otahkoapisiakii:gardenvarietycrime:Today’s fun surprise was seeing puella translated as “whore”.The
otahkoapisiakii:gardenvarietycrime:Today’s fun surprise was seeing puella translated as “whore”.The other week it was seeing Fagles’ translation of Lacaena as “Spartan whore”Holy shit, what year was whatever you were reading translated to equate “puella” with “whore”?Yeah I’ve been thinking I maybe should have clarified the puella bit, not that it’s any less horribly sexist, but it’s also not in the sense of “girl child” and it wasn’t straight out of a dictionary, which is the impression I worry people are getting.For context: it was a 1960s (man’s) translation of Catullus 43, and the puella is the one in the first line salve, nec minimo puella naso, which the translator chose to translate as “O elegant whore! With the remarkably long nose”.I guess in the translator’s mind Catullus was already criticizing her appearance and boyfriend so he may as well go the full mile and call her a whore?? The thing is though, besides puella, the only other “name” Catullus calls her is amica, which I guess in certain contexts could mean something like “mistress” but here I see no indication of it being anything but “girlfriend” or “sweetheart”, especially considering that ultimately this poem is less an attack on the girl herself and more Catullus saying that nobody can compare to Lesbia’s beauty.(And let’s be honest: Catullus isn’t afraid to call someone a “whore” if he wants to – he doesn’t shy away from those sorts of words – which makes it feel even more unnecessary on the translator’s part. What sort of person reads an ancient poem and immediately thinks “you know what this could have more of? gendered slurs”)I’m by no means an expert so if someone has a better explanation than misogyny I’d be glad to hear it, but I don’t have high hopes :/ -- source link