Mouse or Rat?: Translation as Negotiation

by Umberto Eco

From the world-famous author of THE NAME OF THE ROSE, an illuminating and humorous study on the pleasures and pitfalls of translation.'Translation is always a shift, not between two languages but between two cultures. A translator must take into account rules that are not strictly linguistic but, broadly speaking, cultural.'Umberto Eco is of the world's most brilliant and entertaining writers on literature and language. In this accessible and dazzling study, he turns his eye on the subject of translations and the problems the differences between cultures can cause. The book is full of little gems about mistranslations and misunderstandings.For example when you put 'Studies in the logic of Charles Sanders Peirce' through an internet translation machine, it becomes 'Studies in the logic of the Charles of sandpaper grinding machines Peirce'. In Italian 'ratto' has no connotation of 'contemptible person' but denotes speed ('you dirty rat' could take on a whole new meaning!)What could be a weighty subject is never dull, fired by Eco's immense wit and erudition, providing an entertaining read that illuminates the process of negotiation that all translators must make.

Genres: Nonfiction, Language, Linguistics, Philosophy, Essays, Books About Books, Italy

216 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 2003

About the author

Umberto Eco was an Italian medievalist, philosopher, semiotician, novelist, cultural critic, and political and social commentator. In English, he is best known for his popular 1980 novel The Name of the Rose, a historical mystery combining semiotics in fiction with biblical analysis, medieval studies and literary theory, as well as Foucault's Pendulum, his 1988 novel which touches on similar themes.

Eco wrote prolifically throughout his life, with his output including children's books, translations from French and English, in addition to a twice-monthly newspaper column "La Bustina di Minerva" (Minerva's Matchbook) in the magazine L'Espresso beginning in 1985, with his last column (a critical appraisal of the Romantic paintings of Francesco Hayez) appearing 27 January 2016. At the time of his death, he was an Emeritus professor at the University of Bologna, where he taught for much of his life. In the 21st century, he has continued to gain recognition for his 1995 essay "Ur-Fascism", where Eco lists fourteen general properties he believes comprise fascist ideologies.

Reviews

[Manny · Rating 4 out of 5]

Umberto Eco's collection of essays on the theory and practice of literary translation is very fine, and I devoured it in a day and a half; but I'm afraid to say that, the whole time I was reading it, I couldn't stop thinking about Astrid Lindgren's unforgettable character Karlsson på taket, aka Karlsson on the roof, Karlsson vom Dach, Karlsson sur le toit, Карлсон, который живет на крыше and a host of other names. One reason is already clear: Karlsson has been translated into a huge number of languages, and the challenges involved in this kind of venture are at the heart of what Eco is writing about here. Literal translations of any work of literature fall flat, for reasons Eco analyzes in great detail, and Karlsson is an excellent case in point. In the original Swedish, he has a unique and irresistible charm; in translation, he can easily come across as an insane egomaniac. Some of his translators (the German, and I am told by all my Russian friends, the Russian one) get him right; some (unfortunately, both the English ones) get him wrong; the French one is somewhere in the middle. As Eco says, you need to think deeply about the effect the author is trying to create and figure out how to create the same effect in the target language. That involves making compromises. You give up something less important, usually exact fidelity to the source text, to get something more important: here, the all-important thing is that Karlsson should be a loveable rogue and not a lunatic. Hence the subtitle of the book, "Translation as negotiation".

The other thing that made me think of Karlsson is, if I am to be blunt, that Eco does not list modesty among his many virtues. World's greatest polyglot literateur, guess who that is? World's most amusing translation theorist, guess who that is? World's best inserter of hidden references into postmodernist texts, guess who that is? World's greatest, cleverest, funniest, most-translated, most postmodern, all-round bestest author, guess who that is? In each case, I hear Lillebror's voice from the 1974 movie, answering in adoring tones: det är DU, farbror Umberto!

But you can't help loving him anyway, the old rascal. How does he do it? He's evidently performed some extremely cunning negotiations when he translated himself into written form...

[Ed · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a moderately interesting and informative collection of essays on the subject of translation. It centres mostly on anecdotes about Eco's own novels, which (as I have not yet read them) put me at a disadvantage in terms of my appreciation for this book. I have an intermediate level of competence with Italian, but not French, Spanish or German, which are the other languages covered in this book. A reader familiar with all those languages would be better able to appreciate the subtleties described, but ironically, would probably not have much to learn from this book.

My favourite chapter was the last one, which contained an interesting analysis of the delineation between colours in various languages and cultures. This chapter in itself could have formed the basis for quite an interesting book.

[Shelley · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5

[Annie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well, Umberto Eco is Umberto Eco. Try as he might to be as academic and objective as possible, he just can't help reminding the reader of his own superiority and intelligence. And although it is something one most probably expects when choosing to read Eco, it still does ruin the reading experience in some moments.
"Mouse or Rat?" is a collection of Eco's lectures on translation. And although I wouldn't say he presents novel ideas (at least from the point of view of a 2017 reader who already knows the basics of translation and translation theory), he does offer some novel and interesting perspectives from which you can discuss or analyze certain aspects of translation.
The main topic of the book - negotation in translation - is tackled from every possible side and explained thoroughly with extremely intelligent comments and remarks. Personally, I also especially loved the last chapter, although I felt like it was more of a linguistic discussion and the aspect of translation was only thrown in as an afterthought in the last paragraphs. On the other hand, I simply hated Eco's attempts to disprove Jakobson's theory of translation and his thoughts on adaptations. It just felt disgustingly pretentious and some of the points sounded naive and definitely exaggerated.
Eco gives numerous examples (often from translations of his own novels), which, interestingly enough, is both a strong point and a weak point of this book. He's very inconsistent in a way of presenting these examples. Sometimes, he quotes a translation in, for example, French, and then translates it back into English or at least thoroughly explains what is done well in badly in this translation and why it of interest for him or for the readers; with such examples, even a person who doesn't know any French will get the point. However, what happens more often is that he quotes translations in various languages and offers little to no explanation as to what is even the point of him bringing up these texts. You're just left with half a page of text in Italian or German and if you don't understand it, then it's your problem, because Eco goes on without further explanations. One would have to be fluent in at least Italian, Spanish, French, and German to really get the full experience out of some of the chapters.
All in all, even if I rolled my eyes at Eco's pretentiousness and was dissatisfied with the poor handling of providing examples, the book was definitely an interesting read. Like I said, it does offer some interesting new perspectives and perhaps it may challenge your views on some aspects of translation.

[Maria AC · Rating 3 out of 5]

Eco sabe hacer que un texto teórico sea interesante y divertido. Me sacó unas buenas risas y me ayudó para la tesis. Excelente servicio (excepto porque al final se pone poquito denso y repetitivo).

[Sam Aird · Rating 3 out of 5]

Eco does not patronise his readers and assumes that naturally they must be suitably au fait with at least Italian, French, German and Spanish. Di conseguenza, most of the nuances and subtleties of the difficulty/impossibility of translation (the main theme of the book) were lost on me. That said, the few morsels intelligible für mein kleines Gehirn were muy interesante.

[Patricia Macías García · Rating 2 out of 5]

No sé si me he pasado con la mala nota, pero es que he terminado leyendo en diagonal (y porque tenía que leerlo para clase, que si no probablemente no lo habría terminado). El problema con el libro es que se supone que está enfocado a traductores, pero no creo que los traductores encuentren nada nuevo leyéndolo. Sin embargo, creo que sería muy difícil de comprender para alguien que no haya estudiado Traducción. Entonces, ¿qué es lo que pretendía Umberto Eco con este libro? ¿Solo contar sus anécdotas? La verdad es que resulta muy aburrido ver cómo te corta y pega en mitad de su explicación traducciones de sus obras o traducciones realizadas por él y comparadas con otras para demostrarte que él lo habría hecho todo mejor siempre.

[Izi Freitas · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a take on the the concept of 'faithfulness' that translators face when presented with particularly difficult texts, focused on the relationship between English, Italian, French, Spanish and German.

While the majority of the theories and arguments Eco discussed were explored well (including those that I didn't agree with him on), the recurring undertone is a that of a self-aggrandising author/lecturer who presents his own books and translations as the pinnacle of the genre - which I guess after half a century in the field he had a right to do.

My main gripe with this book that prevented me from giving 5 stars was the section on 'Intertextual irony' starting on p.114. Eco introduces the concepts of a 'naïve reader' versus a 'competent reader': you are competent only if you understand and appreciate the archaic references in (mainly his) novels. I know this book is 20 years old but I think it's time we stop viewing people who aren't interested in or exposed to some of the 'great' pre-20th century writers as less intelligent than those who only read Shakespeare, Keats or Dickens (or their European equivalents).

In any case I wholly recommend this book to anyone who enjoys linguistics and translation. If nothing else the book is a good starting point for discussions on translation.

[Boronia · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely loved this book. A plus if you can read & speak English, French, German, Italien and Spanish. Litteral translation from one language to the other: hilarious!

[Маx Nestelieiev · Rating 5 out of 5]

прекрасні, але розрізнені нотатки Умберто Еко про переклад. скидається на те, що він зібрав крихти, що лишилися від інших його серйозних книжок і зліпив оцього колобка - тим не менш, Еко - це завжди кайф. переклад як перемовини з привидом віддаленого автора, з тривожною присутністю іншомовного тексту і з фантомом читача (а ще з видавцями), що можна відкинути лише тоді, коли ми будемо покликатися на Досконалу Мову. про латинського topo, який чи то пацюк, чи то миша. про італійського nipote, який і grandson і nephew. про французьке glace, яке і лід і морозиво. про три переклади Романа Якобсона (із якими Еко полемізує) і про багатостраждальний переклад "Сильвії" Нерваля.

[Maja · Rating 3 out of 5]

a good book with some flaws - opened new ways of approaching translation for me
I'd give it 3,5 stars

[WIlliam Gerrard · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a collection of essays on the topic of translation. It is constantly exploring the role of the translator as a negotiator is the way he interprets texts for his target audience. Eco points towards an underlying perfect language that writer uses which transcends the individual tongues a work may be written in. What duty does the translator have in presenting an author's true thoughts? The examples are plentiful and obviously abound from a man with a great deal of real-life experience as a translator. I found the in depth discussion of poetry translation a little over my head and very complicated but it gives you something to aim at as you learn the art and process of becoming a translator. The essays build on the work of other translation scholars and argues for and against their ideas and methods. I found that the text reads very well and is an ideal compliment to the more formal study one gets from course texts. I am sure that after a few rereads Umberto Eco's message will reveal itself more fully to me.

[Ocean G · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this for my translation book club (https://www.facebook.com/groups/Trans...), so here are some discussion points/questions I jotted down for discussion:

I retried his Altavista experiment from Chapter 1:
The works of Shakespeare - Le opere di Shakespeare - Shakespeare's works
Speaker of the Chamber of Deputies - Presidente della Camera dei deputati - President of the Chamber of Deputies
Studies in the logic of Charles Sanders Peirce - Studi nella logica di Charles Sanders Peirce - Studien in der Logik von Charles Sanders Peirce - Studies in the logic of Charles Sanders Peirce

Translation and Reference (Chapter 3)
It was very interesting to see how closely he works with his translators, at least in the languages he mentions (English, French, German, Spanish, Catalan). I wonder if it is the same for all languages. It must be so much work to go over all these points with translators in every language.

Chapter 4:
I liked the anecdote about how he disagreed with his English translator (William Weaver), and so Weaver consulted with Eco's wife in order to get a consensus. And she said Eco was wrong!

5: The idea of double-coding, and how much Eco put in his novels, was intriguing. I'm embarrassed to say I caught none of the ones he mentioned from The Island of the Day Before.

6: I confess this was the most intense chapter for me, so I'm not sure how much was over my head. What did you guys think of it?

7: Was I the only one who didn't read Monterroso novel as Eco did? He gives 2 possible scenarios, but neither of them was how I understood it:
"Cuando despertó, el dinosaurio todavia estaba allì". (When he woke up, the dinosaur was still there).
I understood it to mean that, when the dinosaur woke up, he noticed he was still existing. Did anyone else get that? Would that even make sense in the Spanish version?
Eco said that someone else woke up, and saw that the dinosaur was still there next to him.

8: The discussion on colors reminded me of Guy Deutscher's book "Through the Language Glass", where he discusses how the ancient people didn't seem to have a word for Blue. And in fact, from Eco's discussions it seems like it was an odd color out. I wonder why. I know there's a theory that we have evolved since then to see blue, but apparently that was debunked.

4 stars, but 5 stars if you're a translator because it's pretty much a must-read

[Rome · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is an excellent book telling us the nature of translation and how it is different from interpretation. There were a lot divergence with how people in the past perceived translation as a form of interpretation or vice-versa. My take-home from the book is that in translation, there are mainly two ways to do it – to focus on the source language or the target language. Anything in between may cause a hazy translation.

It would have been good for me if I had knowledge in European languages as there were a lot of examples in Italian, in French and others. Because I had no idea what those strings of words meant, either I read those selections in passing or I didn’t read it at all. But I don’t think my experience in reading the book was less as compared to those who knew those languages. I just feel like my experience is not similar to them. It’s like watching a foreign movie without subtitles and still somehow getting the entire story while losing some fine details.

Overall, I like the book and I like the idea of translation as a form of negotiation between the language, the translator, the culture and the people to whom the service is being done for.

[Al Maki · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Reflections on his experiences” of translation, as a writer whose works were translated; as a translator of others' work; as an editor; and drawing on his academic work for a theoretical basis. Lots of specific examples and explanations of the complexities. A particularly good section at the end on the illuminating complexities of translation of colour terms.
“...translation is always a shift, not between two languages but between two cultures – or two encyclopedias.”
To give an example, the Russian translator of The Name of the Rose, “...Helena Costiukovich, remarked that Latin words (whether or not transliterated in Cyrillic characters) are not only incomprehensible to Russian readers, but also do not convey any religious connotation. Thus Costiukovich decided to render my Latin quotations in the old ecclesiastic Slavonic used by the Orthodox Church in the Middle Ages – so that the reader could both vaguely understand their meaning and perceive the same aura of old religiosity.”
Eco wrote that translation is negotiation, a process wherein you give up something to gain something.

[Douglas · Rating 4 out of 5]

As one might expect, this isn't a book for everyone. One of my pet peeves is people who try to read Eco, for example, because someone said he would make you look smart for having read it and then say you hate it because you couldn't understand it. One doesn't climb Everest because someone thought it makes you look like a good climber, you climb it because you can--or you fail. But for lovers of language and semiotic theory, there's just not a clearer, more enjoyable little book. Eco has a few books on translation, certainly on symbols and their interrelationships, but this one fits a number of his obscure treasures. It does get a bit dry now and then, in his wonderful scholarly tone, but it usually picks up right away and you're carried away with him on this magnificent linguistic journey. It helps if you know a little German and French, Italian and Spanish, but it's not absolutely necessary. This book covered so much ground for me, and gave a stimulating vocabulary with it, that I can't help but recommend it--to the right crowd.

[Rita P Smits · Rating 4 out of 5]

What a pleasure to read Eco on translation! I would recommend it to everyone interested on the subject, as this book is engrossing, clear and fun to read. The only reason I did not give it a 5-star rating is because of some smaller qualms I had:

- I would have appreciated some back translation for the Italian passages (abundant), without which I missed some subtler points made sometimes;
- I did not find the last 3 chapters as interesting as the rest of the book, as they focus primarily on linguistic theories following Jakobson, and discuss translation as a form of interpretation and languages as a semiotic system;
- When discussing poetry I was unable to understand some of Eco's examples, as he points out instances of "hendecasyllables", "hemistichs" etc. without explaining what they are, or exactly where they can be found in the poems. Similarly, sometimes Eco makes assertions that he does not back-up adequately with arguments - and as much as he can be considered an authority, he's also just a man :)

A lovely way of finishing the readings of an entire year!

[Elzira Rai · Rating 4 out of 5]

Though short on theoretical insights, Mouse or Rat offers many fascinating examples of how translators negotiate meaning across linguistic divides, particularly Eco's own translators, whom the author anal-retentively controls and evaluates from afar. It's particularly intriguing that Eco claims to reject the so-called Whorf hypothesis, yet proceeds to present numerous examples of the multiple ways in which language determines percpetion and cognition (and this while rarely leaving the realm of Western European languages). Though Eco rejects the incommensurability of languages - or, in other words, the solipsism of linguistic cultures - it is telling, I believe, that he often resorts to a double negation to rescue his belief in the possibility of translation: it is, Eco says, "not impossible" to translate. This un-impossibility rests upon an apparently irrational belief in "universals", a sort of core human experience that transcends linguistic boundaries, which Eco clings to, in the face of the evidence he himself produces, in order to escape the terrors of cultural solipsism.

[Harry Colin · Rating 4 out of 5]

A collection of essays that explore and explain much of the nuance of the art of translation. Signore Eco was a fine stylist and polymath and these reflections are quite useful and entertaining.

One element certainly not lacking in Eco was self-esteem; most of the examples are drawn from his own books - mostly his novels - and he never allows the reader to forget how brilliant he was. This gets tiresome if you read straight through the book, as I did, but this work can be taken in smaller bites, chapter by chapter.

If you are fascinated by the art of translation, this book is for you. Those readers either indifferent to subtle translation nuances or of a more utilitarian bent when reading translated works will likely be closing this book up well before the final chapter.

[Sofi · Rating 1 out of 5]

Ho trovato questa raccolta di saggi del professor Eco la più boriosa, noiosa, strampalata, senza capo e coda, dissertazione sul suo lavoro di traduzione o di scrittura dei propri romanzi da una altura supponente e per nulla chiarificante a proposito dei temi che si supponeva sarebbero stati trattati. Cosa ti rimane dopo la lettura? Nulla, niente di niente a proposito della traduzione e del mestiere e l'arte del traduttore. Gli unici sentimenti a riguardo sono la voglia di finirlo presto e di non leggere neanche uno dei suoi romanzi scritti o da lui tradotti per la paura di morire prima di noia che di cultura. Non ho mai letto uno scrittore talmente tanto egoriferito da farti odiare ogni singola parola che scrive.

[E · Rating 3 out of 5]

These are published lectures delivered by Eco on the topic on what is (and is NOT) involved in faithful translation. Most of the examples include Eco's native Italian, usually involving Eco's own writings. He is certainly in what we might call the "dynamic equivalent" camp, which is a perfectly fine place to be when you're not dealing with holy writ. Those involved in reading the Bible in the original languages should continually study and hone their translation skills, and part of that involves exposure to different theories and techniques. Thus this work by Eco is useful, although by the time I got to the equations (no joke!) I might have been glazing over a bit . . .

[L.E. Duncan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Entertaining series of essays on the (very difficult) art of translation. Think I would need to know, er, at least three to four languages other than English to really appreciate it, but still interesting. Title refers to the fact that Italian mostly uses the word "mouse" for mice and rats, that "rat" doesn't have the same "sneaky" connotation as it does in English, etc. Endless tiny and large differences between languages to account for, let alone different texts to allude to, etc. I learned a lot! Translation is hard!

[Matthew · Rating 4 out of 5]

Insightful and witty at times, I enjoyed this look at some of the theory of translation. I had enough German, French, and Spanish to sort of get by with his excerpts; I just wish I knew Italian since this language, being his native language, was used more than any of the others. Being a polyglot is basically needed to fully appreciate the book, so its reach is somewhat limited, though can still be appreciated if one has an interest in this sort of thing.

[Pete Harris · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting, with many examples of how passages of Eco's own works had to be translated using different approaches to get the best (not necessarily the most literally faithful) equivalent in different languages.

It's not primarily about surface language differences so much as differences in cultural and literary background that have to be navigated so the impact of a passage can be delivered in the way the author intended, even if it means some meaning is lost or changed.

To appreciate the examples as much as possible, it'll help to have at least minimal reading familiarity (not fluency) with some of Italian, French, Spanish, Catalan, German.

What this book is really good for is making you realise you only got about 10% of what Eco was doing in any of his books that you thought you understood :)

[Rob · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a self-confessed word game player, the late Umberto Eco was clearly not an easy man to translate for. He was also a translator himself, which at least allows him to allow that he is making things difficult for people, but he was also a stickler, and an eruditely blinkered one at that who did not always see the absurdity of what he was demanding from his collaborators (8 different archaic ways of saying "red" in your language even if you can only find six, and those at a full Latinate stretch).

As Eco writes: "Sometimes I ask myself if by chance I write novels purely in order to put in hermetic references that are comprehensible only to me. I feel like a painter who, in a landscape, puts among the leaves of the trees – almost invisible – the initials of his beloved. And it does not matter if not even she is able to identify them."

Case closed, as we might say. The appeal of Eco actually lies in his investigative (and rather atavistic) zeal. It is not in vain that his breakthrough novel, The Name of the Rose, was sold as a kind of mediaeval literary whodunnit. His connection with his surprisingly large readership (given his flighty concerns) comes through the fact that he is the indefatigable and avuncular academic with more ways up the mountain than anyone else. Whatever had to do with language, he took it on board.

This book from 2003 is in fact based on a series of lectures on translation in which he looks at a number of the issues that come with the field, from intertextual concerns to how to take on board certain unbridgeable differences, such as in rhyming poetry. To a translator, it is endlessly interesting, but also often maddeningly pernickety. For example, he muses on Fredric Jameson's decision to translate "coupé" as "hansom cab", and allows that "coupé", which exists in English but has become more readily identified with a car, may have been less identifiable for the reader than "hansom cab". But then Eco suggests that with the hansom cab the coachman is behind and in the coupé in front, eventually conflating this "difference" in mode of transport with a Prime Minister arriving at the scene of a disaster by car instead of helicopter and what readers might infer from such a difference. But very few readers know (or care) whether the rider of a hansom cab is in the front or back, seeing it simply as a horse-drawn carriage, and this distinction indeed only takes on importance for the scene if the driver in some way has to interact with the characters. Which is precisely the key point for the translator. If not, then the word chosen has to be one that will best paint the scene. If so, then it is necessary to ensure that the choice does not muddy the viewer's perception, and the translator's research has to take in the fact of the driver's position. Translation is indeed about negotiations of meanings but it is even more importantly about gauging your readership correctly without speaking down to them or overestimating them.

Eco is right to state that a translator must understand all the ins and outs of the text he/she is translating, and that all the necessary research must be done to ensure there are no errors of understanding. His view of translation as a form of negotiation between languages is also a good analogy, hinting at the pragmatic decisions we need to make when faced with terms from the source language that do have a fixed equivalent in the target language, or when needing to suggest elements that the source language reader will automatically feel upon reading the source text. However, in making "rules" we are always invoking the arrival of the exception: the truth is that the translator has to ensure that the reader in the target language understands the book in the way the author intended for their counterpart in his/her own language. Where the rhyme is necessary, look for a rhyme, where a list of terms for red is necessary, ensure there are enough for the point to be made clear and the character rendered faithfully. But whether there is truly a difference between 6 and 8 of said definitions is really a question for Eco and his desire to play games, hermetic or otherwise.

To be fair, when removed from his love for verbal games, Eco actually argues a similar point, "Translators must negotiate with the ghost of a distant author, with the disturbing presence of foreign text, with the phantom of the reader they are translating for. Translation is a negotiation to such an extent that translators must also negotiate with publishers, because a translation may be more or less domesticated or foreignised according to the context in which the book is published, or the age of its expected readers." In short, the same way that Sun Tzu said that one must "one must know one's enemy and know oneself," it is paramount for a translator to understand the work and its context as well as the target audience and the moment in history. The tools that can be used for this come more from reading and culture than they do from theory, but Eco does a good job of setting out some of the theoretical names for the tasks that form part of the bread and butter or every translator's (increasingly computerised) day.

[Eve · Rating 3 out of 5]

FINALLY I have finished this book!! Umberto Eco is moderately insufferable as a character, but the content was useful for my essay, so

[Marina · Rating 5 out of 5]

Can't believe I got to live at the same time as Umberto Eco. How fresh, how lucid, how grounded.

[Christopher Walker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Made me think more about translation - the art and its difficulties - than I had ever before.

[Deborah · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very interesting collection of essays about the art of translation

[Amelia]

apologies for the translation theory spam.