Quote:
Originally Posted by Kudryavka
Yes, double, triple, etc. translations are pretty inevitably bad. The more you translate, the farther you get from the original author's source and ideas, even when it's master translators doing it; it's an inescapable truth that we have to deal with unless we want to go learn the author's original language. When people who seem not to have a great grasp on the from language do it it's only worse. 
But some translation is definitly better than nothing. |
Here's an interesting theoretical question to ask yourself though:
Let's say you have 3 translators, A, B, and C.
A can translate from language J to language X
B can translate from language X to language Y
C can translate from language J to language Y
You want a translation into language Y, so have 2 choices: double translation A->B or single C
The question is, what level of skill of the translators A, B, and C makes one or the other a better choice?
Clearly if C is a terrible translator and A and B are both excellent, the double translation is superior. And if A, B, and C are all just as good, then C's single translation is superior in all cases. But what if C is half as good as both A and B?
Is the quality of A's translation more important than B's? (I would hypothesize this).
Especially with more obscure languages, finding a competent direct translator may be nigh impossible...