any of the other translations and appears to be the longest out them all. This sentence appears to stress every bit of information presented within the sentence and maintains the readers'. However, I found this sentence to be the most uninteresting because there was too much punctuation! Because of the long-windedness and formality of the sentence, it kind of reminds me of a twisted fairy tale. I use the word twisted because it describes the main character, Samsa, as a "monstrous vermin." This gives him a negative portrayal and appear like a freak of nature. Judging off of this sentence, I assume that this translator's novel would be way more narrative compared to the other authors. This is kind of interesting to me because the use of punctuation can help break the sentences down and make them shorter. But, in this case, the author is using it to add more narration and make the sentences longer.

How Translation Alters Meaning
Based off of the previous translations, the use of diction negatively connoted the main character while also stressing the context of the situation. For example, in Translations 1, 2, and 3 used large words to stress the abnormality of the situation. But, in Translation 4 the translator's use of monstrous not only brought on the sense of Samsa's size, but the ugliness of his new form. So by adding adjectives to the sentences it changes the portrayal of the character. The size of the sentence also effected the seriousness of the situation. For example, Translation 2 was the shortest out of all of the other translations and appeared to gloss over the occurrence of Samsa's transformation. I think the fact that Kafka never explicitly explained why Samsa got changed into a bug is super important and the fact that the opening sentence of Translation 2 glosses over the situation would distract the reader because they would be focusing too much on how it happened rather than the actual plot of the novel. Translation 4 appeared to make the same mistake by saying "found himself" as if it were a casual situation.This is similar to the novel Never Let Me Go where the author never mentions what the exact purpose of the donations were and who they went to.
Therefore, I think Translation 3 is the best because it hinted towards the abnormality of the situation and alluded to some sort of justification as to why it happened. Translation 1 would have been good as well if it were not for the awkward syntax towards the end; it appeared to be too literally translated. This brings to concern how translators translate novels.
I usually am all for straight forward translations of the novel because they tell you exactly what the author said and leaves the meaning open to the readers' interpretations of it. However, I realized that this can sometimes hinder the meaning of what the sentence was trying to say and can create awkward syntax which can confuse the reader. Conversely, if the translator decides to flower the sentence up more than what the author has done, it can give importance to something else that the author was never trying to give the importance to. I now understand the complicated predicament of translations. I also understand that it is hard to contact the author and see what their actual intent is because that still can be skewed if communication is not fully comprehended. Sometimes the translations do not exactly translate literally either. However, I do think that if the correct tone is maintained throughout the novel, the meaning can still be held accurately. Since I have not read The Metamorphosis, Translation 3 appears to be the best because of the implied context it has given. I think that by doing so it helps focus on the author's intent which is the prime focus of every translator's purpose.