From: Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM
Date: Mon Oct 03 2005 - 08:36:54 EDT
[Chris wrote:] All English translations are defective in offering Oembodiment� as the translation of 'Darstellung' in the context of Marx�s first chapter. Very occasionally Marx does speak of Oembodied labour�, but nearly always the term is Darstellung. The labour of the worker is Darstellung in the value of the product, that is, Opresented there�. ORepresentation� is inadequate here because it suggests a mere appearance form of something going on elsewhere. But Opresentation� I think avoids this. Value does not just represent abstract labour, it is the mode in which it becomes socially objective, i.e. really present. In the same way money is the mode in which value as universal is presented, not represented as if it already exists somewhere else. _________________________________________________ Hi again Chris, I'm still think about your comments. Isn't "darstellung" ordinarily and customarily translated into English as "representation"? If that is the case, is your point that the common or everyday translation of "darstellung" is inadequate as an expression for Marx's meaning in relationship to value? In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 04 2005 - 00:00:01 EDT