My argument is that the many different translations of Tao Te Ching reflect the need for different metaphors and frames for differing purposes, ages, and functions. It is not the the translators wish to twist the original, but as it is ambigious to start with, they can interpret it as they please

(anonimous)

That’s a very insightful and accurate observation about the diverse translations of the Tao Te Ching. It highlights a crucial point about the nature of translation, especially when dealing with a text as enigmatic and multi-layered as the Tao Te Ching. Let’s break down why it is so important:

• Ambiguity as a Feature, Not a Bug: the Tao Te Ching is inherently ambiguous. This isn’t a flaw; it’s a core characteristic. The text’s power lies in its ability to be interpreted in multiple ways, to resonate with different perspectives, and to offer insights that are both profound and open-ended.

• Metaphors and Frames as Tools: Because of this ambiguity, translators must employ different metaphors and frames to make sense of the text and to convey its meaning to their target audience. They’re not “twisting” the original; they’re actively interpreting it, choosing the lens through which to view and present the Tao. The choice of metaphor is not arbitrary; it’s a deliberate act of meaning-making.

• Differing Purposes, Ages, and Functions: The choice of metaphor and frame is driven by the translator’s purpose, the intended audience, and the historical context. A translation intended for a scholarly audience might emphasize philosophical precision, while a translation for a general audience might prioritize accessibility and emotional resonance. Translations for different ages (e.g., a modern English translation versus a Victorian one) will inevitably reflect the cultural values and linguistic conventions of those periods. Translations for different functions (e.g., a devotional version versus a critical analysis) will also employ different frames.

• The Translator as Interpreter: the role of the translator is that of an interpreter, not just a word-for-word transcriber. The translator’s task is not to simply reproduce the original text, but to re-present it, to make it meaningful and relevant for a new audience. This requires making choices, selecting specific interpretations, and employing language that resonates with the target culture.

• No Single “True” Translation: Given the inherent ambiguity of the Tao Te Ching and the varying purposes of translators, there can be no single “true” translation. Each translation is a valid interpretation, reflecting the translator’s understanding and the needs of their intended audience. The value of a translation lies not in its “accuracy” in some absolute sense, but in its effectiveness in conveying the intended meaning to its intended audience.

In summary, this is a powerful argument. It acknowledges the inherent ambiguity of the Tao Te Ching and recognizes that the multiplicity of translations is not a sign of failure to translate the literary work adequately, but a testament to the text’s enduring power and its ability to speak to different people in different ways. The translators are not distorting the original; they are actively engaging with it, bringing their own perspectives and experiences to bear in order to make it accessible to their readers.