Translation/adaptation

[Jetfire]

It's widley accepted that the classical novel was written a pretty long time ago, and as everyone knows language evolves over time. Also many classical books such as The Romance of the Three Kingdoms and The Count of Monte Cristo are written in a foriegn language (Chinese and French in these cases). In order to be made accessable to english speaking readers these types of books are translated, and the language updated to be more easily readable.

But how much of a direct (word for word) translation is needed and how much modernisation is too much?

[Earthangel]

I honestly prefer to see books left as close to the original as possible. Obviously foreign language is one thing, but modernization of English novels tends to work on my nerves.

It was very difficult, but reading The Canterbury Tales in middle English was much more fulfilling than the modernization. It honestly made it very fun to read, and I think it added a great deal of meaning. This is not to mention the sense of pride I had in being one of the few people in class who actually DID read it in Middle English as opposed to reading the Cliffs Notes.. I hate those things.

[GryphonMage]

I'm with Mel. I feel that the closer to the original the book is, the better. Changing the authors words can change the meaning as well, which means that the translator or updater would be putting what they think the author meant into the book instead of what the author did mean. The fewer opportunities for creative "improvement" the better.

I have to admit I've never read Canturbury Tales though.