Re the citation from the _Results ..._ that was
last noted in [5181].
Although Chris Arthur's article in _Capital &
Class_ had a quotation (from the Penguin 1976 edition of Volume 1 which
included a translation of "Results of the Immediate Process of
Production") which read:
"Thus capital [is] *productive* (p. 26),
in the source cited (the Penguin ed., p. 1056),
it was actually:
"Thus capital appears *productive*.
This was not, a typo. In fact, in a footnote (#9, p.
36), Chris explains:
"Note the mistranslation: 'appears' should be
'is' as in Marx, 1994a: 459 [_Collected
Works_, Volume 34, JL]. (I concede
other cases of 'appears' in this translation
of *Results...* are genuine.) Marx first arrived
at this formula in the 1861-63 manuscript;
see Marx 1994a: 128; the whole section
(121-29) is very instructive".
So, evidently there is a difference in translation
between the Penguin/Vintage edition and the
_CW_, 34, translation.
Does anyone have the original German? If so,
do you think 'appears' or 'is' is the better
translation?
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon Apr 02 2001 - 09:57:29 EDT