[clickety_clack]

When I read translations like these, I always wonder if the tone is translated. Did the writer mean to convey a very formal “to the utmost”, or was it a more casual “to the max”.

How much of the translators bias makes these seem like academic papers instead of social media posts.

[adrian_b]

Any useful translation of an ancient text is accompanied by the text in the original language, so that the reader may assess how faithful is the translation.

For anyone who wants to read ancient texts, there are bilingual editions, for example those of the "Loeb library".

The translations that omit the original text are just for the people who want to have some idea about the content, but do not care about the correctness of the translation.

With a bilingual edition, it is easy to understand the original text even with relatively little knowledge about the original language.

The original text is important because frequently the translator is forced to introduce inaccuracies in the translation, because of the absence of exact equivalents in the target language, which would require a long explanation of the original meaning, instead of just a translated sentence.

Especially misleading are translations where several distinct ancient words are translated using the same English word, so some nuances are lost.

Equally confusing are the cases when the translator chooses to translate the same ancient word by different English words, because even if the meaning of a word may depend on the context, many translators fail to judge correctly the context, because they may lack specialized knowledge so their guesses are not necessarily better than of the readers who may be less competent in linguistics, but more competent in the science or technology needed to understand the context. Better translators prefer to use a one-to-one mapping between words, which makes it easier for the readers to discover the meaning intended by the ancient writer, after seeing multiple examples of usage.

[tephra]

There is a quote, I can't remember by whom, going something like "all translation is interpretation" (IIRC I heard it on a great courses course on the bible).

To think that there is some sort of absolute truth of how something ought to be translated is IMHO just not reality. Especially when it comes to texts that not only were oral literature long before being written down but we of course have no copies of the originals (whatever original means in this context), but only transcriptions of transcriptions of...

Take Beowulf for one. While perhaps Shippeys translation is very much faithful to the copy we have, is it "better" (whatever that means...) than Tolkiens? or Heaneys? Could we say what the poet would have liked more had they sat here in 2026 and read them all? Of course not and having a multitude of different translations is what we need to fully enjoy these texts (since not all will be able to learn the different ancient greek dialects, latin, old english, sumerian, etc., etc. I'm saying this as someone who is now studying ancient greek).

[forshaper]

This is why I like literal translations & etymological dives, paired with asking what activities would constitute a life in that time. Ie, you may not need to be a competent archer, but it is a little easier to understand someone who used a particular style of bow if you can play around with that type of bow for a bit.

[sapphicsnail]

It's philosophy, it's probably very dense prose. Formal Greek/Latin writing tended to have very long sentences with a bunch of subordinated clauses. People don't really write like that outside of academia or "highbrow" literature right now.

Casual letters and graffiti would be closer to tweets.

[bibimsz]

let's translate the ancient classic poem Mugger's Paradise by the poet Somewhat Frosty:

While I step through the valley of the shadow of death,

I contemplate my life and perceive that nothing remains.

For I have hurled weapons and laughed for so long that

Even to my mother, my mind appears to have departed.

Yet I have deceived no one except him who was worthy of it;

For me to be held as a coward—that indeed is unheard of.

Beware what you speak and where you set out,

Lest you and your companions be outlined in chalk.

[colechristensen]

Sometimes there is very little to go on, but we really do have a lot to work with from the late republic and early roman empire.

Latin is also a very rich language and this is no snippet.

Translation is always hard, especially from a couple thousand years ago BUT this kind of translation comes with a lot of confidence.

[hyhatqtv]

It’s in Greek, though. Of course same points apply

[charcircuit]

After sticking it into CharGPT I can tell you it's neither. The word upmost is coming from is a form of the compound verb ἐκπονέω.

* ἐκ- = “out,” “thoroughly,” “to the end”

* πονέω = “to labor,” “to toil,” “to work hard”

[sapphicsnail]

I can actually read Ancient Greek. LLMS are really bad at it.

> * ἐκ- = “out,” “thoroughly,” “to the end”

ἐκ is more motion away from something. It's often an intensifier in verb compounds but not really as a standalone preposition.

Ancient Greek is a very different language from English. I've found people who try to brute force it by looking up individual words without a knowledge of the grammar end up with a worse understanding of a text that someone who just reads in translation.

[kridsdale3]

I trust a lifelong dedicated Ancient Greek Papyrologist to do a better job here than ChatGPT.

[charcircuit]

And I don't. Humans are notoriously opinionated in the translations they make.

[dylan604]

Sending a tweet is free and takes zero thought to make it (as the vast majority of tweets prove). Writing something on a scroll would take a lot of effort and would not be free. If these were tweet level content in the scrolls, I'd have to totally reevaluate a lot of things to the point I might as well just become MAGA

[dgellow]

You might want to read this: https://kashgar.com.au/blogs/history/the-bawdy-graffiti-of-p...