Lost in Translation

What's lost in translation isn't always just the literal meaning of a word. What's lost can be more the significance, the history, and the culture that makes the word what it is. Words have a beginning, a time when they came into being just like everything else. They also have a history; words tell a story, and have their own identity. Words hold power, truth; they can be twisted and turned around to have one meaning compared to another. They can be used to praise, hurt, comfort, or annoy. Words hold an endless amount of possibility in just a matter of letters strung together. In one language, a word or phrase can hold one meaning, then an entirely different one in another. So what happens when you try to translate a word from one language to another? Do you lose part of that history or meaning? Or do you lose the word itself?

Reading "Translations," its been interesting to see how the original names were changed. I'd seen the two different Irish names on signs before, but never knew how they came to be that way. Reading about Owen translating, either literally or by sound, the names of different places was an interesting experience. I had never imagined that the names would be changed into what they sounded like. But I also think that you do lose part of the original Irish name when translating it into English. You lose the soul of the word almost, the essence of it. Because what it has been for years gives it its own history, a unique past that can't be captured when you change the name. In Italy, for example, saying Firenze brings about a different connotation than just Florence. Firenze has history and a culture unique to the city itself. Florence brings about more of a touristy connotation. Reading the play, I feel that the same could be said with the Anglican names in Ireland.

Shakespeare's lines from "Romeo and Juliet" give a prime example of the English point of view on this when he says, "What's in a name? That which we call a rose

By any other name would smell as sweet."