Riccardo,
The Progress/International edition reads on p. 188:
"But the past labour that is embodied in the labour-labor, and the living
labor that it can call into action; the daily cost of maintaining it, and
its daily expenditure in work, are two totally different things."
Is this better?
Paul Z.
On Sun, 28 Apr 1996, riccardo bellofiore wrote:
> Dears,
>
> as some of you already know I am puzzled by the low quality of the
> translation of Capital, vol 1, Penguin. I need now to quote a part of it
> (page 300), to textually ground an argument in a paper. I found this phrase
> in the Penguin edition:
>
> >But the past labour embodied in the labour-power, and the living labour it can
> >>perform, *and* the daily cost of maintaining labour power and its daily
> >>expenditure in work, are two totally different things.
>
> which sound like:
>
> - (i) the past labour embodied in the labour-power, and the living labour
> it can perform;
>
> - (ii) the daily cost of maintaining labour power and its daily expenditure
> in work;
>
> - (i) is a totally different thing from (ii).
>
> This is wrong, to my reading: *and* should really in fact be translated as
> [or, in other terms], so that the phrase be:
>
> > But the past labour embodied in the labour-power, and the living labour it
> >can > perform, or, in other terms, the daily cost of maintaining labour power
> >and its daily expenditure in work, are two totally different things.
>
> hence
>
> - (i) the past labour embodied in the labour-power,or the daily cost of
> maintaining labour power;
>
> - (ii) the living labour it can perform, or its daily expenditure in work;
>
> - (i) is a totally different thing from (ii).
>
>
> It seems so straightforward to be stupid to send this post. But I never
> exclude that *I* am the stupid. In other words: I ask your help, because
> for me it is quite clear it is an error of translation - I checked the
> Italian and the French translation, and as far as I can go also the German
> original. But I want to be sure, and I am curious if there are different
> readings of mine.
>
> riccardo
>
> ==================================================================
> Riccardo Bellofiore e-mail: bellofio@cisi.unito.it
> Department of Economics Tel: (39) -35- 277505 (direct)
> University of Bergamo (39) -35- 277501 (dept.)
> Piazza Rosate, 2 (39) -11- 5819619 (home)
> I-24129 Bergamo Fax: (39) -35- 249975
> Italy
> ==================================================================
>
>
>