[Mova](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/benjamin-1923-die-aufgabe-des-ubersetzers/)

[home](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [docs](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/) / [papers](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/) / [Machine translation](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/mtrans/) / Die Aufgabe des Übersetzers (The Task of the Translator)

# Die Aufgabe des Übersetzers (The Task of the Translator)

**Authors:** Walter Benjamin · **Year:** 1923 · **Venue:** preface to his German translation of Baudelaire, *Tableaux parisiens* (Heidelberg: Richard Weißbach) **Link:** [archive.org/details/CharlesBaudelaireTableauxParisiens](https://archive.org/details/CharlesBaudelaireTableauxParisiens) · **Licence:** [public domain](https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/) in the EU since 2011 (the author died in 1940); public domain in the US since 2019. The library's OCR drops parts of several pages (pp. VII–XVII). The *Brot*/*pain* example and the closing sentence on the interlinear version are not in it and are cited from the published essay.

classic

- [Publisher's page](https://archive.org/details/CharlesBaudelaireTableauxParisiens)
- [PDF](https://archive.org/download/CharlesBaudelaireTableauxParisiens/BenjaminTableauxParisien.pdf)

**Authors (1)**

1. Walter Benjamin

Citations and author metrics from OpenAlex (); authors with the same name are not always told apart.

## What it is about

Benjamin denies that a translation exists for the reader who does not know the original. A work's translatability is a property of the work. A translation belongs to the original's afterlife (*Fortleben*) and adds nothing to the original itself. The kinship of languages is not the likeness of their words. In each language as a whole one and the same thing is meant, which no single language reaches alone, only the totality of their intentions complementing one another: "pure language". Hence his key distinction: between what is meant (*das Gemeinte*) and the way of meaning it (*die Art des Meinens*). *Brot* and *pain* mean the same thing but in different ways, and so are not interchangeable. A translation should not make itself similar to the original's sense. It should form the original's way of meaning, down to the detail, in its own language, so that both become recognisable as fragments of one greater language, like shards of one vessel. Literal rendering of syntax is therefore justified even at the cost of sense. The translation touches the original's sense only at one point, as a tangent touches a circle, and then follows its own path. He quotes Pannwitz: translators err by preserving the accidental state of their own language instead of letting the foreign one move it. Translations themselves are untranslatable, and the interlinear version of scripture is the ideal of all translation.

## Ideas

- I1. Split each meta token into what is meant and the way of meaning. The concept (`thou`/`you`) is what is meant. The way of meaning becomes explicit features: number, person, politeness, definiteness, aspect, word class. Today `meta.rs` merges members and drops their differences. Benjamin's distinction says the merge is right for the concept and wrong for the features, which is open problems 4 and 5 stated as one design rule.
- I2. "Shards of one vessel" as a lexicon test across more than two authors. A concept is well formed when its members across the four Bibles and the Hebrew complement each other. Each author's member set covers part of the concept's contexts, and together they cover all of them. Report for each concept the share of its contexts covered by one author alone versus by the union. Concepts where one author covers everything are spelling variants. Concepts where coverage is split are real "ways of meaning".
- I3. The interlinear as an ideal endpoint, not a baseline. Exact mode already gives a fully literal path: source words, MACULA glosses and target words, aligned by verse. Publish it as an interlinear view in the run's `examples.md`: Hebrew word, its meta tokens, the target chunk, and the residual class of each. That is the most transparent form of "why" the translator can give.
- I4. Translatability as a property of the source. Benjamin predicts that text which is mostly communication (lists, laws, genealogies) gives a translation little to gain beyond sense. Text dense in form (poetry) gives more. Measure the share of the reader residual that falls in order and function classes per book genre. A high share means the source's way of meaning, not its sense, is what is being lost.

## For Mova

The essay is the philosophical case for the meta-world, the "pure language" that no single text reaches, and for keeping each author's way of meaning as features instead of erasing it. I1 is the concrete step for `meta.rs` and `profile.rs`. I3 is a report for `tools/translate`.

Topics: [Machine translation](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/topics/machine-translation/)

## Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

```
@book{benjamin1923die,
  title = {{Die Aufgabe des Übersetzers (The Task of the Translator)}},
  author = {Benjamin, Walter},
  year = {1923},
  url = {https://archive.org/details/CharlesBaudelaireTableauxParisiens}
}
```

- [← previous The First Surface Realisation Shared Task: Overview and Evaluation Results](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/belz-2011-first-surface-realisation-shared-task/)
- [next → Methodological considerations in the METAL project](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/bennett-1988-methodological-considerations-metal-project/)
- [↑ back to Machine translation](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/mtrans/)