Always worth reading again – a poem by Edward Lear with no particular reference to Easter.

bq. Who or why, or which, or what,
Is the Akond of Swat?

bq. Is he tall or short, or dark or fair?
Does he sit on a stool or a sofa or chair,
or SQUAT,
The Akond of Swat?

bq. Is he wise or foolish, young or old?
Does he drink his soup and his coffee cold,
or HOT,
The Akond of Swat?

…

bq. At night, if he suddenly screams and wakes,
Do they bring him only a few small cakes,
or a LOT,
For the Akond of Swat?

bq. Does he live on turnips, tea or tripe?
Does he like his shawl to be marked with a stripe,
or a DOT,
The Akond of Swat?

The Akond of Swot was the ruler of a state now in Pakistan, although I couldn’t find akond in the OED.

bq. In the 19th century the Akund of Swat rose to power. He was a Sufi ascetic with a highly charismatic and warlike personality who united the Swatis and made his capital at Saidu Sharif.

Pastiche

Some bloggers apparently think my entries are exactly what they would have written themselves if they hadn’t had something better to do. So much for vanity!

Rowohlt

At least two blogs link to the Zeit interview with the literary translator (and occasional inhabitant of Lindenstraße) Harry Rowohlt and add the word ‘Lesen!’.

I haven’t been able to use that word since Else Stratmann became responsible for it on TV and taught us that reading is Good In Itself (provided we don’t claim to like highbrow stuff like Proust).

I liked the Winnetou reference too, although what I read elsewhere in Die Zeit about Karl May’s take on the Armenian massacre was not so appealing.

Rowohlt gets up at 6 a.m. and does his 5 pages. He says he gets standard payment. Maybe he gets more royalties than some. It’s one of the mysteries of translation how literary translators survive. When asked if he admires other translators, he mentions Hans Wollschläger, and the interviewer suggests he must envy W. for translating Joyce’s Ulysses.

bq. Ich? Das soll doch bitte außer mir jeder machen. Diesen stinklangweiligen Kalauerer. Wenn einem bei Halbinsel, peninsula, nix anderes als Penis einfällt, kann ich das weder bewundern noch im Mindesten komisch finden. Arno Schmidt hat doch, ohne es zu wollen, viel Unheil angerichtet. Leute sagen jetzt »auf jeden Fall« und denken dabei Phall. Die waren sonst schon mit Pippi Langstrumpf ganz gut bedient.

Too true. By the way, I remember hearing Wollschläger on the Ulysses translation – it took him two solid years and I think he earnt the equivalent of 2000 DM per year. Not that I think money is everything – it’s just interesting.

Is writing quicker than translating?

Bloggers ponder. There’s definitely something in it. If a lawyer is writing on his special subject, he won’t have the terminology research to do that I will. Whatever the answer, the big problem is occasional clients thinking they can allow an author three weeks, and then a fourth, to prepare a brochure, and then get that translated in one week.

Today’s Zwiebelfisch in Spiegel Online deals with how (not) to write emails.

(Via kielanwalt`s mepHisto-bLAWg)

The New York Times has an amusing article on the small revenges people take against things that annoy them.

This mystifies me, though:

bq. Most people participate in this sort of behavior on some level, Professor Scott said, adding that his own habit was to write “England” rather than “United Kingdom” on letters he sends to his British friends. He described this as his way of disregarding British claims to Wales and Scotland.

Is this correctly summarized? Or should it read ‘on letters he sends to his English friends…disregarding English claims…’?

He surely doesn’t write ‘England’ on letters to Wales and Scotland, does he? Because that would have the opposite effect.

I usually write ‘England’ on letters to England and ‘Scotland’ on letters to Scotland. Am I making a statement I didn’t intend? Sometimes I write ‘Great Britain’, though. That would be incorrect if I wrote to Northern Ireland, wouldn’t it? But I don’t write to Northern Ireland.

Perhaps it’s too late to think straight, but I can’t think of any way of achieving what this man seems to want to do.

It’s a problem for German students learning English, too. They often say ‘England’ meaning the UK. That’s OK if they are referring to London, but not for Glasgow. Or they will translate ‘die englische Königin’ as ‘the English Queen’ instead of ‘the Queen’.

Das neue Cornelsen-Wörterbuch ist ganz ordentlich gemacht, trotz einiger marktüblicher Fehler, hat etwa 27,000 Begriffe in jeder Sprachrichtung und kostet knapp 30 Euro. Es könnte für Studenten interessant sein oder für alle andere, die die größeren Werke (Romain, Dietl) nicht brauchen/wollen. Dr. Walter Bachem und Dr. Dieter Hamblock sind Anglisten an der Ruhr-Uni Bochum. (Hamblock hat ein paar andere gute Wörterbücher veröffentlicht). Es könnte allerdings Konkurrenz bekommen.

amazon.de Link: Wörterbuch Recht,…

Bei Beck ist Klaus Fleck’s Wörterbuch Recht FR>DE, DE>FR 2004 erschienen (EUR 28). Vielleicht bringt Beck sowas für Englisch heraus? Bei Langenscheidt soll auch ein Rechtswörterbuch September 2005 erscheinen, allerdings mit Schwerpunkt Vertragsrecht (siehe früheren Eintrag). Hier soll der Preis des gedruckten Werks ebenfalls EUR 29 sein, knapp EUR 50 mit CD-ROM.

amazon.de Link: Wörterbuch Recht, Französisch-Deutsch,…

Langenscheidt schreibt: “Rund 11.000 Fachbegriffe und mehr als 22.000 Übersetzungen je Sprachrichtung.” Man muss eine Seite sehen, um die Bedeutung von diesen Zahlen zu sehen. Laut ihren eigenen Verlagen haben Cornelsen 27,000 Einträge in jeder Richtung, Lister/Veth (Hueber Taschenwörterbuch Recht, 2 Bände, 8.000 Begriffe DE>EN und 10.000 EN>DE, Köbler (Rechtswörterbuch für jedermann) 10.000 bis 14.000 Stichwörter in jede Richtung.