this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2020
1 points (100.0% liked)

Ask Historians

543 readers
1 users here now

Intended to mimic the format and style of /r/AskHistorians, while also serving as a general sub for historical discussions. The rules should be familiar for anyone accustomed to AskHistorians.

  1. Nothing Less Than 20 Years Old
  2. Don't plagiarise. Quotation of historians is acceptable and encouraged, but please cite them so that people can look at the source themselves.
  3. Provide sources where applicable, and be ready to provide sources for any claim you make. Wikipedia is not a source.
  4. Remain on topic. Follow-up questions on the same topic are allowed and encouraged, but entirely unrelated questions should be asked in a new thread. Jokes are allowed, but please use common sense - a thread should not consist solely of comic relief!
  5. Don't be afraid to question established narratives, or narratives presented by other users, but refrain from conspiracy theories or pseudo-history. If you want to discuss Nazi Antarctic bases, credible sources are expected.
  6. Speculation and presentation of original ideas is allowed and encouraged, but do NOT attempt to pass it off as undisputed fact. Make it clear that this is your own thought/opinion.
  7. Debate is allowed, provided that it remains structured, civil, and on-topic. A thread about the Kronstadt Rebellion is welcome to contain debate on that topic, but the debate should not become a general debate between Marxism and Anarchism as ideologies. Debate in a comradely fashion. Personal attacks won't be tolerated.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
CommieWalrus@lemmygrad.ml
1
RSFSR Constitution (1918): English translations vs. original text and other translations (www.marxists.org)
submitted 4 years ago by diorama@lemmygrad.ml to c/askhistorians@lemmygrad.ml
0 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Hi all! :hugging face:
It has been a while I am interested in the relationship of migration and international socialist/communist movements.

A bunch of comrades bumped into the 1918 Constitution of the RSFSR for a non-professional translation of an op-ed. In particular, we have focussed on articles 20 and 22.
Surprisingly, we found that the English translations MIA [0] and The Nation provide are missing some content. The original text (same version, different sources: GARANT art. 20, GARANT art. 22, tversu.ru archived on wikicommons) mentions foreign peasants as eligible citizens without any particular formality (art. 20) and the constitutional incompatibility of any limitation of the juridical equality of national minorities. (art. 22) The translations in other languages we found (see below) are closer to the Russian text than the English translations.

Do you think that the Russian-English discrepancy has any philologic or historic significance? Also: since English is lingua franca in many countries, a significant discrepancy may impact the diffusion in other languages (see e.g. the Portuguese translation on wikipedia, which is a translation of a translation).

Other languages

  • Italian: "ai contadini che non si avvalgono del lavoro altrui", "limitazione della loro uguaglianza giuridica"
  • German: "oder zu der keine fremde Arbeit ausnutzenden Bauernschaft", "Beschränkung ihrer Gleichberechtigung"
  • French: "paysans qui ne vivent pas du travail d'autrui", "limitation de leur égalité juridique"
  • Castilian: "campesinado que no vive del trabajo ajeno", "limitación de su igualdad jurídica"
  • Polish: "włościaństwa, nie żywiącego się cudzą pracą, "ograniczenie ich praw"
no comments (yet)
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here