Text 1: Critic Soto argues that translation inevitably distorts poetry. A poem's effects depend on sound, rhythm, and connotation, all of which are bound to a specific language. To translate poetry, Soto contends, is to write a different poem with thematic similarity to the original — a creative act, but not a faithful reproduction.
Text 2: Critic Park does not dispute that something is lost in translation but argues that something is also gained. Translators confront poems with fresh ears, foregrounding meanings the original audience took for granted. The translation tradition, Park contends, has enriched literature precisely because it generates new poems in dialogue with old ones.
Based on the texts, how would Park (Text 2) most likely respond to Soto's claim about translation?
- A
She would argue that all translations are perfect copies of originals.
- Bcheck_circle
She would accept the loss while emphasizing creative possibilities Soto undervalues.
- C
She would say translation should be banned.
- D
She would deny that anything is ever lost in translation.
Explanation
Park accepts loss but reframes translation as also creative. B captures her partial agreement. A contradicts her; C is absurd; D is not her view.