Something is always lost in translation, regardless of how good the work is. The translator's task is to come to grips with this loss. How a translator deals with what is lost defines their practice and aesthetic. Fundamentally, there are only two ways to approach this problem:

One can identify what might be lost and try to fight against it by reducing the interference of the target language to a minimum. This conception of translation understands the process as one of establishing equivalence. The symbol expressing the relationship between the two languages is


This is one option. The other is to embrace this loss as an inevitable condition of re-creating one language in another and to use it as an opportunity to make it come alive in translation in a way that could only happen in the target language. The symbol describing this relationship between the two languages is


And it's always tilted in favour of the translation. This is not to say that the translated text by definition exceeds the original in quality, but too signal that unless a translation can be thought of as better in the new language than a mere 1:1 rendering of it, it was not worth doing. I dedicate myself to the <-kind of translation.