Translations:CP 05635/8/en: Difference between revisions

From Corr-Proust Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
Unfortunately, we are still dealing with missing sentences and words, etc. Based on the tiredness in my eyes, I can’t convey to you how much additional work is required not having faith in the proof. I do, however, despite all the errors. But here is something that is quite odd and that I am telling you in full confidence. I had thought up until now that the transcribers responsible for this work were rather clueless and regularly made errors for that reason (I could give you 100 examples). It was to my great surprise to see that the word ‘gluant’ [sticky] had been replaced by the word ‘visqueux’ [gooey] in the latest proofs. I find it astounding while shameless and uncultured at the same time. When rereading a rather well flowing sentence, in order to avoid referring back to your typist’s manuscript, it just so happened that I was taken aback by the word ‘visqueux,' which I didn’t think I put there. Given it isn’t a recent proof, as they are galley proofs (so from a manuscript that I hadn’t reread for a while), I compared the printed galley proof with the manuscript pieced together by your typist, which didn’t have ‘visqueux’ but ‘gluant’<ref name="n7" />. Do these trivialities give you an idea about the troubles I’ve been having with this volume? Alas, it’s shameful to talk about oneself, books and printing while so many suffer. Despite your youthful appearance, you have a grown-up son; I would be grateful to know if you have any good news from him, or whether he is out of danger<ref name="n8" />. We tremble for all our own and I am thinking about you both with all my heart.
Unfortunately, we are still dealing with missing sentences and words, etc. Based on the tiredness in my eyes, I can’t convey to you how much additional work is required not having complete faith in the proof. I do, however, despite all the errors. But here is something that is quite odd and that I am telling you in full confidence. I had thought up until now that the transcribers responsible for this work were rather clueless and regularly made errors for that reason (I could give you 100 examples). It was to my great surprise to see that the word ‘gluant’ [sticky] had been replaced by the word ‘visqueux’ [gooey] in the latest proofs. I find it astounding while shameless and uncultured at the same time. When rereading a rather well flowing sentence, in order to avoid referring back to your typist’s manuscript, it just so happened that I was taken aback by the word ‘visqueux,' which I didn’t think I put there. Given it isn’t a recent proof, as they are galley proofs (so from a manuscript that I hadn’t reread for a while), I compared the printed galley proof with the manuscript pieced together by your typist, which didn’t have ‘visqueux’ but ‘gluant’<ref name="n7" />. Do these trivialities give you an idea about the troubles I’ve been having with this volume? Alas, it’s shameful to talk about oneself, books and printing while so many suffer. Despite your youthful appearance, you have a grown-up son; I would be grateful to know if you have any good news from him, or whether he is out of danger<ref name="n8" />. We tremble for all our own and I am thinking about you both with all my heart.

Revision as of 20:38, 12 November 2021

Information about message (contribute)
This message has no documentation. If you know where or how this message is used, you can help other translators by adding documentation to this message.
Message definition (CP 05635)
Malheureusement nous en sommes aussi aux phrases et aux mots sautés, etc. Au point de vue de la fatigue de mes yeux je ne peux vous dire quel surcroît de travail cela me donne de ne pas pouvoir me fier un instant à l’épreuve. Je le fais cependant d’où des erreurs. Mais voici qui est plus curieux et que je vous dis tout à fait en confidence. J’avais cru jusqu’ici que les typographes chargés de ce travail étaient assez ignorants et péchaient constamment par là (je pourrais citer cent exemples) ; quel n’a pas été mon étonnement dans les dernières épreuves de voir que le mot « gluant » avait été remplacé par le mot « visqueux ». Je trouve que c’est stupéfiant à la fois comme sans-gêne et comme culture. C’est par un pur hasard que, relisant une phrase qui allait assez couramment pour n’avoir pas besoin de me reporter au manuscrit de votre dactylographe, j’ai été surpris du mot « visqueux » que je ne croyais pas avoir mis. Comme c’est assez ancien, puisque ce sont des placards (donc d’un manuscrit que je n’avais pas relu depuis longtemps) j’ai voulu confronter le placard imprimé avec mon manuscrit reconstitué par votre dactylographe, celui-ci portait non « visqueux », mais « gluant »<ref name="n7" />. Ces riens vous donnent-ils une idée du tracas que me donne cette édition ? Hélas on a honte de parler de soi, de ses livres, de leur impression quand tant de gens souffrent. Puisque malgré votre apparence de jeune fille, vous avez un grand fils, je serais bien heureux de savoir si vous avez de bonnes nouvelles de lui, s’il n’est pas dans un point dangereux<ref name="n8" />. Nous tremblons tous pour les nôtres, et je pense de tout mon cœur à vous.

Unfortunately, we are still dealing with missing sentences and words, etc. Based on the tiredness in my eyes, I can’t convey to you how much additional work is required not having complete faith in the proof. I do, however, despite all the errors. But here is something that is quite odd and that I am telling you in full confidence. I had thought up until now that the transcribers responsible for this work were rather clueless and regularly made errors for that reason (I could give you 100 examples). It was to my great surprise to see that the word ‘gluant’ [sticky] had been replaced by the word ‘visqueux’ [gooey] in the latest proofs. I find it astounding while shameless and uncultured at the same time. When rereading a rather well flowing sentence, in order to avoid referring back to your typist’s manuscript, it just so happened that I was taken aback by the word ‘visqueux,' which I didn’t think I put there. Given it isn’t a recent proof, as they are galley proofs (so from a manuscript that I hadn’t reread for a while), I compared the printed galley proof with the manuscript pieced together by your typist, which didn’t have ‘visqueux’ but ‘gluant’[1]. Do these trivialities give you an idea about the troubles I’ve been having with this volume? Alas, it’s shameful to talk about oneself, books and printing while so many suffer. Despite your youthful appearance, you have a grown-up son; I would be grateful to know if you have any good news from him, or whether he is out of danger[2]. We tremble for all our own and I am thinking about you both with all my heart.

  1. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named n7
  2. ↑ Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named n8
Retrieved from "https://corrproust.web.illinois.edu/wiki/index.php?title=Translations:CP_05635/8/en&oldid=8174"