Those who are familiar with foreign literature must have heard that it’s impossible to grab the significance through translation. Not few doesn’t realise what it means. Sentences always have a subtle nuance (what should I put it?) only the native people can understand so that it is hard to resist that we translate it very specifically. Take an example through a poem of Emily Dickinson.
I woke and chid my honest fingers,
The Gem was gone —
And now, an Amethyst remembrance
Is all I own —
According to a recent study, it is common understanding that what the poet lost is “poetry.” Why. What counts is “winds were prosy.”
“Prosy”, my italic, implies here the opposite meaning of verse, not weakness. Prosaic monotonous has robbed of the idea of poetry. The poem tells that sorrow. In other poems, Dickinson uses gem as the metaphor of poetry consistently. But the problem is how we translate it in Japanese, for instance. In Japanese “prosy”（散文的）doesn’t have double meaning that it’s impossible for readers to notice it in translation.
Foreign literature offers to us two types of entertainment, original texts and translation, so we have to choose one to take. It is researchers task to provide better translation in order to give readers the same quality of experience as much as when they read original ones.