From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Sat Jul 22 2006 - 11:10:40 EDT
> Once a translation has been made, it is > usually easy to improve it (e.g. the Pelican translation of Capital is > superior to previous ones), and personally, if I would do that (which I am > not about to), I would try to make the Grundrisse text more readable using > the information we now have about the totality of his project, and add an > analytical index. Hi Jurriaan: The _Collected Works_ edition of the manuscripts has an analytical index. It can take some time, but if a passage is sufficiently interesting, I like to compare the Penguin/Vintage edition with the CW edition. But, is the CW edition a _better_ translation? I don't know. It is also organized differently and seeks in this to be more in keeping with the order of the manuscripts. Were they successful in that endeavor and is this an improvement? Of course, the Penguin edition is cheaper and more available and is the one which most English readers are most familiar with. But, is the CW qualitatively better and should we get into the practice of citing that rather than the Penguin edition? In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 31 2006 - 00:00:03 EDT