[Legate of Amon Lanc]

I should speak here on behalf of the Czech translation, which I believe is very good. And I even think this is a very nice moment - this is the first time I get to disagree with Tolkien on something! Because when it comes to translation, I am a friend of translating the names where it seems appropriate (and if the translator is up to it, which is the most important part!), generally I would say that the point is to make the reading smooth to the reader and, if possible, to convey the feelings the reader of the original version has. Of course, the best thing is if you can read it in the original, but then, there are many who cannot, and in any case, it is not the same or as smooth reading for many people as it would be in their mothertongue, and being distracted by trying to understand complicated sentences in a foreign language might disrupt your enjoyment of the language just as much as the translation would, if not even more.

And translation is always a matter of decision (and I can imagine texts far worse than that of Tolkien's, remembering all my foregone attempts to translate ancient Hebrew poetry), and in any case, you already are breaking the basic feeling the text gives by translating it. Even a sentence like "In the green forest it was twilight" does not sound the same as "V zeleném lese bylo šero", and the, let's say, melody of the language is already different. Therefore, names should be translated accordingly too, wherever it is appropriate. In Tolkien's case, it goes for Hobbit place names and surnames at least (because they are supposed to sound "like home", therefore, they should sound akin to placenames and surnames familiar to the reader), and then specific names, for instance Gollum, which conveys a certain sound, in case it sounded weird in the language into which it is being translated - in Czech, it is Glum, and that sounds really as if you are swallowing something nasty, while Gollum is a bit too long and has double consonant, which does not really fit the language and would start seeming strange.

Although Gollum isn't such a big deal, but the word hobbit is more interesting, as it apparently has been a source of controversy in several translations. Well, let me say it plainly: Sorry, mister Tolkien, with all due respect, hobit (as we have it in Czech) is far better than hobbit for us. The reason is once again: we don't have double consonants, and even if they are in foreign words, we don't pronounce them (usually merge them into one), which would already erase the "bb" for an average reader. Hobit could almost be a Czech word, or at least it doesn't sound so utterly alien as hobbit would. And in any case, if I imagine seeing a book in a bookshop titled "Hobbit", I would most likely be "oh no, another of this pseudo-newspeak-englishised books, which try to get sold by having wannabe-cool-sounding titles which don't really say anything, just like the other book titled 'Wortharr', which is apparently the name of the main hero or the continent where it takes place". When I see "Hobit", I think "hey, that sounds funny, what does that word mean?", with the sort of assumption that it is an actual word meaning something, unlike the imaginary neighbour 'Wortharr', which obviously is not any real word, that's plain on first sight.

So speaking of the one translation I know, the Czech one, I would say that is a really good one and the person who had made it really tried to make the effort. There are very few moments when something sounds wrong, and it actually isn't character names or place names or anything - the only thing the translator didn't manage to do well was the translation of some sayings (like, I didn't know for a long time that what Aragorn says about wolves and orcs is a saying - for some reason, the translator didn't manage to make it rhyme or anything, but then again, if I think about it, in this case, it is really difficult, as the words "wolf" and "orc" don't rhyme in Czech and if you ended the line with some other word, it might sound like a bad attempt of rhyme with stupidly reversed word order), or the Rohirric poems. Most of the poems and songs in LotR are translated really nicely, but the Rohirric ones, for some reason, are totally off - they don't rhyme, they don't alliterate, they sound like random "shouts in the dark". That is a pity, but aside from this, there is basically nothing to complain about. In any case, I know that the translator tried to do her best - from what I can see from the rest of the books, and from what I know about how she came to translate it - and there probably were enough obstacles in attempts to translate these poems in particular.

So, I feel I should step in defence of it, in contrary to Luthien_ Tinuviel who spoke here before also in relation to the Czech translation, but who hasn't read it; and with all due respect, she is seemingly not a native speaker, and basically nothing she said is really valid in any way. I must say that all her proposals sound rather horrible to me - calling somebody Bilbo Sáčkový would sound like calling him "white yoghurt", because it denotes a Bilbo whose speciality, as opposed to other Bilbos, is that he is "sack-y", or made out of a sack, or of a certain kind (the same way as white yoghurt is different from a strawberry yoghurt). You must consider how the things sound to Czech ears, not to the ears of a foreigner, and that goes for every translation. Likewise, the real name used in the translation, "Pytlík", sounds absolutely fine, it can mean a "pouch" and that's what I believe most people imagine when they hear it, and it's okay, because it is actually a possible normal surname. And I don't see any problem with conjugating words, once again, it may look puzzling to a foreigner, but you don't think about it if it's in your own language, and it would be far more disturbing if you saw words unconjugated in the text.

So, all in all, my belief about translating the names in LotR is: what is English (in terms of the story, translated from Westron) should be translated into the respective language, only what is Elvish should be kept Elvish and so on, and words of questionable origin (like hobbit) can also be translated. After all, I am not sure what does Tolkien think, but the word "hobbit" is a translation, the "real" Westron word is kuduk, right? Therefore, I don't see why it should not be translated.

An interesting chapter (and another can of worms) in this scheme would be the Rohirric language, because of course, what we have in the books is not Rohirric, but something Anglo-Saxon. Personally, I believe keeping the Old English names here is good even for the translation. However, I have heard that the Czech translator briefly pondered whether she should not attempt to translate Rohirric names in Old Church Slavonic - the very ancient predecessor of Czech, with the obvious intention: to give the same feeling to the local reader as the reader in the original language has - that "these people are speaking the language we were speaking a thousand years ago". Certainly an interesting prospect, I must confess that I am still a bit intrigued by the idea, because this dimension is of course totally lost in the translation (and if it wasn't for the Appendices, I wouldn't know about that) - even though I am happy with it the way it is, and the idea of having Éomer called Vojmir or something is a bit creepy. But for some sort of "experimental translation", it might not be as bad, and might be really interesting, just for the sake of it. Because after all, if we wanted to be "proper" and approach LotR the way Tolkien did - as in "I have a book in Westron about this and this, and I translate it into English", then of course we should approach it as "okay, I have a book in Westron and I translate it into XY".

Originally Posted by Luthien_ Tinuviel

The problem lies in the fact that Tolkien was such an artist with words- their sounds and appearances add to their meaning and mood, which cannot be carried over successfully into another language, I think. One can achieve such an effect in any language, but I don't think one could get the same effect in one language as another- it's simply not possible.

I 100% agree with this. But what I said in the very beginning, that's just how it is, and if one is a translator and wants to convey some book, at least a bit of the reflection of the original "white light" to the large audience, who might not speak the language the book is originally written in, then he or she can "only decide what to do with the words that are given to us". "Feinschmeckers" can read it in the original and enjoy it fully (though again, I doubt that a non-native speaker can really enjoy it fully the same way, unless he's been speaking English for the last forty years).