Nicholas J. Theocarakis wrote: >I owe an answer ro James Ahiakpor's question why >I did not translate the text in French. I am >guilty of cut and paste from the text provided >by the National Library of France. I assumed, >however, that people in this list are not >offended by a few lines in beautiful French and >that they would prefer to read the great Galiani >in the original than the traduttore traditore There is a good reason for the Italian proverb. I can't say much about economic articles, since I read them only in English, but I know from my experience in reading (or more accurately, re-discovering) the Bible in Greek, and especially the New Testament. The differences between the Greek and its English translations can be large and small, and in some cases so decisive as to be a totally different gospel. For example, there is the translation of the word dikaiosune and it cognates, which can be translated as either "righteousness" or "justice" and which is a frequently used word in the Bible. When Jesus redefines morality as a "hunger and thirst for dikaiosunen," is he calling for justice or for righteousness? I suggest that a gospel of righteousness and a gospel of justice are two very different gospels. The King James translates this word consistently as righteousness, while the Latins, and those who follow that tradition, translate it as "iustitiae." There is no particular problem in the Greek, because in the Bible (as in Aristotle), justice is righteousness and righteousness justice. But in English, the ideas become separated, and hence we have to make a choice. At one time, education and languages went together, and no one could consider himself an educated man or women without having some recognized "international" language. But alas, I am not an educated man in this sense, and must read most things in English. This is not too bad, but one must realize that there are limits and dangers in translating ideas from one language to another. "translator, traitor" indeed. John C. Medaille