Translation into English

[Ingsoc]

One of the most annoying thing to me as a native Hebrew speaker in when I'm reading a book or an article in English is the custom of English writers to "translate" foreign names into English sounding names. the most blunt example is Marcus Antonius who became Mark Antony and when you transcript the name accurately you pronounce it wrong, for example Cicero should be pronounce as Kikero.

 

Now I assume this was originally done as an attempt to bring close the English translations of ancient writers to the English speaking audience, but why continue with it to this day? it's amaze me every time that I read an article or an book in English that author could call Marcus Antonius Mark Antony.

[Klingan]

I hate it too... I would never neither write nor say Mark Anthony or any other named changed. (Of course as far as possible)

[ASCLEPIADES]

One of the most annoying thing to me as a native Hebrew speaker in when I'm reading a book or an article in English is the custom of English writers to "translate" foreign names into English sounding names. the most blunt example is Marcus Antonius who became Mark Antony and when you transcript the name accurately you pronounce it wrong, for example Cicero should be pronounce as Kikero.

 

Now I assume this was originally done as an attempt to bring close the English translations of ancient writers to the English speaking audience, but why continue with it to this day? it's amaze me every time that I read an article or an book in English that author could call Marcus Antonius Mark Antony.

Salve, I.

In English as in any other langiuage, that's called naturalization: making a word from another language (ie, Latin) a natural part of the language.

 

It depends basically on the frequency of its use; words like Livy, Antony and Pliny are widely used out of the specialized areas closely related to Latin.

 

In English and other languages, foreign words are typically written in italics until they are naturalized: Livius, Antonius, Plinius. ].

 

For example, in regular Roman historians

Edited June 25, 2008 by ASCLEPIADES

[Ingsoc]

Thanks for the explanation ASCLEPIADES I wonder if this also apply to other major languages like German, French, Russian, etc.

[ASCLEPIADES]

Thanks for the explanation ASCLEPIADES I wonder if this also apply to other major languages like German, French, Russian, etc.

I think it does.

[Ingsoc]

Hmmm... it's made me think how mistranslation of ancient sources affect our view of Rome, it's quit possible that most modern reader of Plutarch[us] biography of the triumviri who was defeated by Octavianus think that his real name was Mark Antony (or any other distorted form).

[ASCLEPIADES]

Hmmm... it's made me think how mistranslation of ancient sources affect our view of Rome, it's quit possible that most modern reader of Plutarch[us] biography of the triumviri who was defeated by Octavianus think that his real name was Mark Antony (or any other distorted form).

Actually, even if the "Octaviunus" agnomen would have been the right and expected evolution of his original nomen after Caesar's posthumous adoption, it's just an historical reconstrunction; he never used it, as he wanted to be seen as a 100% Julian, at least until becoming Augustus.

[Klingan]

Thanks for the explanation ASCLEPIADES I wonder if this also apply to other major languages like German, French, Russian, etc.

I think it does.

 

The French does. Sulla is called something really silly there, Zilla or Zylla -ish. I keep forgetting it.

 

We normally keep the names in Sweden.

[Primus Pilus]

Thanks for the explanation ASCLEPIADES I wonder if this also apply to other major languages like German, French, Russian, etc.

I think it does.

 

The French does. Sulla is called something really silly there, Zilla or Zylla -ish. I keep forgetting it.

 

We normally keep the names in Sweden.

 

As an example of this outside of English, I'm aware that in the Deutsch speaking world that Marcus Aurelius, for example, is commonly referred to as Marc Aurel (same in French). It's not a "Germanization" of the Latin so to speak, but still a manipulation of the true form.

[Maty]

As a matter of interest there's hardly a Roman emperor of the Julio-Claudian dynasty who keeps the name he was known by to the Romans. Augustus was indeed Augustus, but Tiberius no more called himself that in his official nomenclature than Caligula called himself 'little boots'. Quick now - which emperor had the proper name of Tiberius Claudius Nero Germanicus? Was it Tiberius, Claudius or Nero? (It was Claudius.)

 

Likewise we refer to Cato the elder and Cato the younger and ignore all the other Catos who were around between the pair. Kikeroo (Cicero, whatever) was actually Marcus Tullius officially speaking anyway, as officialdom of the day did not recognize cognomina unless they were several generations old. In a way modern usage is a sort of shorthand used to refer to particular people of historical significance - it's a useful convention, but you have to be careful when dealing with original sources - someone called 'Caesar' for example could be one of several dozen people, depending on context.

[sonic]

When it comes to spoken Latin, 'Cicero' is my favourite. Because it is so common in England (I think a large percentage of the population will have heard the word, without being able to say who/what he was), extremely pedantic specialists will correct people on their Latin (eg. the plural of hippopotamus, or how to pronounce 'Veni, Vici, Vidi' - with the 'V' being a 'W') then comment on how wonderful 'sisseroh' is!

 

However, the need to be 'politically correct' is now starting and beginning to cause confusion. For a long time people in Britain have been able to learn about 'Belisarius' because they could read 'Procopius'. Now, it's changing to 'Belisarios' and 'Prokopios'. The same is true all over antiquity, especially in regard to Greek names needing a 'k', not a 'c' and the endings 'ius' and 'ios'.

 

However, if this needs to change then does it need to change the world over, not just in labels in antiquity?

[Traianus]

Well, in Spanish that hapens too. Marcus Antonius is Marco Antonio, Cicero is Cicer

[docoflove1974]

Well, in Spanish that hapens too. Marcus Antonius is Marco Antonio, Cicero is Cicer

[ASCLEPIADES]

The French does. Sulla is called something really silly there, Zilla or Zylla -ish. I keep forgetting it.

 

We normally keep the names in Sweden.

That's because Swedish is not a Romance language. As Docta explained, "the Romance languages would naturally utilize the phonological changes on the proper Latin names just as they were applied to the rest of the lexicon". The Cornelian cognomen Sulla poses some particular problems, explained by a couple of historical-linguistic oddities.

 

Even if all contemporary Latin authors wrote Sulla , the main primary sources on the famous Happy Dictator, Appianus and Plutarchus, wrote both in Greek. Then, the first Latin vowel "u" was transliterated by the Hellenic upsilon ("Y"). There you get the Sylla used by some late Latin authors, like Orosius and Jordanes.

 

Now, when you re-transliterate "Y" back to Latin, you have two main alternatives; "i" and "u".

 

Spanish and related languages have the additional phonological circumstance that their double consonant "ll" is quite different from the original Latin usage. Actually, original latin "ll" sounds closer to their simple consonant "l".

 

Those are the reasons why, depending on the language, you may find "Sulla", "Sylla", "Silla", "Sula" or even "Sila".

[Traianus]

depending on the language...."Silla"

 

Silla means "chair" in Spanish, from latin sella, ae. And as "e" in some cases was pronounced like "i", your Silla (Sulla) would be confused for Silla (Sella), which for the analphabet plebe (and others) should be, at least, hilarious.

Edited July 6, 2008 by Traianus