Oh that's a good one! Thanks for pointing that out, I want to read the newer translation now.
> Cecil Parrott deliberately anglicized the novel.. What is stunning is the poverty and one-dimensional lexical register of the translator’s mother tongue.
> Sir Cecil ultimately failed in rendering the “lazy argot”.. For example, he used the word “bastard” to render into English such varied words as “chlap” (sonofagun, guy, man), “kluk” (boy), “podlci” (moral degenerates), “lotry” (crooks), “sběř” (pack of rabble) and “pahejl” (stumpfoot).
> ..which translation you read will give you a different experience with the titular character, and the story in general. In short, the Sadlon translation gives the reader a novel with extraordinarily more depth and layers than the Parrot translation. ..Parrot’s vernacular obscures the subtleties and nuances that make a huge difference in what Hašek was communicating to the reader.
> Cecil Parrott deliberately anglicized the novel.. What is stunning is the poverty and one-dimensional lexical register of the translator’s mother tongue.
> Sir Cecil ultimately failed in rendering the “lazy argot”.. For example, he used the word “bastard” to render into English such varied words as “chlap” (sonofagun, guy, man), “kluk” (boy), “podlci” (moral degenerates), “lotry” (crooks), “sběř” (pack of rabble) and “pahejl” (stumpfoot).
> ..which translation you read will give you a different experience with the titular character, and the story in general. In short, the Sadlon translation gives the reader a novel with extraordinarily more depth and layers than the Parrot translation. ..Parrot’s vernacular obscures the subtleties and nuances that make a huge difference in what Hašek was communicating to the reader.