Anyone have an opinion? Mandelbaum? Another edition? Thanks!
Steve
― patronus11, Wednesday, 24 October 2007 14:23 (nineteen years ago)
Chin up, the Latin's not THAT difficult.
― Casuistry, Wednesday, 24 October 2007 19:08 (nineteen years ago)
I really enjoyed the David Raeburn translation from 2004--it's a Penguin Classic edition. Having said that, it's the only translation of it I've read, so I don't know how it compares.
― James Morrison, Wednesday, 24 October 2007 23:35 (nineteen years ago)
I've read both the Raeburn and the Melville translations, and I still find the Mandelbaum translation to be overall the best.
― oscar, Thursday, 25 October 2007 02:06 (nineteen years ago)
I used Dryden et al. when writing about John Locke's Treatises, since it was the translation available at the time Locke was around (although he undoubtedly read the Latin), but I would choose a more modern translation if reading purely for pleasure.
― Skrik, Thursday, 25 October 2007 21:29 (nineteen years ago)
Casuistry, thanks for the laugh! My Latin extends about as far as the Harry Potter spellbook, grade 1. (Though you prob. figured that out from my userid.) And, yes, Skrik, it is for pleasure as you perceptively guessed.
You folks are amazing! Happy reading, all.
― patronus11, Saturday, 27 October 2007 18:01 (nineteen years ago)